I wasn't indicating that a huge amount of money need be spent. Heck, here in Australia a Technics SL1200 (between $900 & $3000) will set you back more than my Ariston RD110 SL with Fidelity Research FR24 Mk2 tonearm cost me ($800). It seems the Ariston turntable was listed rather cheaply as most want a working table , whereas this had no tonearm . Covert Australian dollars to US and it will show to be a good deal less ($608).
I'd never heard of Ariston before , and there was next to no information on the RD110 SL though what I could find on the brand suggested more digging was worthwhile . So I started threads here and on Stereonet (the view from other Aussies gives a different view point, though there's more diversity on AK) and the viewpoint of others helped me decide to buy it.
I think the thing is to be patient and have money set aside for when the bargain tables come up. . . . And as always plenty if time on Google and picking people's brains on the forums for knowledge and experience . That is often more valuable than Googling alone. Likewise you need a working table to use in the meantime . All I'm suggesting is that a great cart sounds best on a great table , that I haven't yet tried my Hana in the Ariston though suspect that when I do it will be amazing . . . Though the Empire 4000 D/I vastly outperforms the Hana EL on my JVC QL7 turntable when on my Ariston, the Hana will probably outperform it on the Ariston as well . The table plays a larger role than I'd previously come to believe.
Heck, I know you can go higher up the line than the Ariston, though I'm not likely to anytime soon. It will be a year or two before another such bargain comes about I'm sure. For now I'm going to see what I can do to improve the performance of my JVC as I'm now rather dissatisfied with it.
It's just a case of deciding where you can get the most performance gain for the least amount of money . I suspect that if I hadn't upgraded to EAR 834P copy phono stages the difference between tables would have been far less noticeable. I also should have realised that when I hit a certain level of cartridge and every new cart I tried simply seemed a step sideways from the last that perhaps something was holding them back. As such once the carts were allowed to perform to a greater part of their full potential , its one of largest leaps forward in sound quality I've heard. So yes, a cheaper cart on a better table will most certainly outperform a more expensive one on a lesser table .
I guess another point I need to clarify is that I could only ever afford this performance level with a combination of quality vintage gear and Chinese products which a copies of older Western valve phono stage and amplifier design. Often capacitor and volume pot upgrades are necessary to get the best from Chinese gear. I do everything on a budget as well in order to get the best value for money I possibly can.
I hope I've be able to clarify my previous points to your satisfaction
To the OP I don't have a MC cart and have no experience with them but I do have a LOMM it's a Pickering XLZ with a 4500S stylus. they say it's a backwards engineered MC but electrically it is very similar it needs a SUT or a head amp ,you can also change out different stylus.I love the XLZ with some music that i'm very familiar with I'm hearing new stuff.This cart seems to improve the listening experience with more complex music like jazz, some rock and blues usually bands using more instraments especially horns.On my other TT I use a mix of Stanton/Pickering carts EEEs and stereoheadrons .Which I much prefer when listening too earlier rock, power rock and a lot of blues.More mid and bottom punch. A good example is I much prefer early beatles on TT #2with the EEE but latter beatles on the one with the XLZ there is no comparison. This is just MHO. Interested if other people listen to both types
God yes, I've lusted over the XLZ for a few years now, along with certain other carts like the Grace F8C, Empire MC5, Supex 900 etc.
