Imitation is the highest form of flattery?

[Jack in Wilmington]

A moving coil cartridge is always on the low compliance side of life. AT suggests 2 gram tracking force. I find the cartridge neutral but not colorless as the OM20 can become. You will need a phono preamp with good sensitivity and gain of 60db or more.

I find the sound of MC cartridges to sound more solid than MM cartridges. That may be due to the higher tracking forces.

I'm a little confused. The only MC cartridge that I've heard was a Sumiko Blackbird and it was called a "high output" MC cartridge as there was also a "low output" version available. Is output and compliance two different things? I only got back into vinyl a couple of years ago and a lot of the terminology is new to me.

[JohnMichael]

I'm a little confused. The only MC cartridge that I've heard was a Sumiko Blackbird and it was called a "high output" MC cartridge as there was also a "low output" version available. Is output and compliance two different things? I only got back into vinyl a couple of years ago and a lot of the terminology is new to me.

Think of compliance as a suspension. A low compliance cart will have a stiffer suspension and need a heavier arm. A high compliance cart will have a softer suspension and need a lighter arm to perform best.

Output in moving coil cartridges are determined by how many turns of wire and power of the magnet. A low output MC will have fewer turns of wire and therefore can only generate a smaller signal. Having less wire creates a lower mass generating system said to trace the grooves better with maximum information retrieval. The more turns of wire in a high output MC add mass to the generating system. More mass can reduce amount of information retrieved.

Compliance/suspesion is the springs and struts of the cartridge and the output is the horsepower.

[Jack in Wilmington]

Think of compliance as a suspension. A low compliance cart will have a stiffer suspension and need a heavier arm. A high compliance cart will have a softer suspension and need a lighter arm to perform best.

Output in moving coil cartridges are determined by how many turns of wire and power of the magnet. A low output MC will have fewer turns of wire and therefore can only generate a smaller signal. Having less wire creates a lower mass generating system said to trace the grooves better with maximum information retrieval. The more turns of wire in a high output MC add mass to the generating system. More mass can reduce amount of information retrieved.

Compliance/suspesion is the springs and struts of the cartridge and the output is the horsepower.

Thanks JM. More info is always good. Something more to consider when making a new purchase.

[blackraven]

Thanks JM.

I have read that if your Tone Arm has good dampening that you can get by with a lower compliance cartridge on a light arm. I am not sure it that is true or not.

[Ryissa]

I took a careful look at those photos and unless their supposed photographer can demonstrate how those photos came from his Camera I'd be thinking about requesting some money out of that one. (I know it may not be worth the fuss, but arguably you are entitled to being paid for an image you originally photographed when it is clearly being used for commercial purposes). It seems to me some cases have already been won in this regard (my memory is not flawless, so I admit to talking a little through my hat here).

If the photo was posted to a discussion forum and you said something like "hey this is my turntable" and it got taken from there they should have been contacting you about using the image for advertising purposes. Arguably worth at least a couple of phonecalls. Especially if you have the original image sitting on your system somewhere.

Have fun!

[Ryissa]

Hope this link is acceptable.

Copyright Fair Use and How it Works for Online Images Social Media Examiner

[Feanor]

I took a careful look at those photos and unless their supposed photographer can demonstrate how those photos came from his Camera I'd be thinking about requesting some money out of that one. (I know it may not be worth the fuss, but arguably you are entitled to being paid for an image you originally photographed when it is clearly being used for commercial purposes). It seems to me some cases have already been won in this regard (my memory is not flawless, so I admit to talking a little through my hat here).

If the photo was posted to a discussion forum and you said something like "hey this is my turntable" and it got taken from there they should have been contacting you about using the image for advertising purposes. Arguably worth at least a couple of phonecalls. Especially if you have the original image sitting on your system somewhere.

Have fun!

Ryissa, a hearty "cease and desist" to you. The images in this thread are clearly not being used for commercial purposes.

People link to advertisers' photographs all the time in their forum posts, and unless they do so for advertising purposes of their own or to make slanderous comments, the poster is highly unlikely to get into any trouble. Gee gosh, I wonder if Google has paid for a every Image or Video they link to when you 'google' a subject? Maybe you could elucidate that point for us.

Using standard webpage tools, a web author can prevent the normal 'Save image', 'Copy image URL', etc. The vast majority do not do so for the simple reason that putting stuff on the Web is about publicity and if their photos are linked elsewhere, so much the better.

JohnMichael, with a twist of ironic humor, was wondering whether the original advertiser ought to pay him for publicising their images. (This was joke, not a serious suggestion.)

[JohnMichael]

Ryissa, a hearty "cease and desist" to you. The images in this thread are clearly not being used for commercial purposes.

People link to advertisers' photographs all the time in their forum posts, and unless they do so for advertising purposes of their own or to make slanderous comments, the poster is highly unlikely to get into any trouble. Gee gosh, I wonder if Google has paid for a every Image or Video they link to when you 'google' a subject? Maybe you could elucidate that point for us.

Using standard webpage tools, a web author can prevent the normal 'Save image', 'Copy image URL', etc. The vast majority do not do so for the simple reason that putting stuff on the Web is about publicity and if their photos are linked elsewhere, so much the better.

JohnMichael, with a twist of ironic humor, was wondering whether the original advertiser ought to pay him for publicising their images. (This was joke, not a serious suggestion.)

Wow you know what I was thinking. No I was shocked and annoyed to see someone using my photograph to improve their sales. If you are going to profit from selling a product either hire your own photographer or at least ask permission to use an image.

[Ryissa]

The link I posted explains the difference quite clearly between a harmless link or fair re-use of an image versus using an image for commercial purposes.

The image was clearly borrowed and then Used in an advertisement. Big difference between THAT and say me "borrowing" the image on my blog and saying "wish I owned this".

Cease and disist what exactly? Suggesting someone look at getting fairly compensated for commercial use of their own work? And then post a link that demonstrates they have a case. Seriously?

Pretty innocuous stuff to get accused of being a troll over.