MM to MC back to MM

[jcmusic]

Anyone here go back to MM after trying MC? Why? What cartridge?

Jay

[pauln]

I've always used Bang&Olufsen (moving iron) but I like to
read other's experiences about cartridges and how they worked in their
systems. I found this on the web (edited out references to specific
brands) which might be of help to this discussion. Without any personal
experience with the other designs I can't really tell if the writer is
unduely biased or just has a slightly cynical writing style. Comments
on that would be interesting, too.

=============================================

Phono cartridges fall into the 4 main categories listed below in order of efficiency starting with the least efficient first:



i. Moving Coil

ii. MM moving magnet

iii. Induced Magnet described as moving magnet shunt or moving flux

iv. Moving Iron



Moving Coil

The reason for its arrival was because of the overall lack of system
synergy and ignorance towards the capacity of analogue recordings.
Classical music lovers would either receive poorly pressed records and
man handle them as if they were made of Bakelite and then expect to
have silent passages when the orchestra had momentarily ceased its
labours or an opera singer had paused at a dramatic climax ad nauseum.
Equipment mismatches only exacerbated the problem and so the moving
coil was born we believe, not so much to solve the problem but as a
fiscal enterprise that put an unprecedented financial premium on an
otherwise routine purchase. According to some, its chief design
criterion was to filter out surface noise and ameliorate
inconsistencies in the vinyl pressings. To achieve the aforementioned
goals of vinyl surface noise reduction, the designer's ingenuity had to
realise a cartridge that selects the desired information.



This was achieved by having a long cantilever, attaching massy coil
windings onto the end of the cantilever near the heavily damped
suspension mounting on the cartridge body, temporarily capable of
supporting the inordinately heavy cantilever, stylus and coils. The
coil windings are inefficient in transmission of the electromagnetic
energy of the cantilever. The low level signal that is generated is
later compensated for by another form of amplification (either a
transformer or a stage of transistor or at best, valve amplification).
The long floppy cantilever can for short periods track vinyl warps, the
coil inefficiency can result in a loss of surface noise but can also
result in a general loss of information tuned to the manufacturers
specifications. In this regard some moving coils act as filters. The
long floppy cantilever also prevents it from adequately tracking
transient peaks in musical passages. All the above coupled with the
introduction of resonance as the energy travels up and down the
extended length of the cantilever noticeably distorts the bass energy
and mars the musical illusion.



Additional problems are that the moving coil has a very high mass, and
therefore requires a tone-arm with high mass. An analogy to describe
this non-dynamic affair is that it is like using a tank with which to
play football with. This whole philosophy being practised at the start
of the audio chain prevented any proper referencing of equipment
partnered to it further down resulting in flawed reproduction and a
series of compensatory measures.



Moving Magnet

The MM type cartridge has obvious advantages over the moving coil since
the cartridge as a whole is not designed for any particular kind of
music, deficiency or bias but is intended to resolve all details
faithfully relative to its cost.



The cantilever is medium length. The electromagnetic energy is
amplified rather than attenuated via tiny magnets on the top end of the
cantilever moving within an arrangement of small coils within the
cartridge body.



The simplicity of this device allows a good proportion of materials,
research and development to be applied to the areas that benefit
directly from design refinements. Examples of this are thin walled
small-sectioned cantilevers, stiff suspensions, the best magnetic
materials and coils, lightened chassis and excellent stylus profiles,
all at reasonable cost. The overall mass of the MM is very low and
allows the use of an equally low mass arm.



Induced Magnet

The Induced Magnet type cartridge is a superior aspect of the former
having only a magnetised cantilever, thereby reducing mass and
increasing efficiency even further.



Moving Iron

The Moving Iron Principle: is by far the most advanced type of
cartridge technology and exploits all the above with additional
qualities. The cantilever itself is magnetic and therefore generates
the field for amplification in the cartridge coils. The direct
transmission of this electromagnetic energy means that there is minimal
loss of information and dynamics. The output is also generally higher
and there are unprecedented gains in transient capability. Although
some of these types have not been developed to their ultimate
potential, they exhibit exemplary advantages in their own right and,
all things being equal, are capable of outperforming all other
cartridge types.



