JohnMichael
Super Member
I do not know but if I have a cartridge that needs 100 ohm loading I have the Moon110LP. I am glad I have the original Fanfare3 and it sounds so good with the Gold.
Why choose LOMC cartridges?
- Thread starter Multiplex
- Start date
I do not know but if I have a cartridge that needs 100 ohm loading I have the Moon110LP. I am glad I have the original Fanfare3 and it sounds so good with the Gold.
DeeCee
"Music is what we like to play..."
Amen!
Mister Pig
Pigamus Maximus
No it is not time for a new cartridge when you whack a MC cantilever. You send the body off to Soundsmith or Expert Stylus for a retip. Yes it costs roughly $150 to $500, but its not terribly more expensive than a high quality replacement stylus for a high end moving magnet. Of course the downside is the turnaround time, instead of popping on the new assembly. While the upside is that you get an improved cartridge if you get a cantilever that is stiffer and has reduced mass, and a diamond with a smaller profile. So your cartridge may come out better than stock. The moral is, handle your cartridges carefully, and don't bend the cantilever.
Regards
Mister Pig
Last edited:
My $0.02 worth:
Bottom line, its horses for courses in my experience: both types can produce good sound if correctly utilized and exploited. Correct mechanical matching to the arm is imperative. And in my humble experience if you are to fully exploit the MC type, the SUT/phono stage is critical too.
Maximizing the potential of an MC, usually costs more in ancillaries, but I suppose that makes sense since the majority of upper echelon carts are of MC type. Whether this is a function of fashion or science, I know not really.
In terms of intrinsic capabilities, my limited experience and opinion of MCs is that they have a greater capability in terms of revealing tonal shading, and also seem to have greater dynamics.
I could be happy with either type, provided I could get all the parameters pinned down.
Bottom line, its horses for courses in my experience: both types can produce good sound if correctly utilized and exploited. Correct mechanical matching to the arm is imperative. And in my humble experience if you are to fully exploit the MC type, the SUT/phono stage is critical too.
Maximizing the potential of an MC, usually costs more in ancillaries, but I suppose that makes sense since the majority of upper echelon carts are of MC type. Whether this is a function of fashion or science, I know not really.
In terms of intrinsic capabilities, my limited experience and opinion of MCs is that they have a greater capability in terms of revealing tonal shading, and also seem to have greater dynamics.
I could be happy with either type, provided I could get all the parameters pinned down.
luckydog
Canis inquirit
Hmm, I'm not convinced. AFAIK LOMC armatures typically have similar (if not higher) mass/inertia than MM/MI armatures. In any event, cartridges are velocity transducers ie fast=loud ie not 'subtle'. Plus it's not optional for the stylus to do anything other than follow the groove exactly, it's not free to do anything else. Failure to do so = mistracking, and that's not commonly at issue as a LOMC/MM difference methinks. So personally, I doubt that explanation even though it's often presented
awprint:
lini
just me...
Some corrections...
Kingshead: Actually most MM designs only sport one magnet. The most common exception would be Audio Technica's dual/V magnet design.
JM: In fact Satin wasn't the only manufacturer/brand that offered MCs with user-replaceable needle. The widest choice of families and models was offered by Audio Technica - and I'm pretty sure that AT also made the Pioneer models and probably also the DL80 for Denon. And they also made the MCC110 and MCC120 for Dual, which look very much like AT's own AT31/30/50 family, but unfortunately aren't needle compatible - while quite a few other customers (incl. Akai, Braun, Luxman, Yamaha...) rather went for direct rebadges...
David: I guess SoundSmith should be named as the other remaining manufacturer of low output MIs, while the other manufacturer of low output MMs besides Pickering/Stanton back then was Elac.
Greetings from Munich!
Manfred / lini
P.S.: Hi LD, btw! Neat pawprint icon...
Kingshead: Actually most MM designs only sport one magnet. The most common exception would be Audio Technica's dual/V magnet design.
JM: In fact Satin wasn't the only manufacturer/brand that offered MCs with user-replaceable needle. The widest choice of families and models was offered by Audio Technica - and I'm pretty sure that AT also made the Pioneer models and probably also the DL80 for Denon. And they also made the MCC110 and MCC120 for Dual, which look very much like AT's own AT31/30/50 family, but unfortunately aren't needle compatible - while quite a few other customers (incl. Akai, Braun, Luxman, Yamaha...) rather went for direct rebadges...
