Here's basically what we would do to make a selection:
1. We'd look at reviews in the Audio Critic, HFN/RR, Absolute Sound, Audio, and Stereophile
2. We'd call people we knew in the industry who made preamps, tonearms, or were just good engineers and listeners
3. We'd go in a shop that carried them (I was in the greater Boston area so there were lots of choices)
4. If they had one on demo we'd LISTEN to a record or two we brought and knew. We also usually brought a test record to see if they could track ok.
5. We'd make sure that the specs such as mass, compliance, output voltage and impedance, frequency response, and channel separation and uniformity made sense (Audio was good for this before we walked in the door as user groups were just starting.)
6. Once we found one we thought we liked, we'd look at the B&K paper printout of frequency response, resonance and channel separation (At someone we knew knew how truly interpret this stuff). I think some of these measurement printouts went out to 40 or 45kHZ so you could see the top end resonance as well.
7. All things being equal we selected the one with the greatest but most uniform channel separation and the HF resonance as far out of the audio range as possible.
8. We'd get our best price and they would mount it and usually set it up at our digs using test records, oscilloscopes and the like or we'd get an engineering friend who had same to bring his or her's over. Sometimes we'd bring it to their university/company lab along with our preamp and turntable in the midnight hour.
The part I remember is that Fidelity Research, some Dynavectors, I think the Panasonic strain-guage system, and Ortofons used to include those, maybe some Deccas too. I don't think, eg., two famous brands that roll off the top end then and even today had them but I couldn't afford them anyway. I do think the Music Box in Wellesley, MA would run those tests for you if they weren't included but I maybe wrong but I wasn't in the carriage trade at that time. (I also was kinda turned off on the MM super-trak thing since I owned a Share V-15 mk 4.)
Questions - (Oh, I realize that good engineering and execution is not a sufficient condition for listening pleasure):
a. Since I've been out of cartridge buying for some time do any manufacturers actually include step 6, that is, an actual paper print out of the individual cartridge performance with the load, temperature conditions, etc. included?
b. I note that at least one of the magazines mentioned above still runs some semblance of cartridge tests in an engineering lab. Why then would folks consider cartridges, except their own tastes, that did not measure flat, have high but uniform channel separation, and a HF resonance as high as possible, all other things being equal, such as your loudspeakers not having a rising or droopy bass or high end?
c. Why is a more expensive cartridge necessarily a better one then and today, but more today, it seems? It wasn't in the past unless you had expectation bias...or were nouveau riche.
d. So how do members choose a cartridge today from an anecdotal point of view?
If I gore anyone's ox I apologize in advance.
1. We'd look at reviews in the Audio Critic, HFN/RR, Absolute Sound, Audio, and Stereophile
2. We'd call people we knew in the industry who made preamps, tonearms, or were just good engineers and listeners
3. We'd go in a shop that carried them (I was in the greater Boston area so there were lots of choices)
4. If they had one on demo we'd LISTEN to a record or two we brought and knew. We also usually brought a test record to see if they could track ok.
5. We'd make sure that the specs such as mass, compliance, output voltage and impedance, frequency response, and channel separation and uniformity made sense (Audio was good for this before we walked in the door as user groups were just starting.)
6. Once we found one we thought we liked, we'd look at the B&K paper printout of frequency response, resonance and channel separation (At someone we knew knew how truly interpret this stuff). I think some of these measurement printouts went out to 40 or 45kHZ so you could see the top end resonance as well.
7. All things being equal we selected the one with the greatest but most uniform channel separation and the HF resonance as far out of the audio range as possible.
8. We'd get our best price and they would mount it and usually set it up at our digs using test records, oscilloscopes and the like or we'd get an engineering friend who had same to bring his or her's over. Sometimes we'd bring it to their university/company lab along with our preamp and turntable in the midnight hour.
The part I remember is that Fidelity Research, some Dynavectors, I think the Panasonic strain-guage system, and Ortofons used to include those, maybe some Deccas too. I don't think, eg., two famous brands that roll off the top end then and even today had them but I couldn't afford them anyway. I do think the Music Box in Wellesley, MA would run those tests for you if they weren't included but I maybe wrong but I wasn't in the carriage trade at that time. (I also was kinda turned off on the MM super-trak thing since I owned a Share V-15 mk 4.)
Questions - (Oh, I realize that good engineering and execution is not a sufficient condition for listening pleasure):
a. Since I've been out of cartridge buying for some time do any manufacturers actually include step 6, that is, an actual paper print out of the individual cartridge performance with the load, temperature conditions, etc. included?
b. I note that at least one of the magazines mentioned above still runs some semblance of cartridge tests in an engineering lab. Why then would folks consider cartridges, except their own tastes, that did not measure flat, have high but uniform channel separation, and a HF resonance as high as possible, all other things being equal, such as your loudspeakers not having a rising or droopy bass or high end?
c. Why is a more expensive cartridge necessarily a better one then and today, but more today, it seems? It wasn't in the past unless you had expectation bias...or were nouveau riche.
d. So how do members choose a cartridge today from an anecdotal point of view?
If I gore anyone's ox I apologize in advance.