I wanted to let you know that I followed your coaching to the letter and after several more hours was able to substantially improve the results. As you predicted, however, the low numbers I originally reported seem unrealistic. Not sure what happened there. In any event thank you ever so much for your help.
42 responses Add your response
AM is a bit of climb but very useful once you are comfortable. You are making good progress. I still think you are confusing the terms. You need to get a firm grasp on the difference in zenith and azimuth or we are talking past each other. like this
you can adjust zenith on almost all headshells, if they have slotted holes, you can rotate the cartridge and adjust zenith. rotate it looking down from the top. Many do not have azimuth adjustments, rotate it looking at it from the front. you should be able to get these closer 25.42 db (r) 23.12 db by adjusting azimuth. Round off your readings as you look at them.. 23.1 and 23.12 are not significantly different I think the .45% and .48% IMD you reported earlier is suspiciously low, perhaps impossible. While 5-6% is much higher, it is not horrible and more realistic. I suspect you can change the Zenith to lower them further then try VTA. changing the Zenith, turning the cartridge ever so slightly, I mean teeny, tiny amounts where you aren’t even sure you moved it, can make a huge difference. It is just something you have to keep doing until you get a feel for it. Screws a bit too loose and it moves too much and won’t stay, a bit tighter and you can’t move it. I’m talking about turning (twisting) it looking straight down from above rotating it clockwise and anti-clockwise.. again, so little you aren’t even sure it moved, a fraction of a degree. then you have to check Azimuth and overhang and VTF and VTA again, and so forth. Unless you slid the cartridge back and forth while adjusting zenith then overhang won’t change but check, VTA and VTF likewise, but check them.
|
I did two things. First I played band 2 and recorded the db difference without changing anything. 22.56 db (r) and 23.38 db (l). Second, per the recommendation of Louis of Ortofon, USA, I changed from the Jico head shell that I have been using for years for all my cartridges, and substituted the OEM head shell. Two points of interest to me were: 1) the OEM head shell weighs 8 grams, the Jico weighs 12 grams and 2) the OEM head shell does have zenith adjustment, which I mistakenly thought it lacked. Anyway here in abbreviated form (skipping parameters that are unchanged from my previous report) is the new data: 4. Azimuth L/R + VTA 25.42 db (r) 23.12 db (l) ; 6.6% (l) 5.1% (r) (note much higher than previous numbers) 5. Channel Balanace. 0.71 db 6. Vibration test is meaningless 7. Resonance. Lateral Peak. 8.583 Hz, Vertical Peak 8.577 HZ I also ran the track ability tests on the Ortofon Test Record. So with all that done and the numbers changed I can't say that I hear any difference. I am getting more comfortable with AnalogMagik. It does seem that the resonance test works, but failing it does not necessarily mean that the sky is falling. |
I read the tutorial. V2 works a bit differently than V1, but what I stated about azimuth is true nonetheless. For azimuth, the goal is to minimize crosstalk and to make it equal in both channels as I described. For VTA, the goal is to minimize distortion. While VTA and azimuth are interrelated, they are different. You stated the distortion you measured which is an indication of optimized VTA. . This does not mean you optimized azimuth by minimizing and making crosstalk equal. From the tutorial. which states what I did about azimuth. I am not misunderstanding anything.
|
The numbers I provided are the IM distortion values. I did not record the db difference values, but will go back and do so later today and post them. I have a PT appointment this morning, recovering from knee replacement surgery, so I can't do it right now and it is not trivial to set up the test for me. In the meantime please look at Tutorial #9 as I believe it will end your misunderstanding. |
That can’t be correct. For this test you are playing a 1 KHz tone in one channel and measuring how much lower it is in the other channel. Lower is negative dB. -20dB is 10 times less and not so good -30db is about 32 times less and what better cartridges can do, or close to it -40dB is 100 times less and very unusual as well as very, very good You should typically be getting readings in the minus 25-30 dB range. The goal is for them to be as close together as possible with about .5dB difference pretty good. So for instance -27.7dB for L and -28.1dB for R would be .4dB difference so pretty good. The numbers you stated make no sense. https://www.analogmagik.com/azimuth
I assume Dave was using Analog Magik and using the VTA test if he has version 1. He has discussed this over at What’s Best. Version 2 has a Zenith test but I have V1 so haven’t used it. For V1 measure distortion with the VTA track, twist and measure until you get it as low and even as you can. Typically starting closer to 10% after aligning visually, I’ve found 2-3% to be really good. |
"In theory it should if the effective mass is low enough to render the resonance frequency of the combination using an LVB is in the 8-12 db range in both planes." As I am sure you know, frequency is measured in Hz, not in db. So it might seem you meant to write that the amplitude of the resonance is 8-12db. But the desired resonant frequency is also said to be in the 8-12Hz range. So I wonder what you actually meant to say. Also, further up the thread, you wrote "Azimuth L to R. 0.03% difference (note my VTA adjuster is frozen but visually it looks OK)". What does that mean? Does it mean that there was a .03% difference in interchannel crosstalk, in terms of db? That is a very very tiny difference that I doubt can be measured reliably. Some months or a few years ago, Dave Slagle was at my house, and he adjusted my ART7 cartridge to correct for its zenith error. To do that, he had with him a laptop with some sort of measuring program on it. But also we listened after each tweaking of zenith (made by twisting the cartridge in the headshell). There was a profound positive difference both aurally and by computer measurement, when he got the zenith optimized. I was really rather amazed. Since then, that headshell and that cartridge are permanently mated, so far as I am concerned. |
After ruminating per our last exchange I decided to ask Louis at Ortofon for comment. I sent him a copy of my test report. He expressed alarm at the resonance result and asked if I was using an aftermarket head shell (yes a Jico) because in his experience the 2M cartridges are compatible w/SL1200 TTs. He stated that the measured resonance failure would result in miss tracking and audible distortion. So, I played through my Ortofon Test Record paying particular attention to the Tracking ability tracks and can hear no miss tracking. My conclusion parallels yours that the deficiency must be in the AnalogMagik test for this parameter. |
My VPI HW 40 w/Hyperion passed the test. I was laughing to myself thinking about this last night. First, no wonder my Technics sounds the best it has ever done. It has a brand new LVB installed, which is far better than the regular Black that it replaced which was also defective in any event. Also, like you, I wonder now how important the resonance test is. Or put another way, what are the practical ramifications of this failure? I thought it might be interesting to ask Ortofon for comment. I have been interested in their new tonearm anyway and wonder if replacing the stock Technics tonearm would offer an appreciable improvement on the GAE. In theory it should if the effective mass is low enough to render the resonance frequency of the combination using an LVB is in the 8-12 db range in both planes. |
I have set up four cartridges using the Analog Magik software, and all four should be ideal using the standard resonance calculation, based on weight of tonearm and cartridge compliance; however, all four fail markedly using the Analog Magik test LP. This makes me wonder how valid the test LP really is… |
Here is the test summary. Date of setup: July 26, 2025 Turntable: Technics SL1200GAE Cartridge: Ortofon 2M Black LVB AnalogMagik V.2 Initial Setup was accomplished using mechanical & visual aids, i.e. Feickert protractor, Ortofon Stylus for gauge etc. 1. Speed. 33.3 (per discussion in the thread this was only used to verify that the program & hardware were working and adjusted properly. It is agreed that this is not a valid test for the turntable.) 2. VTF. I decided to use the 1.6 gram set point specified by Ortofon because there was no improvement in distortion levels when it was varied. 3. Antiskate. Here again the setting provided by Technics worked as well as any so after fiddling with it, I decided to accept the factory adjustment. 4. Azimuth L to R. 0.03% difference (note my VTA adjuster is frozen but visually it looks OK) 5. Zenith Angle Error. 1.01% 6. Channel Balance. 0.01 db 7. Vibration. Negligible. 8. Resonance. Failed. >20db in both lateral and vertical planes. This surprises me because in theory this bumble bee shouldn’t fly. In fact this turntable has never sounded this good. So much for theory. In closing I want to thank all of you for your questions and comments. This dialog has been tremendously helpful to me as I have learned how to work with AnalogMagik. If any of you are ever in South Florida and you want to bring along your turntable I would be delighted to meet you and setup your turntable using it. |
The greatest thing about Analog Magik is the peace of mind I get when I am done. For years I sat listening and wondering if my cartridge was aligned. Now, even though there are too many variables to ever get it perfect, I am confident enough in my alignment that I can push those doubts away and my listening enjoyment has gone up tremendously. On a practical level, I agree with the above that VTA changes do not make tremendous differences, Never have and never will be the guy who changes VTA for every record depending on thickness. Life is too short. When in doubt I use the Fremer method with a USB microscope to make sure I am somewhere near 92 degrees and leave it there. https://www.analogplanet.com/content/video-showing-setting-stylus-rake-angle-using-digital-usb-microscope I do find the Azimuth adjustments to be very useful, very audible. I have version 1 and I use VTA test for Zenith. Typically after aligning by eye with a protractor I measure closer to 10 % distortion but with teeny tiny twist of the cartridge get it down to around 2%. No way to do that visually. Zenith and azimuth I see as the 2 things that make the most difference. I suggest replacing the cheap ART interface he recommends with something better. I have found, as have others that the gain control on the ART does not track perfectly so adds difference in level between channels. There are many Pro Audio Interfaces to choose from. I have an Apogee Duet that works great, and the DAC also sounds very good so I use that when I want to stream.. not often. https://www.sweetwater.com/shop/studio-recording/audio-interfaces/ I have not tried Wally, but with all of the + feedback it seems to be a fine way to do things. I have too many cartridges to be able to afford to send them all to Wally for analysis. Add all of the hardware you have to buy to implement his system and the cost of Analog Magik is a better option for me.
|
I agree with what Mac wrote above, and want to answer lewm's question as accurately as possible. This discussion and the questions back and forth have been immensely helpful to me. My new LVB stylus arrived yesterday and seems to work just fine. I am going to try to put a few more hours on it today and then tomorrow I will go through the Analogmagik procedure and take copious notes as I go and will document the results here. Hopefully that will give anyone interested better insight into the program warts and all. Here is a link to the website with the tutorials that I will follow: https://www.analogmagik.com/copy-of-setup-tutorials-instructions |
@lewm The shim isn't for zenith. You are correct, you have to change the alignment of the cart in the headshell. The "Wally Zenith" provides the correct reference point adjusted for the specific error in your cart. But as I said you have to know precisely what the error is. There are other Wally tools for azimuth & antiskating (which also measures tonearm friction). Both companies have video tutorials. Check them out. I think the main takeaway is (and perhaps @billstevenson agrees?), that conventional tools and methods will only get you in the ballpark (maybe with decent seats). Other than truly dialed in sound, the secondary benefit for me is piece of mind. I no longer second guess the setup or feel the need to tweak it. I just enjoy it.
|
So what does Wally or Analog Magik do to correct Zenith error? I have heard talk of a shim, in the case of Wally, but I don't see how a shim can correct zenith. Seems to me you need to twist the cartridge with respect to the long axis of the headshell in order to bring zenith error down to zero or close to it. Bill, when you mention azimuth, are you aiming for equal crosstalk in both channels by electronic measurement, or are you aiming for setting the stylus square or symmetrical with respect to the groove walls? |
The Wally zenith tool is easy to use IF you send the cart in for microscopy analysis which precisely measures zenith error as well as providing a custom shim to optimize SRA/VTA at the headshell, which is what I did. Otherwise you are correcting by ear which I imagine isn't easy, hence Bill's comment that AnalogMagik is easier. I have not used AnalogMagik so I am not advocating one method over the other. |
Lewm, Now you know of two and I can tell you from having used both, that for correcting zenith AnalogMagik is far easier to use. The other parameter that by measurement contributes significantly is azimuth. These two together, azimuth and zenith, contribute more distortion, and in consequence offer the greatest opportunity for improvement of all of the variables. |