David: I guess SoundSmith should be named as the other remaining manufacturer of low output MIs, while the other manufacturer of low output MMs besides Pickering/Stanton back then was Elac.
Greetings from Munich!
Manfred / lini
P.S.: Hi LD, btw! Neat pawprint icon...
JohnMichael
Super Member
Moving coils can certainly be modified but will you still like the sound. MC cartridges such as the Gold have a trade the old in for new. Either way the cartridge needs to be removed and remounted and aligned at a later date. Turn around time at Soundsmith can be 5 weeks.
In the days when vinyl was my only source it was nice to have a routine stylus replacement. No remount needed just slide out the old and in with the new. The OM20 stylus came with a new magnet, suspension, cantilever and stylus. Only the coils remained the same.
In the days when vinyl was my only source it was nice to have a routine stylus replacement. No remount needed just slide out the old and in with the new. The OM20 stylus came with a new magnet, suspension, cantilever and stylus. Only the coils remained the same.
Kingshead
Professor
Some corrections...
Kingshead: Actually most MM designs only sport one magnet. The most common exception would be Audio Technica's dual/V magnet design.
JM: In fact Satin wasn't the only manufacturer/brand that offered MCs with user-replaceable needle. The widest choice of families and models was offered by Audio Technica - and I'm pretty sure that AT also made the Pioneer models and probably also the DL80 for Denon. And they also made the MCC110 and MCC120 for Dual, which look very much like AT's own AT31/30/50 family, but unfortunately aren't needle compatible - while quite a few other customers (incl. Akai, Braun, Luxman, Yamaha...) rather went for direct rebadges...
David: I guess SoundSmith should be named as the other remaining manufacturer of low output MIs, while the other manufacturer of low output MMs besides Pickering/Stanton back then was Elac.
Greetings from Munich!
Manfred / lini
P.S.: Hi LD, btw! Neat pawprint icon...
Pulled that post from the interweb to save time.
Martin
What would happen if I added damping via fluid damper?
Mister Pig
Pigamus Maximus
Well if you are careful with your cartridges as you should be, the stock cantilever will be there when the diamond wears out. Then a stylus replacement is performed, and we are good to go.
Now as near as I can tell.....we no longer live in the old days. And the old day rules are not set in stone for us in the new world analog world. While installing and aligning a cartridge is not my idea of fun, it certainly is not an insurmountable task for a dedicated analog-ist.
I would suspect that owners of only moving coil cartridges will keep a back up or some sort of spare to run while their cartridge is out for service. I know I do. And then there is always cee dee's
But once again this is just the opinions of a simple pig. I just find that most of the "problems" or disadvantages of moving coils is just a bunch of noise.
Regards
Mister Pig
JohnMichael
Super Member
Mister Pig
Pigamus Maximus
Cool. Funny thing is I have owned all those companies too. Dynavector 17D3, Grado Master, Benz Micro Glider, and Ortofon OM40....
Didn't keep any of them though. Just own a ZYX 4D and a Clearaudio Signature. Two cartridges is all I need.
Regards
Mister Pig
Hmm, I'm not convinced. AFAIK LOMC armatures typically have similar (if not higher) mass/inertia than MM/MI armatures. In any event, cartridges are velocity transducers ie fast=loud ie not 'subtle'. Plus it's not optional for the stylus to do anything other than follow the groove exactly, it's not free to do anything else. Failure to do so = mistracking, and that's not commonly at issue as a LOMC/MM difference methinks. So personally, I doubt that explanation even though it's often presented
Is that really the case? I would be under the assumption that the low mass of the LOMC is the primary reason it is preferred over any other. Magnets are heavier than a coil, and a small coil is lighter than a big coil as explained early, that simple factor is what would make the stylus best able to react to the smallest nuances in the groove. Mistracking is the result of a complete failure to maintain groove contact but a heavier object cannot react as quickly as a lighter object, simple physic. So althought the heavier MM can maintain contact within the groove walls, it is less able to react to the smaller most slightest of physical features, those will simply be skipped over. At least that is how I understood it. Manufactures can use what ever exotic materials they wish on any of the choice of cart be it MM, MI, MC, LOMC that fact that the LOMC seems to be the most able, by design to keep that mass the lowest, would it not?
lini
just me...
