Is there any room for moving magnet or moving iron cartridges?

[Moog]

My Ortofon Blue 2m keeps me happy, although it is partial to very clean vinyl, which is why I might be changing...

Which moving coil cartridge cartridge have you compared the ortofon to? What turntable,tonearm and phonostage are you using?

[joel]

In my opinion (and it's just that) we often get sucked in by the hype surrounding technology.

Everyone says that MC is better than MM, but when reality bites, I would rather have a good MM cart than a bad MC one. And then fool myself into believing that the MC is better because it's supposed to be.

Same thing with TVs where LED TVs are currently the bees knees (but I haven't found one that on SD TV does a better job than my old CRT TV)

Cars are the same, and we all need the latest fuel injected, microprocessor controlled, airconditioned, fuel sipping model.
But my zero tech, old, slow and if I'm honest none too comfortable classic car puts a bigger smile on my face (even if I just take her around the block) than my modern sanitised machine.

If it works, puts a smile on your face and delivers music, then there is space in the market for all technologies

[Telephono]

i began to wonder if there are any mm cartridges out there that really stand out

The Goldring 1042 is great; but then I have never heard a really good MC in action.

[Moog]

I also have the Grado Prestige Gold mm cartridge, which also highly regarded in Stereophile, but to my ears, it falls way  behind the Sumiko Blackbird. Other options in the same price league as the Sumiko in US Markets are the Lyra Dorian and the Shelter 501 MK ii and i hope to audition them one day.

[Ampdog]

Everyone says that MC is better than MM, but .......

I have been pondering the same thing for a while (no, do not get popcorn out - hate the stuff personally - but unbiased thinking would help).

While having to upgrade a phono stage for a friend (and with a few further requests). I decided to consult on the internet regarding the reigning state of the art of phono cartridges. I am still hunting for inherent MC superiority. Firstly before going there, one must realise that reproduction from records are governed to a far greater extent by tracking and tracing errors, stylus shape and angle -  the whole setup - than by actual signal generation by whatever method (provided the latter is of good quality naturally). This already makes one skeptical of dramatic differences (aren' they always) reported between pickup topologies.

Looking at the basic magnetic pickup, the essential elements are a constant magnetic path, a means to vary the intensity of said path corresponding to the traced signal, and a means (usually a coil) to convert said variations to electricity. In the Moving Magnet way - (here I must pause and point out a misnomer. I have only ever found one system where there were literally moving pieces of magnets on a stylus shank. Most modern so-called MM systems actually seem to be variable reluctance, where the magnet is fixed and the variation in field is caused by a shank carrying the stylus completing the magnetic path between suitable poles.)

For such an MM (VR) system one then has the channel coils fixed somewhere in the magnetic path, with a variable magnetic flux provided through them by a magnetically conductive path with a variable air gap - that of the stylus shank between suitable shaped poles. (This all quite minute in shape.)

In the moving coil (MC) topology, four tiny coils are mounted (usually on a cross) on the stylus shank, there being no fixed coils on the magnet construction proper. Question: In simplest form and all things being equal: Why mount the coils on the moving system, adding mass there instead of having them fixed and keeping moving mass as low as possible? That apart from having to connect the moving coils to the outside world via leads subject to fatigue etc.? Electrically there is no difference: A fixed magnetic path consisting in part of iron and in part of air, and passing though a coil - or did I miss a first year varsity class somewhere?  Also, what little data I found on equivalent moving mass certainly did not point to universal MC superiority - the opposite in certain cases.

So, I am asking for elucidation - why the almost snob vaue attached to MC? (I have not even mentioned the added amplification required to get signals on par, with the added danger of added noise.)

(And I would repeat that just about any tonal preference/shortcoming regarding phono cartridges is so dependant on electrical loading in comparison to the principle of MC/MM that the latter is irrelevant.)

[mafioso]

I have been pondering the same thing for a while (no, do not get popcorn out - hate the stuff personally - but unbiased thinking would help).

While having to upgrade a phono stage for a friend (and with a few further requests). I decided to consult on the internet regarding the reigning state of the art of phono cartridges. I am still hunting for inherent MC superiority. Firstly before going there, one must realise that reproduction from records are governed to a far greater extent by tracking and tracing errors, stylus shape and angle -  the whole setup - than by actual signal generation by whatever method (provided the latter is of good quality naturally). This already makes one skeptical of dramatic differences (aren' they always) reported between pickup topologies.

Looking at the basic magnetic pickup, the essential elements are a constant magnetic path, a means to vary the intensity of said path corresponding to the traced signal, and a means (usually a coil) to convert said variations to electricity. In the Moving Magnet way - (here I must pause and point out a misnomer. I have only ever found one system where there were literally moving pieces of magnets on a stylus shank. Most modern so-called MM systems actually seem to be variable reluctance, where the magnet is fixed and the variation in field is caused by a shank carrying the stylus completing the magnetic path between suitable poles.)

For such an MM (VR) system one then has the channel coils fixed somewhere in the magnetic path, with a variable magnetic flux provided through them by a magnetically conductive path with a variable air gap - that of the stylus shank between suitable shaped poles. (This all quite minute in shape.)

In the moving coil (MC) topology, four tiny coils are mounted (usually on a cross) on the stylus shank, there being no fixed coils on the magnet construction proper. Question: In simplest form and all things being equal: Why mount the coils on the moving system, adding mass there instead of having them fixed and keeping moving mass as low as possible? That apart from having to connect the moving coils to the outside world via leads subject to fatigue etc.? Electrically there is no difference: A fixed magnetic path consisting in part of iron and in part of air, and passing though a coil - or did I miss a first year varsity class somewhere?  Also, what little data I found on equivalent moving mass certainly did not point to universal MC superiority - the opposite in certain cases.

So, I am asking for elucidation - why the almost snob vaue attached to MC? (I have not even mentioned the added amplification required to get signals on par, with the added danger of added noise.)

(And I would repeat that just about any tonal preference/shortcoming regarding phono cartridges is so dependant on electrical loading in comparison to the principle of MC/MM that the latter is irrelevant.)

Mmmm...Ampdog

Maybe I can convince you?

mafioso

[joel]

My take is that, as I've said before, a good MM is better than a bad MC.
The technology itself will not be an indication of how well something performs, but rather the implementation of said technology.

I for example picked up my good MM cart for a song, and there is no way, I believe, that at the price I paid,  I could get a better MC product.

This being said, an angel from the cape is certainly on my wish list.

[Moog]

An Update. I decided to save a bit of money by replacing the damaged Sumiko Blackbird with  Sumiko Evo III   (cheaper moving coil).  rior to its demise, the Blackbird has been in my ssyetm for about 4 years and i am very familiar with its sound.The result? An anti-climax?,dDspair?  Yes! The thrill is gone! Those nuances and romanticism (who said it was easy to describe different sounds ?) are now significantly subdued.  The bass output is almost the same (although less defined) but the "romance" ?, "fine detail?", "ability to draw one to the music? " is now subdued. I am now on the market for a more up-market mc cartridge.

[mafioso]

Thanks, Joel

I wanted to post a pic of the latest iteration here last night but couldn't manage the new upload regime.

Further, I agree a good MM cartridge can sound most musical but if I could compare the two types, over a 40+ years of listening, there was only half the fingers of one hand's worth of MM's which sounded as if they could play in the same sandbox as MC cartridges.

In each case (where MM cartridges I listened to sounds comparable to an MC needle) their construction was radically different to what one normally finds. Their generators (magnets, suspension and damper)  was a precision fit, secured by a screw.

I will name the MM cartridges I refer to here - one was a Grace F-9 (made by Yoshiaki Sugano's bro') and the other an integrated headshell design by AT - to wit their model 23a.

Since I don't want to 'push' my own product, I may perhaps just be allowed to mention that I studied the construction of cartridges for 8 years before put a milling cutter to a billet of aluminium or hardwood.

One cannot change the basic principles of 45/45 of how records are cut and pressed but one can certainly change the construction to achieve the same end result. For doing this, I hold two separate design registrations in the EEC and elsewhere.

mafioso

[Ampdog]

Mafioso!

I did not want to mention but you would be the one person to inform/convince me. But please notice I am not siding on any emotional/experience basis. Unfortunately for one, hearing is out for me; ears sadly far too - er - far gone to be of use there.

I don't want to side-line the thread into a theoretical discussion, but had hoped that, after seeing my problem from a practical point, you could indicate where the advantage lies, if not merely in more precise construction. It can hardly be in the lower moving-mass direction (could it?), and for the rest, no difference - again honestly asking, what am I overlooking? Perhaps we can PM; you must have had a reason for preferring to go the MC-way despite the problems and I do not see you as a 'lead-by-the-nose-by-fashion' kind of person. (I had the pleasure of meeting Mafioso on occasion.)

But there; enough side-tracking by me already. Perhaps you might point me to some informative  literature/references/whatever. (One last point: I have certainly noticed some slovenly made MMs on the market; mass-produced things if there ever were - one is not talking about such. Are there also sub-standard MCs out there?)