MM to MC back to MM

Most MCs are so bad at tracking it's not funny. There was one MC I really wanted to hear before eventually deciding whether my Ortofon X-5 high output MC should be retipped. That was the Dynavector 20. After reading the TNT review, however, it was obvious it's not a good cartridge:

Tracking ability did show some cause for concern though. Playing Marleys 'Exodus' album the heavy dubbed bass transients caught the stylus out occasionally, as did Bruce Springstein's 'Dancing in the Dark', producing a crack! as mistracking set in. Using the HFN+RR test record the Dynavector struggled to track the 16 dbl 300hz test and showed hints of mistracking at 14 dbl, something the V15 sailed through. That said the problem only raised it's head on a few very tricky records though perhaps Reggae fans might find the V15 a better bet.

Come on, before that tip encounters grooves where it will jump a much larger quantity will show mistracking!

I'll stick mainly to MM/MI units. Moving irons, though, have a midrange bloom that's highly appealing. Them Grado and Stanton cartridges are real smooth sounding.

***

As for as the MM's go, give me a few names in the $700 range also MI.

Jsman - Do a search in this forum and you will find you do not have to spend $700 to experience terrific LP playback from some of the very best MM cartridges.

Happy listening!

Surely this discussion has been posted before. Sorry for not searching the archives first.

As obvious as it may seem, few discussions address the inherent dilemma one faces when comparing a MM to a MC cartridge. Regardless of any design and/or spec advantages one has over the other, evaluations of different types of cartridges (MM vs. MC) yield results that are difficult to call absolute or definitive. The need to switch to a different phonostage is the culprit. Consequently, you are unable to conclude that what you are hearing is due only to the differences between the cartridges.

Certainly a single phonostage can be used. However, most (if not all) conventional methods of overcoming this dilemma introduce additional variables. For MM phonostages, one can use a step up transformer or a prepreamp after the MC cartridge. On the other hand one can use a passive "attenuator" device after MM cartridges to reduce the output before feeding the signal to a MC phonostage.

It may still be possible to compare a MM and a MC cartridge, but only if one has a phonostage with identical mm and mc performance at any fixed overall [system] listening level. I am not an engineer, so those who have more technical know-how please chime in. Does such a phonostage exist? If so what tests does one perform to determine how similar or different a MM phonostage is from one designed for a MC without using a cartridge?

If this dilemma cannot be addressed, we have no choice but to treat MM and MC cartridges separate/independent from one another. I have my handful of MM cartridges that I cannot do without and for any given sonic parameter/criteria I can rank them. I can do the same for the superb MC transducers that I own. However, I cannot say if my favorite MM is better or not quite as good as my favorite MC, because the introduction of other components means that such an evaluation is not an apples-for-apples comparison.

Well I can.I posted a while back in the Lenco thread,about how I replaced a Denon 103 MC with an Ortofon VMS 20 Mk11 E MI and how I thought the Ortofon was better. Because when I dialled in the anti-skate it actually made the music right unlike the Denon where I was always looking for compromises or using no anti-skate at all.I found using a conical tip improved things still further.A guy on VA called Jeff Medwin says he won't let an art-stylus in his house.Why? there is 3 times the distortion from elliticals or shibata types.We have got lost!