Kingshead: Sorry that I have to correct you again, but on the OMs the magnet is part of the body, not of the needle. B50 once disassembled an OM body to finally clear up that question, but unfortunately the photos in the particular thread over on VE got lost and B50 himself unfortunately also doesn't have 'em anymore...
Greetings from Munich!
Manfred / lini
Greetings from Munich!
Manfred / lini
Kingshead
Professor
As stated in my last post I pulled that from the interweb to save time, any incorrect info was already there. The point is still valid, LOMC designs having less mass attached to the cantilever and will react quicker to groove modulations and the reason they sound better for the most part. I have a Grado Platinum so am familiar with moving iron cartridges, there design is also to remove mass compared to MM, but still have more mass than a quality MC but with more usable output.
Martin
More from the interweb.
Moving Magnet & Moving Iron
In a stereo moving-magnet cartridge (MMC), a miniscule permanent magnet rests on the end of the stylus cantilever suspended between two coils—one for the left and one for the right audio channels (Fig. 5). As the name suggests, the magnet moves (vibrates) between the two coils and, in so doing, induces a small current in them. Since the magnet is extremely small it weighs very little, requiring a lower downward (tracking) force to accurately travel the record grooves.
5. The stereo moving-magnet cartridge design places a tiny permanent magnet on the end of the stylus cantilever, where it is suspended between two coils.
The only marked difference between an MMC and a moving-iron cartridge (MIC) is a tiny piece of iron or other light, ferrous alloy that replaces the magnet on the end of the cantilever (Fig. 6). In this case, the iron is lighter than the magnet, further reducing tracking force while boosting tracking accuracy.
6. Moving-iron cartridges are pretty much the same as moving-magnet types except that a piece of iron or other similar material sits on the cantilever.
Moving Coil
A moving-coil cartridge (MCC) uses an inverted moving magnet design (Fig. 7). The coils attach to the stylus cantilever, and the permanent magnet resides near the coils. Since space is beyond extremely limited, the coils are tiny, using extremely fine wire. This limitation on coil size results in an extremely low output, i.e., in the microvolt range.
7. A moving-coil cartridge basically reverses the moving-magnet design by attaching the coils to the stylus cantilever while the permanent magnet is positioned in close proximity to the coils.
With an output of around 100 µV to 300 µV, MCCs are very susceptible to noise and hum. In addition to an RIAA preamp, these cartridges require an additional amplifier stage or step-up transformer prior to the RIAA frequency-compensating preamp. There are, however, high-output MCCs on the market capable of delivering output levels comparable to MMCs.
Moving Micro Cross
A somewhat proprietary design patented by Bang & Olufsen and not a general consideration, the moving micro-cross cartridge is a spinoff of the moving-magnet/iron topology. During playback, a miniature metal cross ungulates between stationary coils and magnets in sympathy with the stylus. According to its inventor, the moving micro cross eliminates many magnet and coil mass concerns and exhibits far better channel separation because left and right channel motion occurs on separate axes.
The Great Debated
There is still a rather large market for phono cartridges that is both profitable and viable in terms of future developments. This market is truly passion-driven by knowledgeable and opinionated audiophiles, the curious novitiates who are venturing into the dark worlds of analog audio for the first time, and those who are both maintaining and expanding their investment in vinyl recordings.
Once audio aficionados and budding audiophiles have settled on a turntable, they have the daunting task of choosing the phono cartridge. Now this task is daunting only because of the abundance of choices and circulating opinions.
Move The Magnet, The Iron, Or The Coil?
Aside from their differing design concepts, MMCs, MCCs, and MICs each have their pros and cons. If one views them objectively, then it should be fairly easy to make a subjective purchase—maybe. But there is a bottom line, which we can save for last.
Any one of the three cartridge types does a fine job if it’s well designed and constructed, which is usually the case even in lower priced, entry-level components. They only require three things for competent electromechanical performance, i.e., performance up to their measured specs.
First, the cartridge needs a comparable turntable/tonearm. In other words, don’t slap a $40 cartridge on a $4000 turntable or vice versa. Second, the cartridge requires competent installation and alignment to manufacturer spec. Third, the cartridge requires a quality-comparable RIAA-compensated preamp, whether it’s in a receiver, integrated amp, or dedicated preamplifier/controller.