The simple fact is that the vinyl medium was the only realistic
programme source of the era fuelling an unprecedented degree of R&D
in the 70's and early 80's in cartridge design technology.
Unfortunately, the tone-arm, amplifier and speaker technologies did not
generally advance in concert with it and although invariably capable of
good performance, required modifications in order to realise their full
potential.

[pauln]

Bump. I was not trying to kill this thread - someone out there must have something to say...

[Allan Songer]

I use both--a MM in my office systen (linn Adikt) and the Ortofon SPU range at home.

All I can tell you is that the SPU is my all time favorite cartridge--I don't care if it's "accurate"--it SOUNDS accurate--piano, horn, bass all sound "real" to me.

The information you posted is odd--the Moving Coil cartridge has been around as long as the LP--the Orotfon MC was introduced in 1948, so I can't see the introduction as being in response to ANYTHING.

[LarryC]

Bump. I was not trying to kill this thread - someone out there must have something to say...

[The following is edited:] Oooops, I missed that you had found it on the web. My bad! I've edited my reply.

Much of the commentary, in my opinion and limited knowledge, was an incorrect and wild read on the history and direction of the "progression" of quality and advancements in cartridges. I'd have reversed his order and put MCs on top. It's like it was written in the 1960s or early 1970s by someone who was trying to steer the reader from MM or MC toward induced magnet or moving iron (terms that I've never understood, unlike MM and MC), perhaps for commercial reasons. I think of that period because as I recall the bloom had just come off the rose of many stereo moving coil carts due to poor tracking performance. The Fairchild 232, for example, sounded great at its best, but produced audible record wear on each play and finally disappeared (Ortofons seemed to be OK in this regard). Good-tracking MMs like Shures, Stantons, etc., came to the rescue for LP owners. At least that's my memory of it.

Now, the shoe is on the other foot, given huge (IMO) advances in tables, tonearms, cartridges, and electronics. The best MC cartridges that I know of today are very transparent, linear, and extended in bass and treble. In fact, my current Transfiguration cart may be the quietest sound source I have. This also seems to be true of really good tables and arms. All this may be why those I know who have gone to LOMC carts have not reversed course to my knowledge. However, I may not know of examples going the other way.

I don't understand the writer's focus on "efficiency," which in my mind doesn't equate with how good a cartridge or amplifier will sound. Class A amplifiers can be some of the best-sounding stuff around, and yet they're quite inefficient.

Hmm, I'll have to be more careful about reading everything. [:$]

Canyonman, why did you ask?

Larry

[Coytee]

All I can tell you is that the SPU is my all time favorite cartridge--I don't care if it's "accurate"--it SOUNDS accurate--piano, horn, bass all sound "real" to me.

I suppose it has nothing to do with you using the little cubie speakers with the accoustibass module???

[6] []

[pauln]

Bump. I was not trying to kill this thread - someone out

there must have something to say...

[The following is

edited:] Oooops, I missed that you had found it on the web. My bad! I've edited my reply.

Much

of the commentary, in my opinion and limited

knowledge, was an incorrect and wild

read on the history and direction of the "progression"

of quality and advancements in cartridges. I'd have reversed

his order and put MCs on top. It's like it

was written in the 1960s or early 1970s by someone who

was trying to steer the reader from MM or MC toward induced magnet

or moving iron (terms that I've never understood, unlike MM and MC),

perhaps for commercial reasons. I think of that period

because as I recall the bloom had just come off the rose

of many stereo moving coil carts due to poor tracking

performance. The Fairchild 232, for example, sounded

great at its best, but produced audible record wear on each

play and finally disappeared (Ortofons seemed to be OK in

this regard). Good-tracking MMs like Shures, Stantons, etc., came

to the rescue for LP owners. At least that's my memory of it.

