Moving magnet vs. moving coil
Вставка
- Опубліковано 13 лип 2019
- This viewer wants to understand why his moving coil cartridge sounds so much better than his moving magnet. Paul explains why as well as how both work. Have a question you want to ask Paul? www.psaudio.com/ask-paul/
I have finished my memoir! You can go read it now: www.amazon.com/gp/product/173... It's called 99% True and it is chock full of adventures, debauchery, struggles, heartwarming stories, triumphs and failures, great belly laughs, and a peek inside the high-end audio industry you've never known before.
I plan a few surprises for early adopters, so go to www.paulmcgowan.com and add your name to the list of interested readers. There's an entire gallery of never before seen photos too. - Наука та технологія
We desparetly need a podcast format. So much information and insight.
Douglas Blake I was thinking about a real podcast not 6 minutes, Paul is very interesting and has a lot to say, guess time constraints don’t allow. But thank you for the reply!
I'm just starting to mine informations about audio technicalities. I'm quite thankful for this chunk of nugget. Thanks, Paul.
Excellent explanation. Straight forward, easy to understand and helpful.
Thanks
At long last, and in a way I can understand and appreciate. Thank you.
Thank you for sharing all your great knowledge.
Thanks for watching!
I have a Grado ZF3 Classic moving iron, and the Ortofon 2M Red moving mag. Love them both, I couldn’t imagine paying anything more than what I have on those two cartridges. They sound amazing for the cost
Oh wow, that's a great explanation, super clear & super easy to understand! Thank you!
Such a great explanation. Thank you.
Mass was exactly the thing I was going to mention. Less mass, means it's easier for the grooves to accelerate the stylus, with lower tracking weight. With too much mass, the stylus actually rotates slightly, rather than holding its azimuth, and sending an accurate motion relative to the undulations of the grooves in the record. That causes cross talk, and distortion, especially at higher frequencies. A good mic/line preamplifier can solve any problems with the reduced output by flying the coil, rather than the Neodymium Iron Boron magnet. Moving magnet cartridges have improved a lot, since they went with the lighter, more powerful Neodymium magnets, rather than the older, heavier Alnico (aluminum nickel cobalt)magnets, but I still think there is more reciprocating mass with those, than with a modern moving coil cartridge. The lighter, the better!!! It also helps, if the ringing or resonant frequency of the whole assembly can be above any sound it would be asked to track, so it doesn't add coloration to the high end. The only ways to do that is to increase stiffness, and, or, reduce mass. I used to like flying magnet, because it put out a stronger signal, so I could maintain better signal/noise ratio on the amplifier, by turning down the gain. I've since found several studio quality mic to line amplifier ICs, which have such a good signal to noise ratio, that output level from the cartridge is no longer a concern. These chips also work well for the faint signal from magnetic tape heads as well. Now, I can explore these new flying coil cartridges!
Who, my friend. This is pretty high-tech stuff your talking here! I salute you! I am a EE and barely followed your explanation, so I guess a n normal Joe/Jane (avoiding sexism..LOL) reading this will be totally lost. But, again, I commend you!
He did give a very eloquent and intelligent response...lol. I followed it quite easily, but then again, I'm a commercial aircraft engineer so I guess my brain is sort of "set up" for this type of thing. Good stuff, though! @@aldocelli9371
Thank you for that clear expalination
One of the simplest and most effective explanations out there. Nicely done Paul!!
Superb explanation .
I have that Dire Straits album on vinyl that you pulled out, great album! I just got Love Over Gold on vinyl the other week too. I wish I did more research on buying my first turntable though.
Ay least you have a turntable. It shows your heart is in the right place! And, you can always upgrade down the road.
Neil Russell yeah that’s true. At the time I wanted a turntable that didn’t require a seperate preamp, so I thought that this would be a good choice. My turntable has so many issues though.
Thank you for this explanation... makes a lot of sense how you explain how the MM and MC works and why a MC requires a higher gain boost from a preamp.
Man Paul awesome video! I think this is the best one that I have seen explaining the difference between MM/MC cartridges. You made it very easy to understand, without talking down to us viewers. I am definitely downloading, and saving this one! Thank You much for taking the time to make such interesting videos.
Thank-you very much Paul. As always. easy to understand, even for a layman like myself. I have managed to get hold of a few players. All vintage. Pioneer x 4 and a Thorens. I am waiting for my new stylus and belt. I sit and listen to You for hours when I have time. So wish I was closer. Regards. Jacques de Lange , South Africa.
Thanks for your explanation sir!
This is the best explanation I’ve ever heard
I view the turntable/cartridge/record reproduction system as an art rather than a science. Back then they didn't have the understanding or measuring techniques of today so they did experimentation and optimized on what sounded best over what they got from their measuring instruments. The end result was an impressive sound, especially in the days before tech and computers. I started using moving coil cartridges in 1979 because the salesman talked me into it when I got a new stereo. I really didn't compare, but I have always been satisfied with my MC cartridges so I keep using them.
