• The move to the new server is done. There are some software and database maintenance updates in process. This has us passing the hat around to help out. We appreciate any donations. Seriously, even a dollar helps. The payment page may be found here - https://www.audiokarma.org/support.html

MM and MC: What on earth makes the "difference" in sound?

Suzuki

Suzuki

jl1dca
Hello folks.

Since I was an 18-year-old student, I have used and listened to nearly 10 carts, which number I think is small for an middle-aged analog audiophile.
I remeber I had DL103 and AT33 MC's and another cheap MC from AT.
The rest I owned were all MM (including MI type) carts. From what limited experience I had, I'd assert the two of structural types has nothing to do with the sound. Which to fix and which to move is a simple logic, I think.
Yet, I'm not familiar if moving mass of coils can be made smaller than that of magnet.
As for this, MI type will present a solution. Moving coils has leads connected to the terminals and I can't help worring the very thin wire could restrict the movement of the coils. I'm thinking of buying DL-110 though, because of very simple reason that it is an stylus/body integrated one.

How much do you pay attention to a cart model's featuring material or original construction of its own?
 
Register to hide this ad
Yes, it's about the size/precision of the moving mass like you are suspecting.
edit: for some reason in my mind that sentenced covered the size of the coils in MM carts..
 
Last edited:
Suzuki said:
Hello folks.

Since I was an 18-year-old student, I have used and listened to nearly 10 carts, which number I think is small for an middle-aged analog audiophile.
I remeber I had DL103 and AT33 MC's and another cheap MC from AT.
The rest I owned were all MM (including MI type) carts. From what limited experience I had, I'd assert the two of structural types has nothing to do with the sound. Which to fix and which to move is a simple logic, I think.
Yet, I'm not familiar if moving mass of coils can be made smaller than that of magnet.
As for this, MI type will present a solution. Moving coils has leads connected to the terminals and I can't help worring the very thin wire could restrict the movement of the coils. I'm thinking of buying DL-110 though, because of very simple reason that it is an stylus/body integrated one.

How much do you pay attention to a cart model's featuring material or original construction of its own?
Click to expand...

The biggest advantage a MC has over a MM cart is the electrical footprint. Where inductance plays a major roll. traditionally MC's will have a much lower inductance due to the smaller amount of turns in the coils. Some MI carts also have very low inductance. The standard Grado line has only 45mh, the Statement line only has 2mh. There is also an older line that was 1.5mv output that has 9mh. The amount of mass that has to move, called generally effective tip mass, actually is a measurement of the whole mass of the diamond, cantilever, generating system. Some MM carts fall into what would be a low ETM.
As frequencies rise, impedance rises as a function of inductance. Inductance can and does act similar to capacitance. Where the electrical signal isn't "released on time"............It of course is far more involved than my simple explaination, and there is also some mechanical issues as well. But, by and large the above is a correct but incomplete explaination.
I personally have settled on the MI priciple carts of low inductance.
 
I have a Nagaoka's MP(Moving Permalloy) cart on the tone-arm now. High inductance of coil would cause high input imp to the phono amp, which will let the amp capture noise and interference. Yet, I hear, neo magnet is light and very srtong......

I'm not confident at all on this, however large inductance (L) can be offset virtually by adding small capacitance (C) in parallel to make a resonation circuit at a high freq in a proper segment.
 
Last edited:
I'd add that the lack of a replaceable stylus means that MCs (or most of them) have fewer parts resonating away, and that is one cause of the possible superiority of MCs. This view is supported by the improvements reported when the plastic parts of the stylus assemblies are cut away or damped with putty.
 
But do remember many classic low output Moving Coils do like massy transcription tonearms best. Including the classic Denon DL-103, a classic broadcast cartridge. That's right, it's a radio station unit used heavily by the NHK and Asian broadcasters. And equally beloved by us audiophiles.
 
Suzuki said:
I'm not confident at all on this, however large inductance (L) can be offset virtually by adding small capacitance (C) in parallel to make a resonation circuit at a high freq in a proper segment.
Click to expand...

Exactly !

The electrical advantage of MC's (Low Inductance) are primarily evident with "normal" long or high capacitance cables.

If you can drop your total capacitance (including arm, cables and phono stage load) to below 100pf - preferably 50pf - then you can have the advantage of MC with the advantage of MM/MI.

But it can be difficult to get the total capacitance low enough.

bye for now

David
 
Suzuki said:
I have a Nagaoka's MP(Moving Permalloy) cart on the tone-arm now. High inductance of coil would cause high input imp to the phono amp, which will let the amp capture noise and interference. Yet, I hear, neo magnet is light and very srtong......