Now, the shoe is on the other foot,

given huge (IMO) advances in tables, tonearms,

cartridges, and electronics. The best MC cartridges

that I know of today are very transparent, linear, and extended

in bass and treble. In fact, my current Transfiguration

cart may be the quietest sound source I have. This also

seems to be true of really good tables and arms. All this

may be why those I know who have gone to LOMC

carts have not reversed course to my knowledge.

However, I may not know of examples going the other way.

I don't understand the writer's

focus on "efficiency," which in my mind doesn't equate

with how good a cartridge or

amplifier will sound. Class A

amplifiers can be some of the best-sounding stuff around, and yet

they're quite inefficient.

Hmm, I'll have to be more careful about reading everything. [:$]

Canyonman, why did you ask?

Larry

Well

good! The reason I posted the internet cartridge spiel was that as a

B&O guy for life (so far) one does not get to experience all the

arcane minutia about the "regular" cartridges, arms, and such. A

B&O user misses out on all the adjustments and alignments that make

and break the synergy of all the possible combinations. In previous

posts I have recommended B&O with just this caveat that if one

upgrades to "regular" turntables one will not have gained the knowledge

and experience needed to know all the finer points of geometry, angles,

forces et al. The internet spiel was the most comprehensive (if

perhaps biased or misleading) account of cartridge info I had found. As

Allan noted, the history is wrong about MC... I had a feeling that

something might be amiss and put it up as a target for comment.

OK, I'm off to drag a rock across some plastic and hear some beautiful sound... amazing...

[jcmusic]

Hi Larry,

The reason I am asking is I am about to buy a scoutmaster tt with the jmw -9 arm, and I am trying to decide on which cartridge to go with. I have never owned or heard a MC before and just wanted to hear from the people I trust most. I have wanted to try the MC cartridge for awhile now, but the tt come as a package deal with a cartridge. So I need to decide on which MM or MC.

Jay

[LarryC]

Good show, Jay. I'm not a VPI owner, but the Scout gets lots of praise and the Scoutmaster would be a cut above even that. MC is trickier than MM unless your electronics have a phono stage with the needed additional gain. And it's not even that simple -- there are high-output (HO), medium-output and low-output (LO) moving coils, and there seems to be a consensus or at least an impression that the LOMCs are the most transparent and realistic. I've tried medium-outputs in the past and found them opaque-sounding compared with LOMCs. I kind of wonder about choosing a less-than-excellent MC over a MM.

However, good LOMCs will cost, both the cart itself and things like added electronics or transformers. The 'table and arm should have comparable quality, too, in order to get the good sound out of it. Here, my impression is you are well off with that Scoutmaster and JMW arm from everything I have read.

One BIG potential problem with MC's is that the stylus is NOT user-replaceable! After all, the cantilever has COILS with WIRES attached to the inside of the cart, since the coils are what are being wiggled by the cantilever. My cleaning lady took to dusting my TT and pulled it right out without knowing it! Leaving only bare wire ends dangling inside the cart, of course. That can be hundreds of dollars or more to replace it, and you have to send it in! A MM has only the magnet at the other end of the removable cantilever assembly, so the whole assembl can be removed and replaced for much less money.

So, it seems to me we need to get down to brass tacks -- what are your cartridge choices, both MM and MC (if you're still interested)? Then, forum members can comment on your choices and we can find out the carts' output level. Second, what is the gain of your phono stage, and does it have more than one gain level? For example, some units like BAT phono units can switch between 45 and 60 db, which adds to the 20 db line stage gain. 45 is good, hefty MM gain, while 60 db is good for MC's down to about 0.4 or 0.5 mv output, which is very nice LOMC territory. Can you dig up your preamp info as well as which carts you can have? Thanks,

Larry

[jcmusic]

Hi Larry,

Thanks for the support and the advice. As for the choices, the Dynavector VPI special version 20X 1.0mv output is suppose to be an excellent match for this setup. For MM the Grado Sonata is a good match or so I am told. I am open to suggestion, Mark at Rogue told me I will have no problem with anything from 0.8mv on up. My phono stages gain is 63-65 for MM and 73-75 for MC, all I have to do is change the output tubes from 12AU7's to 12AT7's and flip two slide switches. This is what is required for MC's.