Good work!
ive had a rega p8 with the rega apheta 2 moving coil cartridge fitted for a few weeks now and had the same reaction..going from mm to mc was night and day..love the mc sound..so much better
barrie MC cartridges are night and day you are right, although it depends on the pre-amp whereas MM cartridges are not as fussy.
The difference is probably because the alpheta is in a higher pricerange, more or less translating into higher performance.
every time i learn something here. thank you
Thank you so much. That was great.
Very insightful...!
Great video. I’ve read a lot on the difference but hearing it explained is appreciated.
If you want to compare moving magnet with moving coil cartridges you need to compare apples with apples . Ie the same brand with the same style diamond tip, otherwise you are actually comparing other factors and concluding that it is the MC which is the cause of the superior performance where it might be also caused by a different shaped tip, which also makes a large difference. A more accurate and interesting comparison would be for example to compare an Ortofon Rondo Bronze with an Ortofon OM40 which both use the same tip but are MC and MM cartridges respectively. Also the main reason MC cartridges tend to perform better is that the moving coil has less mass and therefore less inertia than the moving magnet and so it can move more quickly and so track better.
Reminds me of the late Seventies when I had to make a tape before going on an outing.
Good explanation, thanks. I have always heard that if you're not going to spend a "lot" say over $1000 on an MC, the higher end MM cartridges (between $400-$700) sound better than the "cheaper" MC carts. Can someone validate this view or share their insight?
My favorite sounding cartridge is actually a budget ceramic BSR SC5M (diamond conical stylus) with a special R-C circuit that I feed into a tube pre-amp and then into a magnetic cartridge input. I bought it NOS around 2014 but it was manufactured in the early 70's and has a nylon cradle as opposed to the rubber ones that tended to dry out and get stiff. It's a heavy tracker at about 4.5 grams but it sounds amazing. BTW, I'm not in the least afraid to use heavy trackers as long as they don't exceed 5 grams VTF, the stylus isn't worn, the record is clean with a dry dust brush, and the turntable is set up correctly. At least on my system, it sounds better than any moving magnet or moving coil I've tried. It is also by far the least fussy in terms of set-up. The cartridge may have been designed to be paired with cheap BSR changers but when used on a high-end table with a high mass tonearm, this sub $100 cartridge outclasses MC cartridges costing thousands. Having said that, most ceramic cartridges are junk. This specific BSR, the Sonotone 9 series, and a few others are exceptions... you just have to have the correct circuitry to unlock their magic.
Hello Paul
the explanation of the differences and similarities between MM and MC cartridge is very successful.
At 2:23 I liked the comment about the DECCA cartridge.
Except that, unfortunately, connoisseurs were always reluctant to buy, even though DECCA opened up new, unfamiliar perspectives for accurate sound reading, so unfamiliar that some of the good things became too much because of the enormous, incomparable accuracy of the pickup, more on this below. The price for this is a very meticulous and precise adjustment of the DECCA's.
There are particular problems with poorly or moderately damped tonearms.
The permanently vertically and horizontally oil-damped LTD tonearm system from WELL TEMPERED LAB is the ideal playing partner for such a delicate cartridge.
Currently, at the end of 2022, it is becoming more and more difficult to find a new DECCA, let alone to buy it. It is not certain whether production will even start in the future, due to the closure of AEC in Germany at the beginning of 2022.
What distinguishes a DECCA? The AEC-DECCA has no cantilever. There is only one side. Where the AEC Iron needle holder IS the "cantilever" but without a fulcrum. It just comes out of the head just above the pickup point. This end , and not the one opposite, oscillates WITH the finely ground scanning diamond that is attached there, in the extremely close range of the magnetic field of the double coils, which are also located in the head near the grooves of the record. This guarantees that the movement of the diamond and the iron pin in the magnetic field are almost 1 to 1 is transmitted, in deflection range and in dynamic and speed, since this is not reduced by a leverage effect due to a touchdown point, or slowed down in movement.No smear effect, no friction, no reduced movement, only 1 to 1. Such accuracy of pickup is not offered by any other cartridge system,. By AEC LONDON (DECCA) the movements of the diamond, provoked by the forces of the passing bulges and indentations of the grooves, are transmitted almost 1 to 1 in the range of the optimal possible within the magnetic field. This results in an induced voltage that could not come more directly, and in the analog sense not more congruently, with the recording track.
Extremely close to the required ideal standard, closer than a cantilever construction would be physically and technically possible, that is evident. You hardly risk that engraved sound information is obscured, within the range of the physically possible, of course. At least less than with other purely analog pickup systems.
