2. analog
  3. 189527-245

MC-MM-MI CARTRIDGES . DO YOU KNOW WHICH HAS BETTER QUALITY PERFORMANCE? REALLY?

Dear friends:The main subject of this thread is start a dialogue to find out the way we almost all think or be sure about the thread question :  " true " answer.

 

Many years ago I started the long Agon MM thread where several audiophiles/Agoners and from other audio net forums participated to confirm or to discover the MM/MI/IM/MF/HOMC world and many of us, me including, was and still are" surprised for what we found out in that " new " cartridge world that as today is dominated by the LOMC cartridges.

 

Through that long thread I posted several times the superiority of the MM/types of cartridges over the LOMC ones even that I owned top LOMC cartridge samples to compare with and I remember very clearly that I posted that the MM and the like cartridges had lower distortion levels and better frequency range quality performance than the LOMC cartridges.

 

In those times j.carr ( Lyra designer ) was very active in Agon and in that thread  I remember that he was truly emphatic  posting that my MM conclusion was not  true due that things on distortion cartridge levels in reality is the other way around: LOMC has lower distortion levels.

 

Well, he is not only a LOMC cartridge designer but an expert audiophile/MUSIC lover with a long long and diverse first hand experiences listening cartridges in top TT, top tonearms and top phono stages and listening not only LOMC cartridges but almost any kind of cartridges in his and other top room/systems.

 

I never touched again that subject in that thread and years or months latter the MM thread I started again to listening LOMC cartridges where my room/system overall was up-graded/dated to way superior quality performance levels than in the past and I posted somewhere that j.carr was just rigth: LOMC design were and are superior to the other MM type cartridges been vintage or today models.

 

I'm a MUSIC lover and I'm not " married " with any kind of audio items or audio technologies I'm married just with MUSIC and what can gives me the maximum enjoyment of that ( every kind )  MUSIC, even I'm not married with any of my opinions/ideas/specific way of thinking. Yes, I try hard to stay " always " UNBIASED other than MUSIC.

 

So, till today I followed listening to almost every kind of cartridges ( including field coil design. ) with almost every kind of tonearms and TTs and in the last 2 years my room/system quality performance levels were and is improved by several " stages " that permits me better MUSIC audio items judgements and different enjoyment levels in my system and other audio systems. Yes, I still usemy test audio items full comparison proccess using almost the same LP tracks every time and as always my true sound reference is Live MUSIC not other sound system reproduction.

 

I know that the main thread subject is way complicated and complex to achieve an unanimous conclusions due that exist a lot of inherent differences/advantages/unadvantages in cartridges even coming from the same manufacturer.

 

We all know that when we talk of a cartridge we are in reality talking of its cantilever buil material, stylus shape, tonearm used/TT, compliance, phono stage and the like and my " desire " is that we could concentrate in the cartridges  as an " isolated " audio item and that  any of our opinions when be posible  stay in the premise: " everything the same ".

 

My take here is to learn from all of you and that all of us try to learn in between each to other and not who is the winner but at the " end " every one of us will be a winner.

 

So, your posts are all truly appreciated and is a thread where any one can participates even if today is not any more his analog alternative or is a newcomer or heavily experienced gentleman. Be my guest and thank's in advance.

 

Regards and ENJOY THE MUSIC NOT DISTORTIONS,

R.

Ag insider logo xs@2xrauliruegas
terry9
2,253 posts
 

I had much the same experience with caps - Wima was quite good, some of the boutique brands not. I settled on Multicap styrene caps as being the most neutral.

As for direct experience and experiment, I can help you there. I did experiments with a break-out box, then on alternate channels of my phono stage.

Since all the good caps use a dielectric with a dielectric constant in the 2 - 2.5 range, and vacuum and air are very close to 1.000, I wondered. I thought that maybe radio stations that used $10,000 caps knew something that I didn’t. Tried those dielectrics in the same circuit as my favoured Multicap and it was no contest: clearer, cleaner, and far smoother (ESL system powered by mono blocks with air bearing / Koetsu front end).

Costly, though. Very bulky. And a wee bit tricky to design for. But worth it, IMO.

PS high pass filter in my crossover aso this cap is two times critical in that electronics as in the RIAA

You can’t be serious.

Ag insider logo xs@2x
rauliruegas OP
12,874 posts
 

@terry9 : Why can’t be serious? I’m refering that the same cap runs as the amplifier coupling capacitor and at the same time I’m taking advantage on that Levinson design and is used too as the high pass crossover for my speaker/subs.

So, the high pass filter is not an additional " nothing " in the speaker/sub audio signal,I just use that coupling cap for both jobs.

 

Btw, for years I used the Multicap polyestirene ones and still own in stck several samples and asafactI use it today in the high pass filter for the add-on back speaker tweeter that works from 7khz up. Btw, in my system applications main speaker crossovers and amplifiers input coupling caps the Multicaps were and are beated easily for theWima model I’m using and Kemet does the same. In my external hard wired speaker crossovers I’m using the Kemet for the woofers instead the Wima.

 

Now,all what I have to do is to make a self test at the input of the amplifiers and in the speaker tweeters waiting that the size of the air caps permits that I do it.

At both places is very easy to me detect be aware if the air cap can beats the Wima I’m " married ". I can’t make the test in the RIAA due that then we have to re-calibrates everything in that circuit to achieve our 0.012db RIAA deviation and this is to much work for us rigth now.

 

R.

 

 

 

 

 

terry9
2,253 posts
 

"Can't be serious" because a phono signal is 1/100 the size of a line stage signal, and any distortion is therefore magnified 100 times before the crossover. That was my reasoning. Do you think that my reasoning is flawed?

mijostyn's avatar
mijostyn
8,252 posts
 

@terry9 Unfortunately, it is flawed. Not only is the distortion amplified but so is the signal. The distortion remains the exact same percentage. 

lewm
12,576 posts
 

I used to use the Multicap RTX caps for critical applications. (Those are the polystyrenes.) But in my listening opinion, the teflon capacitors that came along later are far better (REL or other). In fact, now I cannot bear the RTXs, and I have a bunch of them in many different values. I also found some 2uF/200V polystyrenes (so not applicable for RIAA or hi-pass filtering unless your filter is set at a high-ish frequency), made by PAS (Pacific Audio Supply), that are unsurpassed for output coupling capacitors. I originally bought 36 of them to use as a high pass filter in my Sound Lab speakers, and when I totally removed the high pass filter in the speakers, I ended up with a box full of the PAS which I then tried experimentally in output coupling and now love. Sadly, PAS is now defunct. I have several PAS polystyrene also in 0.22uF/600V; Ralph used to use them as internal coupling caps in his OTLs. They’re superb but fairly large and don’t fit everywhere. For low value capacitance below 0.1uF, I have found the Russian silver mica capacitors the most absolutely transparent. I use them in RIAA. They were or are cheap on eBay. I guess my point is that no one company or no one type of capacitor is "best" for all applications.  You have to experiment and listen.

More to discover