Jay

[LarryC]

I see those gain figures on the Rogue site. Even 63 to 65 is great gain for MC, and 73 - 75 should be good for really low output MCs.

So, I'm surprised he thought the cart had to be as high as 0.8 mv! I would have said 63-65 is good for 0.5 and above, and 73 is good down to at least 0.3 mv., which includes some of the best carts. My Transfiguration is 0.5, easily handled by the Joule's 61 db phono stage.

According to the Needle Doctor site, the Dynavector 20X comes in either a HO version, at 2.8 mv (much too high for a good MC, likely not to have as good or transparent a sound IMO), and a quite low 0.3 mv version. Wow, what a difference. See the ND Dynavector site.

My camp certainly favors the LO one, and I'd expect 73 db gain to do well with it. I can't be one to say for sure, but wonder if you shouldn't review all this with Rogue and your dealer?

Larry

[garymd]

I went from MM's to a HOMC to a LOMC and will never look back. The difference was night and day in my case. It probably doesn't hurt that I bought one of these:

http://cls.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/cls.pl?anlgcart&1181831494

Mine is actually the "W", not the "V". There is a slight difference in output but they sound identical. Larry had the "V" before he upgraded. If you bought one of these (assuming it mates well with your arm and phono stage), you would never go back either.

Many folks like the Denon which can be had new for under $300. I had one at one time also. It's a fantastic value and sounds great but don't believe anyone who tells you it can rival the higher priced LOMCs like the Temper and others. However, if I was looking to spend $300 on a cart, it's what I would buy.

[LarryC]

Good sighting, Gary.

[kaiser SET say]

Sweet Gary, that is a bargain on that Trans[]

For me really good MC has always been dependant on how good your phono pre is but I'm sure that's just MO[]

I will say there is no exaggeration in the claim that Stanton's 400 V3 cartridge is the loudest cartridge on the planet though, for $19.95 I had to try that thing out and if you have a weak phone stage I highly recommend this cartridge[8]

[maxg]

"Many folks like the Denon which can be had new for under $300. I had one at one time also. It's a fantastic value and sounds great but don't believe anyone who tells you it can rival the higher priced LOMCs like the Temper and others. However, if I was looking to spend $300 on a cart, it's what I would buy."

Where you are dealing with normal gymbaled arms then I would agree with you - assuming medium mass and nothing too esoteric. Where other factors come into play I would be a little more circumspect. Synergy between arm and cartridge is the key to the sound. I have run $1500 cartridges and $130 cartridges and found the latter the better merely due to the match with the arm.

The Denon 103 is, in simple terms, the best audio bargain in the market today - IF IT MATCHES WELL WITH YOUR ARM. IMHO the VPI arms are actually not such a great match here - they are not bad by any means - just not a eureka moment.

I am the first to admit my own setup is insane on the face of it. But I cannot tell you how many audiophiles have left scratching their heads and trying to figure out why it sounds so good. There is, it seems, a little science (maths actually) in the matching of arm and cartridge and I got my sums just about right.

Would it sound better with a ZYX Airy 3? Might do - everyone wants me to try it over here - but at $2,300 it is quite a jump and sadly I cannot talk the distributor into letting me try it out (he does not think it will sound better - a decent reason I suppose). The math does pan out for it though.

One interesting cartridge that does not get a lot of mention on this fora (or any that I know of) is the Denon 304. This was the Denon high end cart. It was ludicrously low output (.18 mV) so you need a heck of a lot of gain with it - but on the one ocasion I heard it I was VERY impressed (but on a $100,000 rig....)

