|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
50.46.131.186
In Reply to: RE: MM vs MC is MC THAT much better? posted by MannyE on December 29, 2016 at 05:54:12
Just one more thing to keep in mind about MC cartridges, and in particular LOMC, is that they typically have a much stiffer suspension to deal with the motion of the cantilever which carries the coils. Perhaps this isn't mentioned often enough, but the stiffer sprung MC cartridge produces more vibration that travels through the cartridge body and on into the armtube.... then into the pivot bearings. A cheaply made tonearm will not handle this added vibration well, resulting in pivot bearing chatter and the signal degradation that goes with it.
You want a tonearm that is known to work well with LOMC cartridges. Otherwise you may never get to hear the true potential of these higher end cartridges. And that is just one of the other extra things you need when going from MM to LOMC.
-Steve
Follow Ups:
You might have missed the discussion below. It seems that some of the new LOMC cartridges have quite high compliance. My Audio Technica AT-ART7 has compliance at resonance of at least 26-cu and possibly 30-cu. Its resonance frequency is between 6 and 7-Hz in my 10.5-gram SME V.
The new Audio Technica AT-ART9 and AT-OC9/III are also both high-compliance cartridges rated at 18-cu at 100-Hz. This means that compliance at 10-Hz might be in the neighborhood of 26-cu to 30-cu.
The Denon DL-301II I owned had compliance at resonance of 25-cu.
There seem to be a lot of high-compliance LOMC cartridges available today.
Best regards,
John Elison
true enough John.
....and then there are those which have very stiff compliance. So this is a variable which the prospective buyer should consider before making a choice.
-Steve
So... high mass toenarm = low compliance cart and vice versa?
Can I assume the choice of tonearm/cart combos are a personal subjective preference or is there a definite "universal" advantage of one combination over the other?
Keeping in mind that I want to set it up and not fiddle. I want to listen to music not play with equipment. It's OK to maintain/check once a year or so, but I'm not willing to fiddle on a weekly basis. I play around with different amps and speakers, but that's a bi-annual or even longer rotation period.
Already covered below. As a rule of thumb the total arm/cartridge system needs to resonate within a range bewteen 8 hz to 12 hz. In general practice it does mean that high compliance = a soft spring. Low compliance = a stiffer spring. Typically high compliance cartridges are matched to low mass arms and low compliance cartridges are matched to high mass arms.Yes, you need to consider this before spending any hard-earned cash on a new cartridge. Typically a Denon DL-103R is a low compliance cartridge that works better with higher mass tonearms.
That is one factor which must be met.
In my initial post to your thread I made note of the quality of mfr on lower cost tonearms. Regardless of their effective mass, their ability to handle spurious vibes traveling through the arm without chattering the pivot bearings is also a factor.
-Steve
Edits: 12/29/16
"1s there a definite "universal" advantage of one combination over the other?"
Yes.
The compliance of the cartridge's cantilever suspension and the mass of the tonearm form a circuit.
The resonance frequency of that circuit needs to be as far away from the lowest frequency in the groove and at the same time as far away from the warp tones as possible.
Normally that is considered to be 10Hz.
The vinyl engine has a chart showing what the resonance frequency of different combinations will be.
Tre'
Have Fun and Enjoy the Music
"Still Working the Problem"
That's good to know.
Maybe the best thing to do would be to finagle an in-home audition with either the Prime or the SL once I make the purchase. Although I don't even know if a cart is "auditionable" due to the nature of the beast. Maybe the store will have something set up I can try. I generally don't care for in-store demos though because they don't represent the reality of my own listening space.
My musical taste is no help at all because I listen to pretty much everything in almost equal measure. This week alone I've gone from Aida to Kraftwerk to Coltrain and Bing Crosby. :).
Regardless, this is a fun issue to deal with and I'm hoping to learn a bit about carts while I do this.
The phono stage is also a very important component in the sound of a vinyl system. I have a good friend with a VPI Prime turntable and an Allnic H-1201 Vacuum Tube Phonostage. I visit him for listening sessions about once a month and he is now using an Audio Technica AT-ART7 phono cartridge in his Prime. His vinyl front-end sounds awesome. He auditioned a Dynavector 20XL and a Denon DL-S1 before selecting the Audio Technica AT-ART7. I don't believe he tried any MM cartridges, though.
I have another friend with a VPI HR-X turntable with 12-inch 3D tonearm and an E.A.R. preamplifier. He also uses one of the new Audio Technica AT-ART7 cartridges and his vinyl front-end is one of the best sounding I've ever heard.
Good luck,
John Elison
Realizing that there are several other variables, especially including the choice of SUT, did you find that you preferred the EAR to the Allnic?
There is no way of knowing what I would prefer because the two phono stages were in different systems and I never heard the same LP played on both. The only constant was the cartridge. They both sounded exceptional to me. I would have to hear both preamps in my own system to determine which sounded better. I do like the AT-ART7 cartridge, though. It is my current reference and I use a Pass Labs XOno phono stage.
Best regards,
John Elison
Post a Followup:
FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: