Hear my Cartridges....🎶

Thank you Invictus and Harold for your kind words 😎
You're right Harold......
WRITING about the 'sound' of different cartridges is such a subjective exercise and ultimately proves nothing to anyone......
I wanted to 'objectify' this process (if possible via the YouTube limitations) by allowing for 'real-time' comparisons of cartridges on a unified 'real-world' system as heard from the 'listener's seat'.
Most cartridge comparisons on YouTube take the phono-feed directly to a DAC or USB feed which 'digitises' the analogue signal and removes the entire 'playing system' from the equation.
You thus don't get to hear Phono-Stage, Preamp. Amps, Cables, Speakers nor ROOM effects in those videos.
With my videos.....what you hear is what you get.....except in reality I get to hear it in far better resolution, detail and quality 👅

I would not be so cavalier as to 'wipe out' MC Cartridges based on my experiences.
I have bought (and kept) dozens of LOMCs over the years and still enjoy many of them alongside my favourite MMs.
The ones you will hear here (except for the Denon) have a place in any decent system IMO.
No....the principle reason I have campaigned against the 'supposed' superiority of MC Cartridges is that there is no 'inherent' superiority of one form of cartridge over another in my experience.
So when some 'boutique'  garage-based two-man businesses produce their 'hand-made' (because MC cartridges HAVE to be) latest exotica for $10,000, $15,000.....$20,000 🤯
I am outraged......
Those cartridges simply do not necessarily sound any better than cheap MM models....especially those designed and manufactured in the 70s and 80s (The Golden Age of Analogue).

There will inevitably be a legion of well-heeled audiophiles who can afford the best and 'expect' that the prices they pay will be reflected in the 'sounds' that they hear!
Without 'objective' assessments able to be agreed upon......the 'street-cred' they have with their audiophile buddies by dropping the names Atlas, Colibri, Koetsu, Miyajima, ZYX et al is all they really need 🤗

In line with the preceding statement......I promised earlier, to post a comparison between my most expensive LOMC Cartridge and my cheapest MM.
The Acoustical Systems Palladian LOMC Cartridge is beautifully designed and made and costs $10,000.
This exercise is not intended to embarrass or shame the Palladian as I don't regret buying it and will continue to listen to it.
I have compared it to the Lyra Atlas, the ZYX UNIverse and the Dynavector XV-1s in my system and prefer it.

The JVC 4MD-20X cost me $110 a few months ago for a NOS example, and was a lower-cost model than the 4MD-1X which is somewhat better.

As I discovered via feedback from Frogman......my aural memory for detail is not good as I tend to just listen 'for enjoyment'......
In other words.....I can enjoy many different cartridge presentations without consciously separating out the detailed differences.
To compare any of these videos here.....I urge you to listen on a computer (rather than a phone or tablet) and open up two windows (or three if there are three cartridges).
By switching between videos of the two cartridges (at the click of a button).... 'in real time' .....you will hear the differences magnified.

ACOUSTICAL SYSTEMS PALLADIAN LOMC Cartridge
Mounted in SAEC WE-8000/ST ToneArm on solid Bronze ArmPod surrounding Vintage Victor TT-101 DD Turntable

JVC 4MD-20X Vintage MM Cartridge 
Mounted in DV-507/II ToneArm on solid Bronze ArmPod surrounding Vintage Victor TT-101 DD Turntable

Listened on my Stax/Lambda Pro Sig/T1 tube driver.

Well, I wouldn’t dream of suggesting that the Palladian sounds $9,890 better than the JVC, but it does sound better...a lot better. I really do wish I could say that the JVC sounds as good as the Palladian does to my ears; but, while it does sound decent, I just don’t think it is in the same league.

First, as I have opined previously, “there is no ’inherent’ superiority of one form of cartridge over another in my experience”. I agree with halcro’s comment completely. IN GENERAL, each technology seems to offer certain desirable characteristics. Personally, I don’t think that this JVC is a particularly good example of the general merits of MM’s. I am much less impressed with this one than the previous Victors heard. As always, the tuning and other characteristics of the rest of the audio system plays a major role in how well a given cartridge fits in.