[garymd]

"Many folks like the Denon which can be had new for under $300. I had one at one time also. It's a fantastic value and sounds great but don't believe anyone who tells you it can rival the higher priced LOMCs like the Temper and others. However, if I was looking to spend $300 on a cart, it's what I would buy."

Where you are dealing with normal gymbaled arms then I would agree with you - assuming medium mass and nothing too esoteric. Where other factors come into play I would be a little more circumspect. Synergy between arm and cartridge is the key to the sound. I have run $1500 cartridges and $130 cartridges and found the latter the better merely due to the match with the arm.

The Denon 103 is, in simple terms, the best audio bargain in the market today - IF IT MATCHES WELL WITH YOUR ARM. IMHO the VPI arms are actually not such a great match here - they are not bad by any means - just not a eureka moment.

I am the first to admit my own setup is insane on the face of it. But I cannot tell you how many audiophiles have left scratching their heads and trying to figure out why it sounds so good. There is, it seems, a little science (maths actually) in the matching of arm and cartridge and I got my sums just about right.

Would it sound better with a ZYX Airy 3? Might do - everyone wants me to try it over here - but at $2,300 it is quite a jump and sadly I cannot talk the distributor into letting me try it out (he does not think it will sound better - a decent reason I suppose). The math does pan out for it though.

One interesting cartridge that does not get a lot of mention on this fora (or any that I know of) is the Denon 304. This was the Denon high end cart. It was ludicrously low output (.18 mV) so you need a heck of a lot of gain with it - but on the one ocasion I heard it I was VERY impressed (but on a $100,000 rig....)

Max,

You didn't post the rest of my quote:

(assuming it mates well with your arm and phono stage)

The Temper is a perfect match for the Vector which was a major factor in my decision to go that route. It's was the same combo both AJ Conti (Basis owner) and Bob Clark (Transfiguration distributor) were using at the time. Since then they've both upgraded to the Transfiguration Orpheus, same as Larry.

[jcmusic]

Ok guys will someone that knows post or tell me where to look for the cartridges that will match the JMW-9 arm, MC and MM. I am told the Dynavector 20X special VPI version 1.0mv is a no brainer. Anyone know anything about this? My budget for either cartridge is $700.00 max.

So I guess what I need to know is are there any MM cartridges in this price range that will compare to a MC in the same price range?

Jay

[kentamcolin]

I've got a VPI Scout with Scoutmaaster platter and motor, and JMW-9 arm. I started with a Dynavector DV20XH high output moving coil and recently changed to a Dyna XX2 mk2. I use Dynavector's P-75 phono stage in PE mode and the sound is fabulous. This combo was highly recommended by Harry W. at VPI. The jump in cost from these two cartridges was huge but worth it IMO, and I could not be happier with the combo.

[LarryC]

Jay, if you do consider kentamcolin's suggestion of the Dynavector XX-2, it seems like you're well-positioned because of your preamp's 73 or 74 db phono gain. That cartridge has a quite low 0.23 mv output level that would probably be low for even my 61-db phono section but OK for yours (you would need to confirm that).

While a 1.0 mv MC may not have the transparency of the more expensive MCs (costing over or well-over $1k), satisfaction probably depends on the kind of music you like and how you listen to it. I'm almost entirely classical, where transparency is paramount, and I think good jazz is the same way, but that may not be true for other kinds of music. In any case, I think one has a search on their hands to find a good MC for under $1k.

Budget- and challenge-wise, the recommendations for the 1.0 mv VPI Dynavector seem to add up to a yes vote. Given that, I myself wouldn't be inclined to look for an MM substitute.

Larry

[jcmusic]

Hi Larry, Most of the music I listen to these days is Jazz and some Classic Rock. I listen at about 80-95db so volume is not an issue. To be on the safe side I would like to stay somewhere near the .08 - 1.0 mv output level, also in the less than $1000 range. So far the list includes the Sumiko Blackbird, the Benz Ace, and Glider and the Dynavector 20X Special VPI version.

Jay