You ask a fair question, what am I hearing? How do I characterize the sound of distortion? Or more specifically, when distortion is reduced, what is the result? I am not good at describing sound. My records sound clearer, more open. An analogy might be drawn with photography. It is like the difference between a well depicted image and one that is a little bit blurred. I am still hearing that it is a Steinway backing Sarah Vaughan, but both are easier to hear. Does that make sense? The difference is not subtle I can tell you that. |
Most cartridges will exhibit at least some zenith error. Parenthetically, for those who don't already know, zenith for us audiophiles refers to the angle that the stylus contact patches for left and right channel information, respectively, make with the groove wall. Someone else quoted the industry tolerance for a +/-5 degree error, which is huge. Because of zenith error, any subsequent effort to "zero in" on the alignment of an overhung, pivoted tonearm is folly. You won't get the null points where you think they are, if indeed you get any null points at all on the playable surface of the LP. So, for me, once you've set overhang and VTA, the most important thing is to correct for the inherent zenith error built into the cartridge. And yet, only Wally has marketed a tool to correct it, so far as I know, and I have heard that the tool is difficult to use and/or may require sending the cartridge to Wally. But if you are finicky about alignment, you gotta face the music. |
AnalogMagik is a distortion analysis program. For example, you want to measure the amount of IM distortion in both the left and right channels at the current setting, then you want to see if changing the current setting or position can improve the numbers. If you discover that no matter what settings you make does not result in a change in the IM distortion then you know something is wrong. You check a different cartridge and observe that changing the position results in changes in distortion, so you know the program is working. So you check a third cartridge and so on to confirm what is happening. All this takes time of course. Now you start to understand why I am seeking help by starting this thread. And believe me, having you guys to talk about it, the back and forth is extremely helpful. Thank you. |
Thanks Bill - this makes complete sense. The same could be said for a defective tone arm wire etc. Although I would have thought a defective cart would have been disclosed by sound alone. |
Hi Bill, I am reading the thread with interest. You wrote that adjusting the azimuth and zenith are the two parameters that made the most difference. Can you elaborate on that a bit more? Specifically what is the listening experience like before and after the adjustment, wider / deeper soundstage, more dynamic….? Thanks! |
Oh I understand now. In trying to setup my SL1200GAE first with the 2M Black, the AnalogMagik software revealed that the cartridge is defective. Wally tools did not uncover that fact. Similarly when I setup the same TT with the VAS Nova stereo cartridge AnalogMagic disclosed a problem with arm resonance in the vertical plane, again Wally tools did not. |
I am familiar with Wally tools, have used them, subscribe to JR's blog and have a friend who has loaned me his full set of tools. The two approaches are fully compatible and in fact if you can first set up your TT with Wally tools, then use AnalogMagik(the correct spelling of the program - I got it wrong) to fine tune you will get the result more easily methinks. As I gain more experience and confidence with the program I am coming to the conclusion that the key parameters are azimuth and zenith. It is here where the magic (or MagiK) occurs. Of course there is more to it than that. For example, Wally tools did not disclose limitations in two of my cartridges. I am also learning that VTA is not that big of a deal really, meaning it can be way off without adding much distortion. This is the kind of thing that AnalogMagik can show. Bill |
Hi Bill, I don’t have experience with Analogue Magik but I’ve read this thread and their website. From both it is clear that their method is time consuming, iterative and not guaranteed. I’ll assume when it does work, it works quite well. For those following this thread looking for set up methods better than eyeballing, tuning by ear or using various protractors etc., I’d like to mention the process I went through with Wally Analogue & JR Bosclair. The primary reason I mention JR is because I used his microscopy analysis service on my MSL Signature Platinum. This provided 2 important (critical) data points: stylus zenith error (almost 4 degrees) and SRA. Published zenith error from 2 of the 3 major manufacturers of stylus cantilever assemblies is +/- 5 degrees. That is a lot! Once known, zenith error can be accurately accounted for in set up, and SRA/VTA is corrected with a custom shim so that the tone arm can remain parallel with the platter. Including the full Wally tool set, the cost was about $1200, and took about 4 hours of my time including watching tutorial videos. This price also includes having JR pretty much on call to talk you through questions/issues during set up. When the process is complete, you are done, other than re-checking antiskating & VTF every 6 months or so, or after moving the TT. The confidence I have in my cart/TT set up is high enough that I never think about it. I would imagine this process and tool set could potentially be used in conjunction with Audio Magik to give a you a significant "leg up" and maybe save time and frustration, albeit at not insignificant cost. |