To my ears the most obvious difference, and one immediately apparent, is that the Palladian controls the highs much much better. I could point out that the JVC sounds thin and splashy in the highs with a generally terrible (sorry) cymbal sound, but the best example is to listen to how it handles sibilant “s” sounds. Listen to the lyric “something” @ 1:44; or, “peace” (?) @ 1:54. The “s” sounds are distorted and splashy. With the Palladian (@1:45&1:55) the “s” is smooth, controlled and well integrated.

With the JVC, besides a cymbal sound (high-hat in particular) that gets distorted and pushed forward to the point of distraction the result of this characteristic is that the sound of other instruments get tilted in the direction of that zone of distortion. The guitars sound thinner with a little too much “twang” and less sense of the body of the instrument. Vocals sound less natural than with the Palladian which offers a generally smoother and meatier sound. At times I wished that the Palladian had a little less “meat” and a little more of the JVC’s faux clarity (distortion) in the highs, but I much preferred the overall balance of the Palladian. The JVC sounds a little fatiguing by comparison. Dynamic performance seemed comparable for the most part, although the distraction of the JVC’s splashy cymbal sound obscures some of the rhythmic interplay between the drums, bass and guitar for some reduction of rhythmic groove.  

Thanks, halcro.

Edit:

I just went back and reviewed my earlier comments (and halcro’s) re the other Victors heard previously. I loved the X1, I did not like the 4MD-1X as much, and I liked this 4MD-20X even less. Halcro feels that the 4MD-1X is “somewhat better” than the 4MD-20X. It all seems to make sense and is consistent.

Perfect 'score' once again Frogman....👍
I agree 100% with all that you say (and hear)......
Of course.....there are some who would shrug their shoulders UNLESS the lowly 4MD-20X actually BETTERED the $10,000 Palladian...🤯
Life is not quite like that........
I merely wanted to reassure those who are on a tight budget vis-a-vis cartridges.....that cartridge designers NEVER set out to produce a 'poor' sounding cartridge.
They are merely constrained to do their best within strict budget constraints and this example may be the 'widest' difference you may hear between the 'Uber' cartridges and the 'Budget' ones.....

You will hear with coming MM comparisons against the Palladian......that competition can get a whole lot closer....🤗

I have been buying vintage cartridges (of all types) for over 10 years....
Not because I don’t like the prices of NEW ones....but because I have found the ’sound’ of cartridges made in ’The Golden Age of Analogue’ (70s to 90s) to be superior to ’modern’ ones.
Most Reviewers will have you believe that there have been advances (both in materials and technology) over the last 40 years but that is not true for cartridges IMO......nor for Tonearms or Turntables for that matter.
All the serious ’advanced’ styli profiles were developed decades ago and utilised consistently in MM designs as well as MCs.
All the cantilever materials such as diamond, sapphire, ruby, boron, carbon-fibre were also invented and used in the ’Golden Age’.
But the ’Golden Age’ had access to materials and technologies that are no longer available......
Beryllium cantilevers anyone.....?
Despite what some designers might tell you about the physical properties of boron that make it the ’best’ material for cantilevers......the vast majority of my favourite cartridges have ’beryllium’ cantilevers which are no longer available.
Hollow-tube aluminium....? tapered tube.....? carbon-fibre/beryllium composites.....?
None of these is commercially available today......

If so many advances have been made over the last 40 years......it stands to reason that cartridges made today would ’wipe the floor’ with vintage models......?

The following ’Shoot-Out’ is between the top-of-the-line Audio Technica AT150ANV (made in ’Limited Edition’ a few years ago) and the 35 year old top-of-the-line Audio Technica AT180ML/OCC.
The AT150ANV famously beat out 8 other cartridges (including the $9000 Ortofon Anna LOMC) in a ’blind’ listening test conducted by Michael Fremer.

VINTAGE AUDIO TECHNICA AT-180ML/OCC MM Cartridge
Mounted in DV-507/II ToneArm on solid Bronze ArmPod surrounding Vintage Victor TT-101 DD Turntable

MODERN AUDIO TECHNICA AT-150ANV MM Cartridge