[Sonnova]

On Sat, 20 Jun 2009 08:43:21 -0700, Harry Lavo wrote
(in article ):

wrote in message ...
Harry Lavo wrote:

Back when measurements were common, the most distinquishing
characteristics of the better moving coils was a much faster rise time,
with a very quick cycle of overshoot and the a steady "top" to the square
wave. By comparison the moving magnets and moving irons generally had
much slower rise times and overly dampened transient response due to
rolled off hghs (and that included the V15). So the moving coils simply
sounded more lifelike and "real" (read: less "canned") when reproducing
actual music. You heard this not only in the featured instruments, but
also in the amount of room ambience caught that lent separation, body,
and dimensionality to the reproduction.

Not objective enough for you? I'd suggest a library visit into the High
Fidelity and Audio magazine libraries, circa late sixties - early
eighties.

Almost all moving coil cartridges have a rising top end response deviating
from flat, with a peak at tip resonance, which is why they have the square
wave response you described. Most of them are better than they used to be
in this respect, but this characteristic still exists. The V15 is
relatively flat in comparison. Do you know how to interpret square waves?
From your comments, you know just enough to be misrepresentative.

Have you actually measured any cartridges? I've measured quite a few of
them with much better resolution than what was published in the rags of
which you speak. It's not hard. This is 2009. You're at the mercy of
the test record, but when the same characteristics show up with several
different test records, one can draw some fairly reasonable conclusions.
You can also draw reasonable conclusions about the test records themselves
by comparing them with a cartridge that can be shown to be relatively
flat.

To rational people, it's really more important that the cartridge have
flat response for frequencies that are actually physically audible. Sure,
MC's usually can go out higher. But it's because of the rising top end in
the audible range. That's why they usually sound different too. Turning
up the treble control from flat on an amplifier generally does the same
thing. Some people like this. I don't. Recordings usually have way too
much high frequency information in the first place because of the
unfortunate practice microscopic miking. But many audiophiles seem to
like this. It also keeps the biz going by churning the market.

What I say here is pretty much the same thing as Robert Greene says in
your beloved Absolute Sound rag and on his mailing list. At least someone
is telling some truths there. Those darned mathematicians... ;-)

All this doesn't mean you can't like MC cartridges personally. Enjoy them
if you wish, but please - don't pass them off as more accurate except
within your own personal preferences.

Frankly, of when I spoke twenty-five years ago, MC's WERE more accurate.
The rising resonance was generally out in the 25khz-35khz range and up to
about 15khz, they wee flat. The moving irons, however, were very
capacitive-sensative and in most preamps rolled off audibly, starting as low
as 8-10Khz.

An MC that was underdamped or badly designed would ring like crazy....the
best only one major overshoot. The moving irons couldn't get out of their
own way...no matter how the measured they simply didn't sound "live".


Modern MCs, even "low" priced ones like the current Sumiko Blue-Point II
don't exhibit those characteristics. They are very musical, extremely fast,
and cartridges like the Blue-Point are high enough in output and source
impedance to sound their best when loaded with a standard 47K Ohm phono stage
input. Low output MCs, are, in my opinion, much too fussy. They require lots
of gain making them very susceptible to hum, and they usually require
precise, custom loading to sound their best.