|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
24.139.24.177
I have a regular Ortofon OM10 on my Technics DD table. I also have an AT440MLa, Shure V15III, M97HE, M95ED. I listen to them all. I may be seriously aurally challenged, but see merit in them all and not so much difference. The AT440MLa seems to be a bit more detailed, but sometimes a bit laid back and, frankly, the Shures, especially my 30 year old M97HE (new generic stylus) seems just as good if not better. But why the hate so many have for the Ortofon? The OM10 is a lesser entity than the 20/30/40, but for its reasonable price I can't find anything wrong and much right. I don't have a lot of disposable income and my big splurge was the new AT440MLa. But sometimes the OM10 just makes me sit up and listen. It has lots of detail and real power in all areas. Bass is excellent and it tracks anything. yet people here look down on it and one called it "ghetto", mostly because the OM5E and OM10 come as standard on some European tables (Pro-ject) and are just too "common". But looking at the price of those tables, the Ortofons must be doing something right or they wouldn't be there. Sometimes, especially when I want some extra "oomph" as in rock music, the Ortofons really pump it out. So how about giving the OM10 a bit of a break?
Follow Ups:
I have an OM-10 and the sound is OK, but as someone else said, it's a bit unrefined.The main thing I don't like is that it has a rather fat elliptical stylus, which means it is more prone to exhibiting inner groove distortion, especially compared to a line contact.
My at440mla trounces it in both these areas.
-----------------
it is because the 25 year old design is a little long in the tooth.
The Ortofon miniature moving magnet cartridges were designed to work in the low effective mass arms of the day. Dual and Thorens tables being produced then are only two of many examples.
Many compromises were made in an effort to keep the mass low. In particular, channel separation is poor to fair across the lines.
I consider the OM10/20/30/40 to be obsolete designs.
I hear you, I have the OMB-10, which supposedly is a OM-10 but sold in bulk. I got it as a temporary fix after damaging my Grado Gold cartridge.the OMB-10 did fine, it certainly tracks better than the Gold...but it does sound a bit unrefined.
to add gas to the fire i replaced it with the AT 440MLa & find it to be MUCH, MUCH better than the OMB-10...but that's on my 'table & my ears.
For the $ though, its a good design (i think) & does play music. I'm keeping mine as a backup for sure...
If you stick with Ortofon, try one of their Super catridges in the future. A freind has a Super 20 and it sounds great on an old Dual TT.
I agree that the AT440MLa is better. It's just that the OM10 seems to get such a bad rap in general.
the $ involved may have something to do with it....anyone who spends thousands on a cartridge might have issues accepting that a $40 cartridge can sound OK. Plus, a $40 cart on a hi-end & tuned TT is gonna sound difft than on a less engineered set-up.i'm just talking trash here, but tt & arm compatibility play a big factor too. To me, its real hard to compare the new AT440Mla to the OMB-10, the AT is just SO much more. but again, my table, my room, my ears....you know!
what kills me is how my Grado Gold shakes violently at the end of the Cardas Sweep track, but this cheap-o OMB-10 rides the grooves like a freight train. Sure there ar diffs in SQ, but a cartridge above all else needs to track the information accurately. some mfgrs just do it right...
My OM 30 super tracks like hell through the tougher tracks on my test record. My Grado Platinum glides through them effortlessly. If I could combine the Grado bottom end with the OM30's quickness i'd have my ideal cartridge. The Ort seems to track music ok though. Either i don't know what mis-tracking sounds like in music, or NONE of my cartridges mis-track.
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: