Talk:Magnetic cartridge

Title and scope
The name of this article needs to be changed to "phono cartridge". The terms "cartridge" and "magnetic cartridge" do not describe the use of such technology in the playback of phonograph records. Phono cartridge has been the correct term (at least in the U.S.) for over 50-60 years. Also, not all phono cartridges are magnetic. Many early cartridges in the 1940s and 1950s and or low quality cartridges were often described as "ceramic cartridges".2600:100F:B029:8537:B457:EEBC:2D4F:BE64 (talk) 10:21, 18 September 2016 (UTC)


 * This article is specifically about the magnetic type. The existence of ceramic (and crystal) piezoelectric cartridges (and their ongoing manufacture and use in cheap gear -- the past tense above is incorrect) is noted in the "history" section, but they are not the subject of any subsequent text. As the overarching topic is the playing of phonograph records, the "phono" part, which is only an arbitrary although long-entrenched abbreviation (and an oddity to Brits), is implicit and need not be used apart from being duly noted once, just as "record" suffices for "phonograph record" if the subject has been established. 66.81.104.244 (talk) 22:15, 29 March 2017 (UTC)

This article should not be exclusively about magnetic phono cartridges. It should be about ALL phono cartridges. Where else would Wikipedians put the information about phono cartridges that are not magnetic? Since they have already put that information here the article is now mis-named. If the article is not re-named to "Phono cartridge" then it should at least be re-named to "Magnetic phono cartridge". Again, the words "cartridge" and "magnetic" include a lot of meanings that have absolutely nothing to do with playback of phonograph records. And the playback of phonograph record is what this article is about. Even if "phono" is an "oddity" to Brits the article name should reflect worldwide English usage. "Brits" make up a small part of all English speakers.

Again, contrary to what the "Brit" said, this article is in fact about ALL PHONO CARTRIDGES, not simply magnetic cartridges. He is simply wrong about that. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.172.120.237 (talk • contribs) 03:40, 23 September 2017‎ (UTC)
 * I've been looking around in related articles, and now believe the scope of this article should be trimmed to include only magnetic cartridges. Brief mention of piezoelectric phono pickups (crystal and ceramic) could be made in a history section, with a link to Phonograph, where they are discussed in further depth. Just plain Bill (talk) 11:27, 5 February 2018 (UTC)


 * I would favour renaming this as phono cartridge, but we have to recognise that it then becomes a different article.
 * Vinyl is not a current technology. There isn't a great deal of ongoing development and expansion to describe. One might even say that ceramic and crystal (non-magnetic) cartridges are obsolete - although I wouldn't make that claim for magnetic. We do need an article on the broader scope of phono cartridges, we do need one on crystal, we don't gain from having the magnetic content separate from this. Andy Dingley (talk) 13:38, 5 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Vinyl remains as a legacy medium, and turntables still exist in a niche market. The scope of an encyclopedia need not be limited to ongoing developments; there are plenty of articles dealing with historic topics. That having been said, I would just as easily favor renaming it as Andy suggests. That would entail rewriting this article, along with re-targeting incoming links from magnetic cartridge as needed. Another possibility, avoiding wasted motion as I see it, would be redirection to Phonograph, which appears to be in decent shape. Just plain Bill (talk) 14:03, 5 February 2018 (UTC)


 * I support 's suggestion to rename to Phono cartridge and increase scope of this article. We could move the contents of Phonograph here and leave a WP:SUMMARY there. ~Kvng (talk) 22:19, 28 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Very odd that people are still discussing whether phonograph records are a "legacy" technology. It really doesn't matter. This article attracts a lot of readers who want to know the history. Five years later no one has renamed and corrected it. Someone needs to jump in and get the work done. Vinyl records are still popular and will remain so for a long time to come. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.172.213.218 (talk) 00:28, 7 December 2021 (UTC)

output voltage
it is not unsefull to talk about an output voltage unless the reference velocity will be clearly defined. US or European standard, RMS or peak. It is usefull to give values in  ## mV  s/cm ( both RMS ). The ouput voltage (better as level in dBV) is important to discuss noise and overload (distortion).

--AK45500 (talk) 14:50, 23 June 2018 (UTC)