A Discussion About What Level Of Analog To Stop At

I listened to 100 HZ as crossover and found the presentation to bee too forward and sometimes a bit hard. I then ran another sweep for 90Hz, and that one is below the threshold. So at this point I am going to listen to 80 Hz and 90 Hz and see which I prefer. The differences between crossover points are more profound than I would have expected. Given the nature of the speaker I can see this happening, its just a learning point of a different format. This is such an awesome hobby we have. 

I dunno. I think of vinyl listening as eliminating unnecessary gear and leaving it to a very solid preamp, tube preferably, and phono preamp.

I’m not into anything digital into the chain, whatsoever, simply because you can do it. Vinyl was created when? But digital was created much later.

Different strokes for different folks, and each of us has different preferences. I have Electrostats in a smaller than average room that’s completely treated. I just wouldn’t consider having digital anything in the chain. But I respect that you obviously believe much differently. Best of luck!

@coltrane1 A vinyl Source, a acoustically treated room and nearfield experiences with a ESL Speaker in use.

This is Bliss, it is the one that got me totally immersed into Jazz, especially Live Recordings.

Dear @neonknight : " Level Of Analog To Stop At "

It’s weird that you ask " nalog " when your system is running digital. The fact that you or any one owns an analog rig and using digital process does not means you are really in analog because you are not.

Analog is analog if we are 100% using analog technology. I remember the indignation of audiophiles whe discovered that MoFy LPs was digital ! !

Anyway, is each one of us privilege to say " analog " even if we are not. It’s useless t you that I can tell you other changes down there when between other things you are using current phono with a voltage device as the cartridge, never mind.

At least my subs integration advise working for you.

R.

Okay, I'll bite.  I have a high system (room $150K, equipment $70K?, speakers $70K?)  I purchased a VPI VI, super platter on a Townshend seismic sink, VPI power supply, 1989 highly modified SME IV arm, Dynavector 20XL2 L, Zesto Allesso SUT, Grover Huffman phono ICs, power cables and custom phono pre-amp.  Why would I not use a higher end cartridge?  I used up a Benz Ruby 3 ($3K 2006).  Because, the cartridge permits me to enjoy nearly all of my 28,500 LPs.  I've heard many high end $7K to $17K cartridges.  They can extract the maximum signal from my best pressed/mastered LPs.  Often, they fail to provide satisfaction from 50s and 60s LPs, mono LPs and just not well mastered LPs.  My friends have a similar experience.  We also prefer flat frequency response cartridges with no rising high end.  Three best friends use the same cartridge and one regrets buying the Dynavector XX2 and wants to go back to the 20XL2 H, another wants the Karat 17DX as he loves the high resolution as opposed to the more balanced body/resolution cartridge.  

To each is own but I don't intend to upgrade unless I get a bigger pile of cash, then it's possibly a more exotic turntable such as a Kronos or other.  

My other turntable is a VPI 19-4 (originally 19-1),  Funny thing is the sprung base plate on springs around a rubber footer.  Works great in isolation.  

Dear @fleschler  : But for what you post you stay totally in the analog domain.

"" We also prefer flat frequency response cartridges with no rising high end.  ""

Yes, historycal almost all of us prefer flat frequenncy. In the old times all top cartridges ( and not top ones too. ) came with the frequency response chart 20hz-20khz and the channel separation in that chart, today no single cartridge comes with.

Ortofon comes with no flat frequency on purpose from several years ago when in its deep research with its golden ears panel made it " thousands of blind test with D2D LP recordings knows by the panel gentlemans whre in those test they listened the cartridge with flat frequency and that same cartridges ( differents ones. ) with up frequency from 19khz-20khz by around 2db and at the end all ´panel gentlemans prefered the those upper 2db in the cartridges. So it's not that Ortofon can't  offer its cartridges with flat FR.

That panel in many ways was and is rigth because those up 2db compensate for the fall down of the inverse RIAA eq. where HF " suffers " and we can listen that deep/fast fall and when we use ( phono stage ) the 3.18us RIAA pole we can attest it. I normally use that RIAA pole.

R.

Curious, Raul. I went from the BM Ruby 3 that the OP likes, to an Ortofon Kontrapunkt C. At first I thought it was "scratchy" so detailed was the top end, but after a while I came to like it, and still do. All that was before I discovered the magic of MI cartridges, but as you've read, I keep the K.C around, and maybe I should re-tip the Ruby 3. Problem is, I've run out of tonearms!

I like a BM Ruby? That is news to me. 

@fleschler  : but today cartridge manufacturers just give us no FR chaRTS AND MAYBE THAT'S STARTED HAPPENING DUE THAT NO ONE AUDIOPHILE ASK FOR OR CARES ABOUT.

Today audio items specs are almost with no true interest to audiophiles as in the old times when professional magasines as Audio, Stereo Review or High Fidelity made its audio items reviews with in deep live measurements.

Little by little the AHEE  said us that specs just does not matters but what says the ears and that's it.

R.

I looked at a used Walker Proscenium, but my dealer talked me out of it citing its complexity. Also, IIRC the founder passed away, so don’t know about support.

The OP has a very nice rig, no apparent chain weaknesses. What level to stop at depends on your contentment, curiosity, and wallet. It’s a hobby, whatever you find enjoyable to do.

A turntable change may be beneficial, perhaps try high mass to get deeper bass. 

@rauliruegas Absolutely incorrect.  I have 11,500 CDs.  I also use a digital recording deck and I have a DAT machine and tapes as well.  

It is wrong in my opinion (obviously) that manufacturers do not supply frequency response graphs.  The rising high end is why I do not prefer Ortofons or Lyras.  I prefer Dynavectors and many Audio Technica cartridges instead.  I have no problem with a flat high end cartridge.  I primarily listen to classical and jazz.  Rock and electronica are usually heard in the digital domain although I do have several hunder Rock LPs.  

@neonknight 

I like a BM Ruby? That is news to me. 

My apologies: it was @fleschler who likes his Ruby 3.

@kennyc I had similar thoughts about the Walker, and all that brass is ugly! 

The Scheu turntable weighs 85 pounds, so it's kind of high mass

When I first bought it I emailed Scheu inquiring about arm board and lubrication. Never heard from them. Makes me reluctant about long term ownership, but for now it's a lovely table. 

Dear @fleschler  : Sorry but I only was talking of the rig you posted that was analog. My reference to digital was only because the OP pass the analog signal through digital meaning is not more analog, at least is what I understand by his posts.

As you I like digital too and in several ways outperforms analog, specially in the bass range.

Today every one can enjoy both medium by separate.

R.

With regard to the level of analog you should stop at, I would offer one thought. So many turntables and arms simply trade one sonic value for another. The question to ask is "does a given turntable and arm offer something unique in terms of technology that will take my analog to the next level?" The turntables and arms that do this are made by Kronos. Their technology of counter-rotating platters improves every aspect of TT performance. Not just different but better.