Whether everyone likes it, is a matter of taste!
I love to experience the history of music through the exploring the lp-recordings benifitting by the excellent competences of DECCA and the LTD arm from WELL TEMPERED LAB record player VERSALEX.
The GERMAN PHYSIKS at the other end are also very up and coming talents that suit the virtuosity of the DECCA.
Unfortunately, the era of the AEC (DECCA) LONDON outsiders seems to be drawing to a close.
Paul, I always look forward to your understandable explanations about interesting subjects from the audiophile world.
I love to experience the history of music through the exploring the lp-recordings benifitting by the excellent competences of DECCA and the LTD arm from WELL TEMPERED LAB record player VERSALEX.
The GERMAN PHYSIKS at the other end are also very up and coming talents that suit the virtuosity of the DECCA.
Just finished 99% True.
It's 100% worth the effort.
I want a boss like Paul, nice person!!
There is another aspect to this recalling my vinyl-playing days. In the 1970s I expended much effort making a damping system for my Grace tone arm in which I had a Grace F8F MM cartridge. The arm was attached to a small aluminium paddle fabricated from a beer can and sat in a pool of machine oil that was a repurposed cough-lolly tin. When I replaced the Grace MM cartridge with an Audio Technica moving coil cartridge in the 1980s, the tone arm damping system became redundant. With lower moving mass at the stylus, less tone arm resonance was excited.
Interesting that the head amp PS Audio makes gives 30dB gain. The head amp I made gave 20dB gain and that was plenty for feeding the MM input on my home-made amp. I still have that little amp knocked up on a piece of Vero board and the Pro-Ject head amp that eventually replaced it ca. 2000. The only time I play LPs these days is for the purpose of digitising them.
My wife also has variable reluctance. And a fair amount of reactance at times. But a good EE has workarounds for this.
Cheers from Brazil.
Excellent explanation to this old Engineer/MD. Several questions. Does the MC lower mass have less wear on a vinyl record? Does the MC have “overshoot” ...lack of adequate damping because of the light weight? Does the higher mass of the MM have a problem with “under shooting” the groove/signal because of the mass? Does the MM cause higher wear? Or does the difference in terminating resistance compensate and provide the proper damping for each design? Are different vinyl pressings made that accommodate one or the other types better than the other? I would assume that most would assume the use of an MM because they are so much more common? Is that correct?
Yes vastly different sounding designs simply because of that factor. My many years experience with moving magnet vs coil cartridges is that moving coils have better dynamics, speed, detail retrieval, because of there design differences. Although I have heard many moving magnet cartridges and one of there advantages is they can bee very musical. They just fall short in dynamics and detail.
MC cartridges sound so much more alive but MM cartridges can soften the harsh highs of a lot of rock records. I use a low output MC cartridge
I used to have quite an expensive MC cartridge - (Ortofon Cadenza Black, also had the Red prior). I decided to try a Nagaoka MP-150 (Moving Permalloy) with a Schiit Mani phonostage and have never looked back, absolutely fantastic cartridge and phono combo. I sold the Cadenza and MC phono stage. What's more you can swap styli on the Nagaoka (like majority of MMs), so for really beat up records I bought a secondhand (like new, but cheap price) MP-110 so I can play those without worrying about damaging the MP-150. So, if you want great LP sound, spend $600 on the Nagaoka/Mani combo and you'll not want for much more.
HiVinyws viewer?
@@Mason085 Yes, it was his reviews that put me onto it.
@@Phil_f8andbethere same here except I don't have the Schiit Mani phono preamp but do wonder what difference it would make.
I started to put another narrative to his hand gestures. Now I can't undo it. Help.
wake me up when you finish.
MM and MI vs MC technology has seemed to come pretty far as of late, so the difference between them is becoming less than it used to be. I have used both over the yrs, and am back to using an MI cartridge for at least the time being. Brands such as Goldring, Soundsmith, and Grado make some amazing MM and/or MI carts today.
One of the biggest improvements, was the move to rare earth magnets, like samarium cobalt, and neodymium iron cobalt magnets. These new magnets produce much more field strength from less mass, than the old alnico (aluminum nickel cobalt)magnets. They've greatly reduced mass, without reducing signal strength. I think flying coil is slightly better on a mass standpoint, but, with the reduced signal strength, your signal/noise ratio won't be as good, if you need to increase gain too much.
Vincent Robinette I think (or at least hope) that magnet development is in it’s infancy. I would love to see a magnet structure that is as light as any coil, but puts out ten times the voltage,
Since the 80s when Audio Technica released their very fine -feature two magnetic generators arranged in the shape of a "V" - Vector-Aligned cartridge include outstanding channel separation, very low distortion and superb tracking performance.
Not to mention their fine components used with the technology.