FWIW, what on the surface should seem to be a very simple thing to understand and measure, wow and flutter, is anything but that. I have not yet had an opportunity to work on a belt drive TT. That day will come, but the two I have ready to hand now are both direct drive. So it is a given that speed is correct. I think we can agree that the wow and flutter measurement I am getting is what is on the test record. In addition to surface irregularities (minimal) there is also the eccentricity of the hole (minimal). Note: minimal is not zero. Both of my measured arms are pivoted, one 9" and one 10", presumably arm length has some impact we’ll call factor X. I am not sure what the practical implications of any of this are on the program. Logically it can be agreed that both the speed and the wow and flutter tests should be set aside. At least for DD turntables. I think that is useful. |
The only issue I have with the Analog Magic is their speed test. It is not possible to accurately measure platter speed using a test tone. The only accurate way is to use a rotary function generator. Here is a quote from Bruce Thigpen - Eminent Technology
|
Hi Bob, Thanks for sharing your insight. It does not surprise me that Analog Magic is used by professionals. It is clearly a professional tool. Although the program itself is easy to use, getting optimal results in set up is time consuming and not guaranteed. There is skill involved here, which is why I was hoping to find someone to mentor me. Take Care, Bill |
I personally use analog magic at home and at audio shows. It is a great tool for setup and I definitely notice the difference. But, as you say, it is a lengthy process to do properly, as you have to go back and forth to fine tune every step. Watching the tutorial videos on https://www.analogmagik.com/turntable-setup helps considerably. I know at least one turntable setup person, Dr. Vinyl, who uses this software when he sets up turntables for his clients. I am not an expert, by any means, but this software works great for me. |
I read through the posts at WBF before I bought the software, but I don’t participate there, rather I was hoping to find someone to converse with here where I am more comfortable. Anyway, I am a new user, have used it so far on two TT, my VPI HW-40, and on my SL 1200 GAE. On the VPI, I have mounted a SoundSmith Hyperion at the moment, and I have spent perhaps 6-8 hours working on that combination so far. I intend to go back to it, as it is an iterative process where the adjustment of one parameter affects others and so you go back and forth trying to achieve the best balance of all the variables. For those who are not familiar with Analog Magic, each variable (i.e. VTF, Zenith, Antiskate, VTA etc.) is evaluated by measuring distortion. When an adjustment is made to lower the distortion of any of these variables, obviously it can affect others. Hence the need to go back and check and readjust and so forth. This is no different from what I have done for years using test records and an "O" scope, but it is orders of magnitude more advanced. I have learned several things so far. The improvement so far on my VPI/Hyperion cannot be overstated, it is profound. I have also been able to vindicate VPI’s claim that antiskate does nothing useful on their arm. On my Technics, I have tried setting up two cartridges: Ortofon 2M Black and VAS Nova. The 2M Black stylus is defective, not worn out, defective, I’ve owned it for years and did not know. A replacement LVB is on order. The VAS Nova set up ok, but failed the arm resonance test in the vertical plain, although it passed in the lateral. When there is a failure, be it the TT or the cartridge, as was reported in the referenced WBF thread, I don’t see that as a weakness of Analog Magic. If, for example, the TT can’t pass the speed test and it can’t be adjusted, there is a clear message. In my case as cited here with cartridges, I need to change cartridges or live with the distortion. Facts are facts. To say Analog Magic does not work with all TTs is true, it will not work with broken or defective ones. |
It’s not ideal or universal for any TT. In my case I had to set the VTA level higher than suggested due to the fact that lower border of VTA adjustment was limited by the bottom of tonearm lift base and at the time when correct (parallel) VTA level was set the bottom of lift device was actually touching the arm board and didn’t move whole way. In simple words, some TT has unique design and mechanical specs which could make difficult implementation of the program. |