MMCs are generally simpler and less expensive to use than MCC designs. Electronically, they only need the phono preamp. Yet, as previously stated, the magnet placed on the cantilever exerts a bit more tracking pressure on the vinyl recording, which some users believe influences the playback’s sonic quality and incurs a bit more wear on the vinyl.
MICs resolve the tracking pressure issue somewhat because iron is lighter than the magnet. This also sets up debates about the quality of playback. Some listeners claim the moving iron is sonically superior to the moving magnet, while others claim the reverse or hear no difference at all.
Stated earlier, MCCs require a front-end amplifier prior to the RIAA preamp. This front-end amp is flat, not frequency compensated. This adds another layer of cost and a layer of installation complexity. But with cost and complexity come fruits. The moving-coil design requires less downward tracking force than either the moving-magnet or moving-iron components.
Perhaps because of the well-known pressure differential, a larger number of audiophiles seems to agree that the moving-coil approach is sonically the best. Getting them to agree on which moving coil is best is another story, which is a good thing in the grand scheme of market health.
Last edited:
lini
just me...
Martin: The "lower moving mass" point is pretty much a myth. Unless one would only look at the very exclusive circle of top high-end class designs with highest quality, lightest, most miniaturised ingredients - because there simply haven't yet been any comparable MM/MI implementations (a few have already come pretty close, though...). But I'm sure it would be doable.
Greetings from Munich!
Manfred / lini
Greetings from Munich!
Manfred / lini
Kingshead
Professor
Mass is mass and it takes more energy to move more of it plain and simple.
We can agree to disagree I guess.
Mister Pig
Pigamus Maximus
This is an interesting point. I have a question. Have you seen publications that state what the total cantilever mass is of various MM, MI, and LOMC cartridges are? I have never seen this information published, and I have not seen anyone pulling apart an Ortofon Cadenza to publish this info, along with say a Stanton 681, or AT 180LC. It would be interesting info to know. And so, how have you determined this is a myth? I certainly would like to expand my knowledge on cartridge construction, so I look forward to any links you could point me to. Some of the better MM cartridges I been fortunate enough to experience have some pretty nice cantilever/ stylus combo's, but I never got to know how close in effective mass the stylus/magnet assembly got to a good quality LOMC.
Regards
Mister Pig
Last edited:
For me the hearing was believing. I doubted the ability to hear the difference between interconnects until a good friend set me straight with a demo of a wide variety one afternoon. Now I'm not saying cost equals satisfaction, in fact the most high end interconnects were too bright for me.
So I just came to the conclusion I needed to see for myself and jumped on a LOMC new old stock Sony my dealer got in a package deal and sold to me at an affordable price. I did get a Cinemag SUT built so it was a $500 experiment. I put it on my Audiomods arm and heard an immediate difference in detail. I started hearing decays on the percussion I never heard before. Went on a Jazz Messenger kick just to listen to Art Blakey.
Now the kicker is would I hear the same improvement on a lesser arm? That is a debate we can have, as well as would you enjoy the difference? Subjectivity is like that.
I had to rethink my own anti SS prejudice recently with the PAT 4 I got by chance. I actually liked the thing, so I got some mods and turned it into a real sleeper of a pre, so you need to decide to take a plunge or not, with an open mind.
If you don't want to make the commitment, which is a perfectly fine stance, you can allocate your cash many other ways in this hobby.
So I just came to the conclusion I needed to see for myself and jumped on a LOMC new old stock Sony my dealer got in a package deal and sold to me at an affordable price. I did get a Cinemag SUT built so it was a $500 experiment. I put it on my Audiomods arm and heard an immediate difference in detail. I started hearing decays on the percussion I never heard before. Went on a Jazz Messenger kick just to listen to Art Blakey.
Now the kicker is would I hear the same improvement on a lesser arm? That is a debate we can have, as well as would you enjoy the difference? Subjectivity is like that.
I had to rethink my own anti SS prejudice recently with the PAT 4 I got by chance. I actually liked the thing, so I got some mods and turned it into a real sleeper of a pre, so you need to decide to take a plunge or not, with an open mind.
If you don't want to make the commitment, which is a perfectly fine stance, you can allocate your cash many other ways in this hobby.