@@doowopper1951 That does make me wonder: What if you just reduce the mass of the flying magnets, until it only produces the same output as flying coil? Would that further reduce mass? Another thing to consider, is signal to noise ratio of the amplifier. the more gain you need, the more you'l hear hiss and other noise. That kind of makes it a trade-off, between mass, and signal strength. A flying magnet design is certainly more simple, and if you don't have to fly the coils, they can be wound heavier, to compensate for less massive magnets.
@ My old Techniques stereo turntable used an audio technica cartridge, that used that exact technology. It worked extremely well. I used that system to record my vinyl records on to audio cassette tapes, for use in my car. I often used the Dolby A setting when recording, so I got a more crisp treble in my car tape player. The channel separation was really pretty good compared to anything else I've ever had, but it did get the highs.
I'm having a really hard time finding a replacement stylus for that cartridge, the needle is now worn out, and the stylus was damaged, when I accidentally slid a record into the tone arm, while it was locked down. I would have felt really bad, except, with the worn needle, it was starting to turn the highs into static.(I needed a new one anyway) The magnets were part of the stylus.
My Technics EPC-100CMK3 says a lot about moving magnet being as good as most high end moving coil cartridge. It sings.
If the mass of a moving magnet is a problem, just make the magnet much smaller with neodymium and use an amplifier with a higher gain, similar to a moving coil amplifier. In the old days of turntables, neodymium magnets were not available and Paul’s point was more valid.
Back in the day, they were using alnico(aluminum nickel cobalt)magnets. They were competing with ceramic cartridges, and they were a big improvement, but now, they're using the lighter, equally powerful neodymium magnets, as well as samarium cobalt magnets. That helps a lot, making the choice hard: Do you want less mass at the expense of signal to noise ratio, or, do you want a little more signal strength to maximize S/N ratio, but with a slight attenuation at the upper limits of hearing frequency? With magnets as powerful and light weight as they are, and, preamps as good as they are, it's kind of hard to go wrong these days. Lower mass wins for me, because I can reduce tracking weight, and hopefully, prolong the life of my vinyl.
@Douglas Blake Not to mention hiss. that's why I recommend a balanced line mic to line preamplifier. That's the only way to get the extra gain, while maintaining an acceptable signal to noise ratio. to just simply turn up the gain on a regular phono amplifier will cause all the problems you described. Newer moving magnet cartridges, equipped with Neodymium magnets, can go a long way to reduce mass, without reducing the signal strength from the cartridge, so a conventional receiver can still be used, without modification, or a header amplifier.
@Douglas Blake Can you describe the axis of the rotation? it could be, that it's taking advantage of the very thing I was saying was hindering performance. I was talking about the actual needle, being levered left and right about the axis of the stylus tube. the cartridge I took apart, had two tiny magnets, 90 degrees from one another. If there was a signal on the record that only went to one channel, one magnet would move in and out of its coil, generating a signal. the other magnet would move radially within its coil, which would not produce any current at all. That required the stylus tube to move diagonally, radial to its axis. Any rotation would result in both magnets moving in and out of the coils, which would create cross talk, which greatly reduced channel separation. Two VERY different designs! The fulcrum for the stylus was a spider, similar to what a loud speaker uses. It allowed movement in any direction, but minimized rotation.
@Douglas Blake That's OK. Curious minds gotta know.😉
There's always an alternative in audio !!
MM and MC ... but you often overlook one VERY important point ( excuse the pun ) and this is the stylus ( not needle ..PLEASE !!) geometry... if you compare a MM with a MC you must use identical stylii.. the best are bi radial types made from diamond and have an elliptical shape .. typically 0.0003" x 0.0007". This eclipse is positioned so that the smaller radii make the contact with the walls of the groove . So in this case in hand which Paul elegantly answered may I suggest you do check the stylus and see if ( in the case of your MM cartridge) you didn't also end up using a bi-radial stylus , which WOULD give superior HF response and trackability.
Janina Palmer and they need to be well aligned... the more radical the diamond shape the more critical the alignment, especially on the inner grove section if the record.
Gordon Stanley ~ precisely !
It's radial not radical btw
Seems right as far as it goes. Consider: lower stylus/shank/coil mass also makes the job of damping resonances much better. Also, stylus restoring forces are less. But I'd be willing to wager that as big of a cause of audible improvement is the shape and quality of the stylus. I have the Grado MC. When it replaced AT's best MM (at that time), the differences were as dramatic as your questioner noticed. The Grado was not only MC, but its stylus was a far smaller elliptical shape to trace more exactly. Not only did I hear more delicate detail, the sound stage widened and stabilized in place. CAVEAT: The Grado works best on really clean records. That too makes a huge difference.
Reduced cross talk, better channel separation, because with reduced mass, the stylus track more accurately, because it doesn't roll. It maintains a more perfect azimuth. Of course, lower mass means better high frequency response. If the ringing resonance frequency is higher than the highest sound frequency it will be asked to track, that means less coloration, so you're hearing program material, not the ringing of the stylus.
Changing the stylus on one of those moving coil cartridges is extremely difficult, I believe. An ultra steady hand is needed, like one would find on people from China and Japan.
But why do Moving Coil cartridges tend to cost several times more than Moving Magnet cartridges? I'm struggling to find a decent MC cartridge that doesn't cost more than my U-turn Orbit.
What has always puzzled me is how they get the signals from moving coil devices out of the coils. I imagine that VERY thin, flexible wires are involved, but the architecture is puzzling. Do the wires affect the 'compliance' (is that the word?)? Do they ever snap from constant bending?
Curious - would love to see microscope pictures of the insides of the cartridge.
Good question.
I have a basic Ortofon moving coil cartridge. It was OK through my previous pre-amp, but when I upgraded to another pre-amp it suddenly moved to another level. No more background noise and just better all round. I have a better than average CD player and the sound just doesn't match the Ortofon.
what phonostage are you now using for your mc cartridge?
The opposite is also true, get a sheathed nail wind coil around it connect a battery to the ends of the coil and the nail will become magnetised.
'Ole Audiophile to Paul: My experience with moving coil was somewhat limited exclusively to Signet, a corporation under Audio Technica. I noticed things got glossed over the whole matching transformer/head amp to the exact model of cartridge thing. Signet moving coil phono cartridge did not have a replaceable stylus so needle wear meant a whole new deal. This is the very thing that drove many of us screaming away from turntable use in the first place. FYI. They sounded spendiferous but they typically cost double or more.
what kind of turntable is that? great videos
Genius!
Excellent video. I have recently started building my HIFI system and am exclusively streaming. I remember spinning vinyl back in the 70-80s and did not realize there were 2 different types of cartridges. For now, I'll stick to streaming using your recommendation of MAC mini and Audivarna. I have to look at the cost and return in terms of better sound and don't see the value yet. Thanks for the video.
The most real honest n best explanation by far, am also using an M75 ed cartridge since my old V15 III stylus ws damaged Shure cartridges are no longer made I was thinking of a MC too now I fully understand why they are able to follow the grooves more faithfully IE more accurate reproduction my Pre amp has inputs for MM n MC but been a pensioner my budget is limited n am sure y time is too so spending a ton of money is out of the question, I also like the solid sound of American made MM cartridges can I expect an improvement with a budget of around £200 top wag? or is my budget way too low? But MC makes a Lott of sense after hearing you great explanation many thanks mate
There are some really good aftermarket stylus options for that V15 III, would heavily recommned looking into some of those. If you have enough to go for a Jico SAS stylus, you'll have arguably one of the best MMs around - they're pricey styli but seriously worth it. I've got a V15 type IV and went for the Jico SAS Boron version myself - After getting the capacitance and setup sorted out right, I've never wanted anything else since. They're super sensitive to set-up and alignment, but once all's dialed in right, you'd have a diffuclt time finding better, especially at it's price point. The JICO SAS styli have a purpose-made tip somewhere up there with Shibata types but you can also get aftermarket elliptical ones for a lot less. Those V15s are seriously worth holding onto!
I'd like to here more on loading and pf.
Less mass is always better. In the motorcycle suspension business, we used to call it "Unsprung Weight" - which is a misnomer, but it covers it pretty well for the lay person. You don't want to have a lot of moving mass, because "light" / less-mass can respond more quickly to changes, which will almost always result in more accurate tracking. You're welcome.
With a MM cartridge the cabling and termination is critical. MC not so much, so they can sound good 'out of the box'. For instance my Shure 97xe with 150pf of connecting cable plus 100pf input load is probably getting a less than perfect HF resonant boost. I'll get it optimised one day. main advantage is losing the needle on the record edge won't cause a financial meltdown.
I always thought of a magnetic cartridge as a miniature microphone. Just imagine what speakers would sound like if they used moving magnets as opposed to the way they are. Moving coil. Highs would be hard to hit.
The Lyra Delos is an example of a flawless MC cartridge. It's worth $2000 now, but worth every cent!
Some would argue that the differences today are not that distinguishable, as they where in the 1970's. MC's had smaller coils (with exponentially smaller resistance and inductance) allowed a higher bandwidth, easily up to 50 kHz. MMs did not display that unique difference because their coils had many more windings, with concomitantly higher resistance and inductance.
But in the late'70's the MM camp responded with better stationary coils which were smaller and had better pole pieces...plus better cantilevers, smaller magnets, and fulcrums which allowed larger freedom of movement for the cantilever. Given that mm's are cheaper and that the high end mc's start well above the 1000$ line, one could get better sound from a sub 1000$ mm than from a sub 1000$ mc. What is your opinion?
Besides the moving mass, you have to consider the eddy currents generated in the copper that are created by the magnet. Drop a slightly smaller neodymium magnet down a copper pipe and see what happens!!!😉
@Douglas Blake 👍
Oh dear here we go again today we have magnets that are so light even compared to coils that this is a moot point. Also a moving magnet produces a much higher current negating the need for a step up.. So let's take 2 cartridges both £3000 one MM and the other MC which is going to be better.. Well I've listened to just about all of the MC's out there my MM floors them all and I don't need a step up which also is way better. Moving Iron ooooh that's so good and better than the above :-)
Currently using a 1973 Pioneer PL50 TT which apparently was designed for a MM cart. Can I use a MC with this table?
To me it seems the only significant difference between MMs and MCs is that MC are less sensitive to loading and phono stage properties, which makes it easier to achieve a flat frequency response.
For instance an Ortofon OM40 or an old Shure V15V-XMR have vanishingly low distortion (for a phono cart), lower distortion than many high and MCs and they can track anything. A cart needs to have low distortion, high tracking ability and as flat a frequency response as possible. Is there any more?
I personally don't have a horse in this race since I'm not a vinyl user, but wouldn't it make sense to design MM cartridges with rare earth magnets like neodymium or samarium cobalt (rather than alnico or ferrite) to lower the mass of the moving component? I'm asking out of naivete since I'm not into vinyl these days and haven't been following advances in cartridge design, but has this been done in any current cartridges?
Brilliant idea. It's been done for about 40 years now. Analogy: MM is like a tiny wheelbarrow. MC is like just the front wheel.
@@jimshaw899 -- ...and vinyl is a trendy nostalgia cult that's more about ritual and visual aesthetics than sound. That bit of snark notwithstanding, I was just curious because I was involved electromagnetic transducer technology in the previous decade -- so thanks for the heads-up. Now we're both better informed -- and it's good to know that whatever's left of the phono cartridge industry is more aware of the available materials than I was about said industry. Peace.
Another problem with moving magnet or variable reluctance cartridges is their relatively high inductance. This makes them prone to receiving nearby ham radio transmissions.
does either have a potential to produce a deeper bass tone?
I have a Philips 224 22GA224 turntable (running on its original cartridge) which sounds way louder at the same amplifier volume level than a Hitachi HT-50S running a Stanton 680 MkII. The Hitachi however sounds 'calming ' and the high tones are not shreeky as with the Philips.
What could be the reason ?
Greetings from Kenya.
At 5:33 - if they are electrically equivalent, then why do MC carts generate a weaker signal that needs greater amplification? I assume the coils in an MC cart are much smaller (shorter length of wire?) as compared to the same coils in an MM cart, which doesn't seem to be a like-for-like comparison, as MM carts could simply use a proportionally smaller magnet to generate a proportionally smaller voltage which would then need the same additional amplification.
So whats the difference between a traditional MC cart and a high output MC cart in there construction?
More coil windings in the high output versions.
Page 175
[C13: from ON kartr]
cartouche = cartouch = cartridge
carton = cartone = pasteboard
carta (It.) = paper/card
And with modern permanent magnets, this issue of moving mass isn’t an issue anymore.
Just like direct drive turntables are nowadays better than belt drive, because issues like cogging and hunting have been overcome.
virtually no high-end table is direct drive
@@johnholmes912 Yeah it's quite disappointing that a lot of manufacturers tend to be stuck in the past, simply because turntables have a bad image as a thing of the past.
Fortunately, there are companies that are actually trying to come up with more modern turntables that perform to modern standards, like the Brinkmann Bardo, Grand Prix Audio Monaco, SAT XD1, Technics SL-1000R, VPI HW-40 and Clearaudio Statement.
Yeah all those dollars and they for the most part have an arm swinging at a fixed pivot. Then dealing with that skating effect and not to mention changing tracking orientation. That last track on a LP is the first thing I noticed or I should say didn't notice when I started using a Technics SL-7 linear tracking turntable. It's not even a very expensive thing . Sometimes you get lucky pulling cords out of a dumpster. Now I've got a Stanton 680ee with a brush...just throw an album on and close"n"play ...self cleaning! Oh yeah it's also a p-mount Stanton did all the alignment for me. Really like that moving iron cartridge design.
Could be the best cartridge in the world and that is the van den Hul Crimson if the weight is suitable for your arm hand built by himself you should get one Paul
Cartridges actually measure a velocity rather than a movement. Because E=dBS/dt Then an integrator converts this to a movement correlated voltage
I agree with everything you said. I personally get superior sound from my MC cartridges compared to my MM cartridges. I understand the concept of less moving mass from the lighter coils.
However one thing that bothers me is that generally MM cartridges are more compliant and are tracked at 1-1.5grams, while the majority of MC cartridges are low to mid-compliance and track optimally at 2-2.5grams. This seems opposite of what the low mass of the MCs would predict.
Can you help out this graying audiophile?
Gordon Stanley I think it really depends on the cart , my MM Grace F9 tracks at 2g where as my MC Denon DL-304 tracks at 1.2g and that goes with all the MM and MC carts I have and have used .
IMHO a good MM will knock spots of a mediocre MC. Much depends on the arm the cartridge is mounted in, for example ..
I have 3 decks, listed in order of preferred sound quality.
Alphason Sonata, HRS100MCS, AT-OC7
Transcriptors Hydraulic Ref, Origin Live's top spec DC motor kit, SME3009s2 imp, Ortofon 2M Black
Roksan Xerxes, (no plinth sag), Linn Ekos, AT-OC7
All running through an M1 Vinl phono stage, Audiolab 8000Q and 8000M's, into Tannoy DC3000's in a big room :).
Here's the interesting bit :).
When fitted to the Alphason or Roksan the Ortofon cartridge gave nothing away to the AT's, the very highest frequencies might be a tad cleaner with the AT but the Ortofon might dig deeper in the bass. Or it could be entirely due to setup.
However put the two different 'cartri' in the SME and the Ortofon MM is the clear winner.
And no I am not joking, the Roksan/Linn was less enjoyable to listen to than the DC drive Transcriptors SME, so much so that I recently sold it on. Quite how reviewers of yesteryear could even begin to compare a Roksan Xerxes, or the Sondek to the Alphason Sonata is beyond my comprehension, the Sonata, properly set up, is simply in a different league to either. Regards to Mike Knowles from Alf.
Really moving iron is the best cartridge soundsmith, it's down to weight on the cantilever that's why moving coil is better than moving magnet most cases it has less weight and moving iron is even less than moving coil. And another thing is the weight of the whole cartridge and stylus is suitable for your arm is important
Any cartridge will sound best if the tone arm is match to the compliance with the cartridge and the assembly properly aligned. I’ve owned Decca’s, ADC’s, Shure’s, Grado’s and various Denons. The current Shures made in Mexico are hit or miss and benefit from a quality Jico or similar fine line stylus. If you have a higher mass tone arm and are willing to invest in a good step up transformer, the Denon DL103 will get you close to the esoteric sound at a reasonable price. If you can find an older 103d , you can have it re-tipped by Soundsmith, this is the bees knees. I think MC cartridges just sound more detailed and three dimensional. Also as Paul pointed out, Some cartridges are very sensitive to resistance and capacitance loading. Tweaking all these parameters makes for a fun or frustrating hobby however you look at it.
I'm pretty sure that Shure quit making cartridges.
Must have happened over the last few years. There are some new Shure cartridges being offered on EBay and other online vendors.
@@jimrusch22 Yes I noticed Shure cartridges being sold on Amazon also. A Shure M97xE MM cartridge that originality sold for $99 (Needle Doctor) is retailing for $365.99! at Amazon. NOS I guess. Must be a good cartridge to pull in that much money.
Lynn Poole Looks like Ill have to shop the garage sales, thrift shops and Craig’s list for crappy turntables that still may have a vintage M97ED. Then upgrade with a Soundsmith stylus. Shure cartridges generally track well, sound neutral but they doesn’t grip you with that wow factor. Shure s are a very practical choice.
Nice explanation, but it raises a question: Why doesn't anyone make a low-output moving-magnet cartridge with low-mass magnets? Wouldn't that accomplish the same thing as a low-mass low-output moving-coil cartridge?
The B&O moving micro cross moving iron variant was better than both. Their ultra low effective tip masses and sapphire cantilevers resulted in incredibly high speed and resolution.
I would like to see exactly how that works, but, removing effective mass is the name of the game!!
@@vincentrobinette1507 Picture 4 cylindrical magnets wound with low # turns wire. Rounded edges (eddy currents) iron cross with ends of each cross directly in front of the magnets. Suspension disc at cross center. Cantilever attached to cross center on reverse side. Flux between the cross points and each magnet generates signal in the coils. Moving mass of small thin cross is ultra low and coupled with stiffness and mass of ultra thin, short sapphire cantilever with ulm diamond produced low resonance,
@@tsamplifiers6493 If it produces enough signal strength, I might replace my existing Audio Technica cartridge with this. Mine only has two magnets, and the stylus tube looks like it might be an aluminum tube, and it has a fairly long cantilever. Mine only has two rare earth magnets in a 90 degree "V", but even all that said, it's a pretty good sounding cartridge. I have not measured the impedance or output amplitude of my cartridge. With the stylus destroyed, I have no way of taking any measurements, other than the DC resistance of the coils, but that doesn't tell me much. If I can't find a stylus, I may have to replace the entire cartridge.
