Yes, that was a fun and interesting evening. From the whole discussion around the topic I had expected that the sound would be more midrange-y, with less HF extension. This was not the case. HF extension and prominence was the same, but the treble sound was less white. Dynamics were the same too. The overall sound seemed just more natural, less synthetic. The Janaki string trio sounded more incisive and less diffuse than I remember, even though on this one we did not perform a direct comparison of the loading settings. On the Holst Planets we compared extensively.
Cartridge Loading- A Misnomer
- Thread starter BruceD
- Start date
Yes, that was a fun and interesting evening. From the whole discussion around the topic I had expected that the sound would be more midrange-y, with less HF extension. This was not the case. HF extension and prominence was the same, but the treble sound was less white. Dynamics were the same too. The overall sound seemed just more natural, less synthetic. The Janaki string trio sounded more incisive and less diffuse than I remember, even though on this one we did not perform a direct comparison of the loading settings. On the Holst Planets we compared extensively.
This thread is what educated me on my setup regarding loading my Delos and Nova II phono preamp, also more importantly made me change the phono cable I was using. That cable was a very high cap cable, where only a 90-121 ohm loading sounded really good.....I thought.
Replacing with a very low cap cable and increasing resistance at the phono stage to 475 ohms, was a rebirth of musical information coming from my speakers. Everything JCarr wrote in this thread was eye and ear opening for me and having @ack recap the information is also valuable to me.......Regardless of what level your analog setup is at, if you are running MC cartridge this thread is a must read if you are interested in getting the highest resolution and widest dynamic range from your turntable playback.
I appreciate it as I knew the Delos was capable of more, I just needed the education to set it up properly.
Cheers,
Excellent! Math and engineering at work! Like I said before, the fundamental reason I selected my VPI arm was it's extremely low capacitance Nordost wiring, and all other mechanical issues with the arm were later fixed.
I recently compared again 47K vs 1K in my system, and 1K sounds noticeably softer in transients and treble, with an unexpected boost in upper midbass as well, which is not natural. Yuk!
I recently compared again 47K vs 1K in my system, and 1K sounds noticeably softer in transients and treble, with an unexpected boost in upper midbass as well, which is not natural. Yuk!
@ack
I have interest in upgrading my tonearm wiring, what Nordost wiring are you using? I'm still very interested in your shielding process too, I need to get on that also......I have found if I place my speedbox too close to my phono stage I hear some hum, RF noise. It's far enough away I hear nothing but that box might be my first shielding project.
Thank you!!
I have interest in upgrading my tonearm wiring, what Nordost wiring are you using? I'm still very interested in your shielding process too, I need to get on that also......I have found if I place my speedbox too close to my phono stage I hear some hum, RF noise. It's far enough away I hear nothing but that box might be my first shielding project.
Thank you!!
So the arm came with Nordost Valhalla, and it has proven to be a sensational piece of wire. I am not sure, but I believe VPI still offers it upon request on their newer arms. And the MIT MA-X inenterconnect is also very low capacitance well. Regarding RFI, keep noisy equipment as far away from phono as possible. The effectiveness of the shielding has been confirmed by other phono modders as well.
Keep in mind that I have also removed that 100pF loading capacitor - totally useless in my mind. Beyond that, the theory is sound, and one should be wondering WHY they are not getting the same results. It's probably also a system resolution issue, to some degree.
Ack,
I asked Andre Jennings to share the loading experience he has with my air tight supreme cartridge. He told me some of the installations he has done are loaded at 47K or 1K ohms but others are 100 ohms +/-- 20 and still others are between 200 - 300 ohms.
He said it all depends on the system context and listening preferences of the listener. I heard a big improvement increasing the loading on my cartridge from 47K to 250 ohms and so I’m satisfied. It’s interesting to know the theory but I’m not asking myself why it sounds better or how I can change things further. I just like the way it sounds and plan to enjoy the music for a while.
Others may want to dive deeply into this subject and try to figure out how to load at 47K ohms. Some day I may experiment with removing the 100pF capacitor and extra shielding to see if it makes a difference in my application. I suspect my other cartridge may also have a different loading setting.
Perhaps my system's resolution is an issue. I'm sure that relative to better systems, my resolution suffers, but figuring out how to increase the resolution of my system further is a task for another day. I've done much of that in the last year or so with component and speaker upgrades.
It is a fascinating thread. Where it not for my recent exposure to more small scale live music up close and personal I would not have explored this whole loading issue. I am glad I did and it has further improved my sound and level of enjoyment.
I asked Andre Jennings to share the loading experience he has with my air tight supreme cartridge. He told me some of the installations he has done are loaded at 47K or 1K ohms but others are 100 ohms +/-- 20 and still others are between 200 - 300 ohms.
He said it all depends on the system context and listening preferences of the listener. I heard a big improvement increasing the loading on my cartridge from 47K to 250 ohms and so I’m satisfied. It’s interesting to know the theory but I’m not asking myself why it sounds better or how I can change things further. I just like the way it sounds and plan to enjoy the music for a while.
Others may want to dive deeply into this subject and try to figure out how to load at 47K ohms. Some day I may experiment with removing the 100pF capacitor and extra shielding to see if it makes a difference in my application. I suspect my other cartridge may also have a different loading setting.
Perhaps my system's resolution is an issue. I'm sure that relative to better systems, my resolution suffers, but figuring out how to increase the resolution of my system further is a task for another day. I've done much of that in the last year or so with component and speaker upgrades.
It is a fascinating thread. Where it not for my recent exposure to more small scale live music up close and personal I would not have explored this whole loading issue. I am glad I did and it has further improved my sound and level of enjoyment.
Last edited:
As much as I believe in system synergy, I also believe in the science of exact math and how it relates to electronics. With this I cannot ignore how this math can affect the sound of a MC cartridge setup, again regardless of level or components in use. I do think the "better" the electronics the more you can pull out of the grooves and that relates to how much more you hear.
It's there, the more proper science applied to the MC cart/phono stage and phono cable will bring out different sounds and in our cases, directly relates to higher resolution and the widest dynamic range possible, as JCarr has stated.
I have heard it with the Lyra Delos as well as even my lower quality AT OC9ML/II, change out the cable and adjust loading the sound changes and I don't hear the same resolution or dynamics.
I had an opportunity to play with a Ortofon A90 for about 2 weeks, man what a lovely resolving cartridge. I listened with the same Delos settings and was amazed at the sound. I then swapped out the phono cable to a high cap one, adjusted loading to 121ohms and boom.....things changed for the worse in my case/system. Resolution was muddled, with some but not much attack on cymbals and biggest thing was sustain suffered, which affected staging.
I listened for about 3 days like that and quickly swapped everything back to a low cap cable, increased resistance to 475 ohms and I was hearing more of everything. Listened for about a week more and really heard the music come back. The Nova II goes to 100K Ohms, but I did not care for that setting at all, backing down to 660 ohms and all came back into play much nicer. For my ears 475 ohms seemed to be really sweet spot for most of the time, same place I have the Delos at. Now could be that I am very happy with that setting, mathematically it is where I should be anyhow, but if I changed I would think I could "like it". I suspect my mind knows that mathematically 475 is more correct so I will stay there, it simply plays into what JCarr says.
My two week test simply tells me that a lot of MC cart designers that say "100 ohms is a good start", may be right but it is not the optimal setting or performance, again in my system.
The information in this thread continues to be.....excellent!
Cheers,
It's there, the more proper science applied to the MC cart/phono stage and phono cable will bring out different sounds and in our cases, directly relates to higher resolution and the widest dynamic range possible, as JCarr has stated.
I have heard it with the Lyra Delos as well as even my lower quality AT OC9ML/II, change out the cable and adjust loading the sound changes and I don't hear the same resolution or dynamics.
I had an opportunity to play with a Ortofon A90 for about 2 weeks, man what a lovely resolving cartridge. I listened with the same Delos settings and was amazed at the sound. I then swapped out the phono cable to a high cap one, adjusted loading to 121ohms and boom.....things changed for the worse in my case/system. Resolution was muddled, with some but not much attack on cymbals and biggest thing was sustain suffered, which affected staging.
I listened for about 3 days like that and quickly swapped everything back to a low cap cable, increased resistance to 475 ohms and I was hearing more of everything. Listened for about a week more and really heard the music come back. The Nova II goes to 100K Ohms, but I did not care for that setting at all, backing down to 660 ohms and all came back into play much nicer. For my ears 475 ohms seemed to be really sweet spot for most of the time, same place I have the Delos at. Now could be that I am very happy with that setting, mathematically it is where I should be anyhow, but if I changed I would think I could "like it". I suspect my mind knows that mathematically 475 is more correct so I will stay there, it simply plays into what JCarr says.
My two week test simply tells me that a lot of MC cart designers that say "100 ohms is a good start", may be right but it is not the optimal setting or performance, again in my system.
The information in this thread continues to be.....excellent!
Cheers,
The problem is not the maths
Its figuring out what really matters
For your system (or potential system)
And implementing it practically
Its figuring out what really matters
For your system (or potential system)
And implementing it practically
Catcher, I thought the argument that JCarr is making is that if the phono stage is properly designed, the cartridge can be loaded at 47K ohms. How do you conclude through the math that "...475 is more correct so I will stay there, it simply plays into what JCarr says." In my own system, based on my listening, I prefer 250 ohms to 47K ohms, assuming that my phono is somehow not properly designed or flawed in some way.
In the end, it seems people are adjusting the loading amount based on what sounds best to them and not relying on what the math suggests is best. The math would suggest that dynamic range is restricted if one decreases the loading values, but I do not hear that in my system.
Hi,
I got that from JCarr also, but in the case of Lyra and their instructions on loading based on their mathematical suggestions in accordance with the total capacitance between cartridge and phono stage. They suggest setting by ear between 91 ohms and 47Kohms, very wide range. Using their math and your total cable capacitance, in my case the range is 200-510 ohms, I have listened in this range and 475ohms is the one that gets me the highest resolution and widest dynamic range. Lyra instructions give range for 50pF and then 100pF, I am neither I am 60-70pF, so making adjustments I sit at 475 ohms.
I tend to agree decreasing the loading value could affect dynamic range, but for me that means going below 200 ohms, based on my total cable capacitance and phono stage.
I have never used one but if an SUT is used in MM connection, does the 47K ohms make sense or sound the best?
I guess I read about so many MC users that simply load at 100 ohms, either because they read that is the "catch all setting" or taking the internal cartridge impedance and x10. IIRC, the instructions on my AT carts say nothing other than "recommended load impedance 100 ohms". Owning a phono stage that does not offer me multiple loading options would not make my list, maybe it is just me and my experience with both mid line and higher end MC carts, but variable loading is key for me.......I mean why not?
I guess my point for this whole thread is I have yet to read anything else on the WWW, that gives me a different process to set loading that has yielded better results than what I get now.
Cheers!
I think you may have missed a main point of this thread, especially as it relates to capacitance.
Last edited:
I appreciate the point about capacitance and my phono stage has loading capacitors. I have mine set at the lowest setting understanding now that one wants minimal capacitance, which has been made clear in this thread. I don't have the technical expertise to open up the casework and remove the capacitor from my brand new phono stage, as you did. Perhaps someday I will hire someone to do it for me.
Given my technical limitations, I take two main points from this excellent thread: 1. adjust loading levels by listening for best sound, and 2. set capacitance as low as possible. I suppose a third is getting a phono cable and arm cable with the least resistance (EDIT: capacitance) possible, but that is not always easy to determine. I have done the first two of these things with the result of improved sonics.
I have two different phono cables and three different cartridges and I am discovering that the loading setting is slightly different depending on which cable and cartridge is in the system. I don't have all of the specifications from my cartridges and cables to actually plug the values into the formulae to get a mathematical answer to the correct loading value as Catcher10 seems to have done.
Great thread.
Last edited:
Not resistance, but capacitance. We take for granted that phono cables have extremely small resistance. And you can hire Goodwin's to remove the loading capacitors if you want, and Pass can give you their id on the board, as they did for me.
Here is the original post from Andre Jennings in which he responded to my request for information about cartridge loading of the Opus-1. I had thought he was referring to the AirTight Supreme, which I own. I apologize if my error caused any confusion. And here is a link to the thread and post #17 on Audionirvana in which this discussion takes place to see the full context of Dre's comments:
https://www.audionirvana.org/forum/...es/108517-kuzma-14-and-air-tight-opus-1/page2
#17.4
Dre_J commented
02-26-2019, 09:32 AM
Peter,
It (loading choice) depends on many variables including the limited ones you mentioned. Once you get past the technical issues of Gain/frequency bandwidth and additional electrical parameters, the preference and perception of sonics come into play.
In the case of the Opus-1 (like many cartridges), the loading values have been from 100 ohms (+/- 20 ohms) to 300-600 ohms to 1000- 47,000 ohms.
It (loading choice) all depends on the items mentioned, in addition to the robustness of the phonostage design (including overload margin and input topology), that mostly determines the range of loading one can safely use with a given lumped impedance of the cartridge/cable/arm combination.
I'm afraid there is no single or average impedance answer for subjective sonic preferences when it comes to loading.
Dre- Flag
I would simply email your phono cable mfg and ask them what the capacitance is in pF/mt or ft for your cable, they should be able to tell you. I was very close to buying some Wire World Silver 7 tonearm cables, but did not when I was told by a tech there the cap was, IIRC, about 200pF. I have some Morrow Audio Grand Reference PH6 phono cables and they are 580pF/mt! The Audioquest Cougar is 40pF /mt, that is what you want, at least that is what my system prefers.
Cheers.....and yes a great thread.
Similar threads