I'm not confident at all on this, however large inductance (L) can be offset virtually by adding small capacitance (C) in parallel to make a resonation circuit at a high freq in a proper segment.
Click to expand...

High inductance combined with extra capacitance will lower the high frequency resonance of the moving system. This is generally not the recommended route for best sound. You're better off keeping the capacitance as low as possible and changing the value of input resistance, if necessary, for flatter response. The cart will sound more open and natural.

Heard you guys got hit hard with a quake. Hope all will be OK.
neo
 
'But in my view, the type of moving coil sound represented by the OC9 is simply wrong; it is neither an accurate facsimile of the master tape nor, more to the point, a true version of the signal cut in the groove. (And it is also false to its sources in an amusical way, though this latter is a personal judgment.)

Oddly, lots of people seem to know that these rising-top moving coils are wrong, but are inhibited about saying so directly. ASP, having noted the OC9's rising top, goes on to say that the cartridge will be perceived as neutral. And AHC in his survey in Issue 65 says "Like most of the moving coils reviewed in this survey, [the Virtuoso] does have a slightly lean overall timbre and frequency balance, and there is a touch of an upwards tilt in the upper four octaves." While I agree with the sonic assessment, I surely disagree with the recommendations. I don't think that such cartridges will be perceived as neutral, and I wouldn't recommend this sound as accurate reproduction of what is on the record.

The inaccuracy of the rising-top moving coil sound is a matter of fact. Its musical significance is a personal "value judgment." But if live music remains our standard, as I surely hope it does, a judgment in favor of this rising-top sound seems misguided. I write this having just returned from an orchestra rehearsal, in a rather bright room, of an orchestral work involving much high percussion. High frequencies there were in abundance; but not the steely glaze characteristic of this type of moving coil sound.'

http://www.regonaudio.com/Stanton881AudioTechnicaATML70.html
 
neobop said:
High inductance combined with extra capacitance will lower the high frequency resonance of the moving system. This is generally not the recommended route for best sound. You're better off keeping the capacitance as low as possible and changing the value of input resistance, if necessary, for flatter response. The cart will sound more open and natural.

Heard you guys got hit hard with a quake. Hope all will be OK.
neo
Click to expand...

yeah, All the transportation stopped all day. Fortunately I was at home at the time.
TV programs have been messed up with breaking-in news. Victims would eventually figure up to a hundred or far more in number, I'm afraid.
 
Last edited:
+1 on the electrical properties -> phase shift (a least on the electrical side) kicks in much later (i.e. significantly further up in frequency)...

Greetings from Munich!

Manfred / lini
 
Been thinking of your safety when I heard of the disaster Suzuki, best regards for your welfare.

On topic;
The two schools of priorities seem to be whether amplitude anomolies (MC) vs phase anomalies (MM). I find phase anomalies far more annoying and artifical sounding tho' concede the desirability of linear amplitude response for a best overall result.
.
 
Pio1980 said:
Been thinking of your safety when I heard of the disaster Suzuki, best regards for your welfare.

On topic;
The two schools of priorities seem to be whether amplitude anomolies (MC) vs phase anomalies (MM). I find phase anomalies far more annoying and artifical sounding tho' concede the desirability of linear amplitude response for a best overall result.
.
Click to expand...

Ditto on the events going on today in Japan.

the "anomolies" of the two generating systems are addressed a bit better IMO with the MI principle employed by Grado with their low out carts. MCZ and Statement series.
 
I have no opinion on the subject, just glad to hear you're ok Suzuki, Watching the news, and the all event looked scary as hell.

John
 
Zodia said:
I have no opinion on the subject, just glad to hear you're ok Suzuki, Watching the news, and the all event looked scary as hell.

John
Click to expand...

Hope all is well with you and your family Suzuki-san! Sorry for taking this topic off-track!
 
tawny said:
'But in my view, the type of moving coil sound represented by the OC9 is simply wrong; it is neither an accurate facsimile of the master tape nor, more to the point, a true version of the signal cut in the groove. (And it is also false to its sources in an amusical way, though this latter is a personal judgment.)

Oddly, lots of people seem to know that these rising-top moving coils are wrong, but are inhibited about saying so directly. ASP, having noted the OC9's rising top, goes on to say that the cartridge will be perceived as neutral. And AHC in his survey in Issue 65 says "Like most of the moving coils reviewed in this survey, [the Virtuoso] does have a slightly lean overall timbre and frequency balance, and there is a touch of an upwards tilt in the upper four octaves." While I agree with the sonic assessment, I surely disagree with the recommendations. I don't think that such cartridges will be perceived as neutral, and I wouldn't recommend this sound as accurate reproduction of what is on the record.

