In article , Dave Plowman (News)
wrote:
In article , Jim Lesurf
wrote:
Mmmm? I have a MC cart (Audio Technica OC9) on a 3009ii and it all
works perfectly, both listening and in measurement.

Does the OC9 have a rather higher compliance (and perhaps more
sensible damping) than many MC designs? The root of the problem was
that many MC designs had/have booger-all compliance and no damping. So
can be problematic in an arm like the 3009 which has low mass.

The lateral bearing on the 3009 could be damped which helped matters
with a low compliance cart. Think it was originally intended for the
Decca FFSS head shell mounting versions.

Strictyly speaking, the arm damper would reduce the resonance peak rise and
Q. But would not move the resonance down to a more appropriate frequency.

That said, I've happily been using V15 carts with a Technics deck/arm for
decades quite happily, despite the arm nominally having too much effective
mass, etc. But I guess that errs on the other side to using a low
compliance cart with a light arm.

Slainte,

Jim

--
Please use the address on the audiomisc page if you wish to email me.
Electronics http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scot...o/electron.htm
Armstrong Audio http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/Armstrong/armstrong.html
Audio Misc http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/index.html