Any idea on the cost? I don't know if it's worth spending more on a cartridge, than what the turntable is worth.
Yes, it's all about inertia and the lack of it. Add a head amp for the superior MC ~ easy.
why does the newer vinyls have to disc and older ones have just one in the album?
I think you might be referring to an album remastered @45 rpm and put onto 2 discs, which can also be done with 33 rpm records to make the grooves wider so the stylus / needle can retrieve more information therefore having better sound.
what on earth are vinyls?
@@nilswegner2881
Com'on man it's not the end of the world ok nobody can speak perfect English he just added an - s - for plural ok some words in English language don't take this - s - like people we never say peoples
Another common mistake everybody makes in English language and probobly you do that too is the double negative for example < I didn't do nothing > right ?? No wrong it's < i didn't do ANYTHING > also < ain't nobody > no the correct is < ain't anybody >
Why nobody says nothing for that and always stuck on peoples and vinyls ??
I hust did all this bla-bla just to show that this - s - is not so serious .
The jacket of that album looks like that of an album Don Ellis did
i saw the things next to you and i almost thought we were talking about printer ink cartridges
Paul, how do you keep dust away on the turntable?
No cover with it ?
He has a cleaner
shaun I have a homemade cover for it. The others have dust covers. I use microfiber cloth to wipe surfaces.
John sweda What kind?
@@russredfern167 I don't know philippinen probably
I like my Ortofon 2M Bronze.
MC 👍🏻
Is there a better value in the five hundred to a thousand $’s in MM vs a lower end MC? I wouldn’t know my favorite as all I’ve had is MM since the 80’s. How much am I missing out or is it truly subjective? It would seem that at a base level, sound can be pretty objective in terms of bass, midrange to treble. It seems that most folks I follow, love the MC but rural life makes it an expensive experiment.
Do they make MM cartridges using rare-earth magnets? Wouldn’t these magnets be much-much lighter than old iron magnets? Wouldn’t these be even lighter than a moving coil?
How about DS Audio optical cartridge?
Do share.
InsideOfMyOwnMind laser TT have been out for years.
@@TexasScout The last I heard they were still a bit troubley but my info is a few years old.
That sounds like a very good concept. Even LESS mass! the lasers, and detectors can ride in the sprung weight of the cartridge(and tone arm), while the only moving unsprung weight is the stylus itself. With the right detectors, it's possible to get very high signal strength, (like condenser microphones) and further improve signal to noise ratio as well. That's like having your cake, and eating it too.
It would be fun, if they could develop lasers fine enough to directly reflect off the grooves of the records, and do away with the stylus entirely. No wear to records, no needle to replace, ZERO MASS!!! it would just track, kind of like an analogue version of compact disc.
Vincent Robinette www.elpj.com
No DAC patch up needed , cartridges are a work of ART !!!
I have spent a heap of cash already on amps and turntables and have one of the best moving magnet cartridges on the market. I am over 50 so don't need perfect hi fidelity audio because my hearing now is different than when I was 20 years old. I would rather focus my resources towards vinyl unless I won the lottery or inherited money from my rich uncle and that's very unlikely.
I would think that the mass of a magnet on the needle shaft would put more force on needle tip in the track on the album and wear it out over time.
The tracking force that the cartridge is set at denotes how much pressure the stylus is putting on a record.
Nick Pantazi I think he means “mass”. More mass=more wear.
Is that a small dent on the speaker on the left in the background? Some heads are going to roll at the next company meeting....🤔🤔🤔
Those are sound diffuser/absorbers, and i'm sure they've been moved around a lot.
Dear Paul
You got a nice tt. May I know the brand. Thanks
Jeez...
Really? Ever slid the stylus off of an mm? Did ya see those two thin little winglets at the top of the cantilever? How much do you think those weigh? And consider they are at the top of the cantilever where they have to move far less than the stylus. I just think we're splitting ***t hairs with this stuff.
Isn't splitting hairs what makes us audio files
I think you haven't heard and don't own an MC cartridge of quality. The difference is not subtle.
@@jimshaw899 I'm using a Sumico BPS nude on a Linn Itok II arm/ Sota Saphire which I just love the sound of but how much of it is due to it being an MC I'm not so sure.
@@InsideOfMyOwnMind HOMC or LOMC?
@@terrywho22 It's the original model, kind of in between I believe. Yeah it's old but still satisfies.
Thanks to some recording engineers applying too much dynamic compression during recording and mastering, I've been forced to resort in using moving coil cartridge because - to my ears at least - MC cartridges seem to improve dynamic range thwak by up to 3 dB, making the recorded drum kit more natural sounding.
A cartridge can't add dynamic range to a recording.