The inaccuracy of the rising-top moving coil sound is a matter of fact. Its musical significance is a personal "value judgment." But if live music remains our standard, as I surely hope it does, a judgment in favor of this rising-top sound seems misguided. I write this having just returned from an orchestra rehearsal, in a rather bright room, of an orchestral work involving much high percussion. High frequencies there were in abundance; but not the steely glaze characteristic of this type of moving coil sound.'
Click to expand...

http://www.regonaudio.com/Stanton881AudioTechnicaATML70.html
Click to expand...

Thanks for the link. But not sure why you chose to quote the section you did. Seems that passage, in context to the rest of the article, is specific to the AT-OC9.

It's also impoertant to note that that article is 20 years old and the market, including the OC9 has evolved. So some grains of salt may be in order.

Here's a passage from two paragraphs up for the one you offered:

the latest moving coils, e.g., the Lyra Clavis, have scored a breakthrough in combining neutrality with unprecedented high resolution. This is, everyone hopes, part of the revolution to come, when amplitude vs. frequency, time and phase will all be reproducible correctly-perfection, in short. But this revolution7 has yet to reach the budget sector.
Click to expand...

I have to wonder, 20 years after this was written, has it come to be true?

And yes, this caught my eye b/c i run a modern version of the OC9 (It's an MLII). It's true; it does rise in the top end. Mine came with a test sheet that shows this clearly. However, unless I'm missing something, I don't think this is inherent in the LOMC mechanics, but rather a description of the "voicing" of that particular AT model.
 
That article - suggested that TOTL MM/MI designs ATML170, Stanton 881, Shure V15, Technics EPC100 is neither the first or last article pointing out the simple fact that many top recording engineers opt for MM/MI designs as being closest in sound to the Master Tapes from which they work.

So when cutting new records they prefer to use these as their monitoring/reviewing tools.

This leads to a whole series of questions about what makes these cartridges sound the way they do, and why has the MC become the dominant high end audiophile cartridge type.

It might even lead one to question the fundamental voicing of audiophile systems and whether audiophilia has meandered into a more specialised space, removed from the reality of sound reproduction....

On the topic of "progress" - one does have to wonder.... there is a social/cultural imperative to assume that New is Better.... and that Evolution equates with Improvement.

Neither is true. Evolution does not involve survival of the "fittest" - it frequently involves survival of the luckiest....
And the marketplace frequently does not reward the best product, but the best marketed product...
Pop culture provides a plethora of demonstrations of products that are made more cheaply and of a lower quality selling in larger numbers and frequently at a higher price.

We no longer see in the standard audio press, intensive technical tests of cartridges - where are the tests of frequency response, phase response, impulse response, tracking capability, compliance etc....?

Instead cartridges are reviewed like red wine. (not that I mind a good glass of red..... had a lovely bottle of Merlot last night...)

There are clearly individuals/companies out there doing very good things with cartridges, but there has been nothing new developed in this area in 20 years....

Cantilever technology peaked with Ruby/Saphire Boron and Beryllium cantilevers.... all children of the 80's

Stylus technology peaked with the MicroRidge/MicroLine - 1980's...

Developments in generator technology stopped also in the 1980's (MC, MM and MI are all children of the 50's or earlier, Strain Gauge is the 1970's....)

What real improvements have there been?

I am not saying individual cartridges are not excellent products - but the tendency to assume that they must be better because they are "new" is what I question.

There are a plethora of absolute ripper gems from the 80's out there, that are more than capable of matching the performance of the best of currently produced cartridges (at a substantially lower cost).
The biggest problem tends to be sourcing styli - and particularly new styli as elastomers (stylus suspension) do age and harden.

I would put forward the following theory - the better the cartridges and styli, when properly set up in an optimised system, the more they sound alike. Particularly if the target is in fact accurate reproduction. It doesn't matter whether the cartridge is MM /MI / MC / SG - or the arm light or heavy, the TT direct/belt/idler.... if the entire system is properly set up, calibrated, adjusted, it is capable of getting very close to the Master Tape sound from which the record was cut.
(as opposed to euphonic creation of a new never before existing sound event)

More importantly in the new digital age in which we are today, the tools that were once limited to reviewers and labs, are now available to all of us.
With a soundcard and a test record, we can test, adjust and calibrate our sytems all for minimal cost. (yes it does take time and effort)

And for the first time - it is possible to properly adjust the loading on a cartridge (both capacitive and resistive) - which allows anyone to potentially achieve proper flat frequency response from their cartridge. (in the past that would have required specialised equipment .... again this can be done with basic freeware and a laptop soundcard)

Time to move on from MM vs MC and focus on what it takes to get the absolute best from each individual system.

bye for now

David
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom