Cartridge Loading- A Misnomer

Al M.

VIP/Donor
Sep 10, 2013
8,684
4,473
963
Greater Boston
Ack, it looks as though the "theoretical ideal" is not attainable in my case. Al M. was over last night and we repeated compared my former loading of 47K ohms to my current preference of 250 ohms. We used the large scale classical recording of Holst's Planets and the small scale string trio of the Janaki Trio. Our ears confirmed that the lower load setting was preferred. I think that increasing the loading by using a lower value actually decreases the amount of distortion we were hearing in both the high and low frequencies. There was more clarity, accurate timbre and articulation of both the cymbals, brass and timpani. The improvement was perhaps even more pronounced with the violin in the Janaki Trio.

It is possible that different listeners may have a different preference. I asked Al to describe the differences in what he heard, and he basically said that it sounds more "natural" at the 250 ohm setting without any loss in perceived dynamics or high frequency extension.

I was quite curious about the data you posted up thread in which you show decreases in volume with increases in loading (lower values). I wonder if this is a result of higher amounts of HF distortion being louder at the higher settings. You have written that in your case you are able to attain the theoretical ideal by loading at 47k ohms by lowering distortions in your vinyl chain, so I presume you disagree with my supposition. If so, what do you think explains the change in volume? Are you measuring dynamic contrast? Al and I did not perceive a decrease in dynamics when listening, though the formulae seem to suggest that frequency range can diminish with increases in loading.

I'm curious because it seems as though my perceptions seem not to correspond to what the measurements would suggest.

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.
 
  • Like
Reactions: PeterA

Catcher10

Well-Known Member
Dec 28, 2018
92
69
105
60
Ack suggested that I revisit this thread because I have been experimenting lately with resistive loading on my Pass XP-27 phono stage. I am using the stock SME phono cable that came with my 30/12A table. I have an AirTight Supreme cartridge. I am finding that my previous setting of 47K ohms now sounds a bit flat and thin to me. There seems to be a lot of resolution and dynamics but the sound is a bit less natural or real than I am finding with lower settings. I have been gradually lowering the load values (increasing the load) and am now comparing the 500, 350, and 220 ohm settings. I prefer these because they seem to improve the sense of weight, body, tonal richness and warmth of real instruments without seeming to diminish dynamics, liveliness or resolution. In fact, the resolution seems greater. There is also an increased sense of palpable presence and more natural sound.

I have been discussing with Ack off line why this may be the case from an electrical point of view, but I keep returning to what my ears are telling me as I listen to my favorite recordings and lower the resistive loading values.

I am curious to know if readers are making their decisions about loading based on the theoretical advantages of higher resistive loading values well described by Ack and JCarr in this thread and loading their cartridges at 1K or higher settings or if they are listening to various settings and finding that it all depends on the components involved. I would also be interested to learn specifically what other owners of the AirTight Supreme are loading their cartridges at.

I find these three comments to particularly well reflect my own experience:

Like Johnathan says the impact of the spike on the signal will depend on the design of the phono stage, but this will give you an idea of what happens with different capacitance and resistance loading values. Knowing that different phono stages behave differently means that you need to use your ears to determine the best loading for your particular combo. Now that I’m using a phono stage that allows custom loading, I am learning how important loading really is. (Audioarcher, post #12)

Mind you, I am speaking in objective terms - I would have no quarrel with anyone who claimed subjective benefits. (JCarr, post #3)

Plus Nick (Doshi) also pointed out that the added "detail" at the say higher loadings actually obscures "real" information. I hear what he’s talking about with the Atlas and other cartridges -but I attribute that to his phono section being very neutral and resolving without the need for extra kick. (post #6)

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,
 
  • Like
Reactions: ack

ack

VIP/Donor & WBF Founding Member
May 6, 2010
6,774
1,198
580
Boston, MA
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!
 

Catcher10

Well-Known Member
Dec 28, 2018
92
69
105
60
@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!!
 

ack

VIP/Donor & WBF Founding Member
May 6, 2010
6,774
1,198
580
Boston, MA
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.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Catcher10

Al M.

VIP/Donor
Sep 10, 2013
8,684
4,473
963
Greater Boston
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!

We didn't hear that in Peter's system. Each case seems to be different.
 
  • Like
Reactions: PeterA

ack

VIP/Donor & WBF Founding Member
May 6, 2010
6,774
1,198
580
Boston, MA
We didn't hear that in Peter's system. Each case seems to be different.

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.
 

PeterA

Well-Known Member
Dec 6, 2011
12,522
10,688
3,515
USA
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.
 
Last edited:

Catcher10

Well-Known Member
Dec 28, 2018
92
69
105
60
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,
 
  • Like
Reactions: ack

Solypsa

Well-Known Member
Jun 7, 2017
1,811
1,399
275
Seattle
www.solypsa.com
The problem is not the maths

Its figuring out what really matters

For your system (or potential system)

And implementing it practically
 

PeterA

Well-Known Member
Dec 6, 2011
12,522
10,688
3,515
USA
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.

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.
 

Catcher10

Well-Known Member
Dec 28, 2018
92
69
105
60
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!
 
  • Like
Reactions: ack and PeterA

ack

VIP/Donor & WBF Founding Member
May 6, 2010
6,774
1,198
580
Boston, MA
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.

I think you may have missed a main point of this thread, especially as it relates to capacitance.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Another Johnson

ack

VIP/Donor & WBF Founding Member
May 6, 2010
6,774
1,198
580
Boston, MA
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!

And that was the intent; tear down walls.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Catcher10

PeterA

Well-Known Member
Dec 6, 2011
12,522
10,688
3,515
USA
I think you may have missed a main point of this thread, especially as it relates to capacitance.

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.

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:
  • Like
Reactions: Catcher10

ack

VIP/Donor & WBF Founding Member
May 6, 2010
6,774
1,198
580
Boston, MA
I suppose a third is getting a phono cable and arm cable with the least resistance possible,

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.
 
  • Like
Reactions: PeterA

PeterA

Well-Known Member
Dec 6, 2011
12,522
10,688
3,515
USA
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 (EDIT: should read 300-600) 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.

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

 

Catcher10

Well-Known Member
Dec 28, 2018
92
69
105
60
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.
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.
 

About us

  • What’s Best Forum is THE forum for high end audio, product reviews, advice and sharing experiences on the best of everything else. This is THE place where audiophiles and audio companies discuss vintage, contemporary and new audio products, music servers, music streamers, computer audio, digital-to-analog converters, turntables, phono stages, cartridges, reel-to-reel tape machines, speakers, headphones and tube and solid-state amplification. Founded in 2010 What’s Best Forum invites intelligent and courteous people of all interests and backgrounds to describe and discuss the best of everything. From beginners to life-long hobbyists to industry professionals, we enjoy learning about new things and meeting new people, and participating in spirited debates.

Quick Navigation

User Menu

Steve Williams
Site Founder | Site Owner | Administrator
Ron Resnick
Site Co-Owner | Administrator
Julian (The Fixer)
Website Build | Marketing Managersing