Anyone notice different amounts of surface noise with different arms?

@lewm The Channel D phono stages have extremely accurate RIAA circuits. Digital RIAA correction has less distortion. But good phono stages already have very low distortion. The difference is not significant. Next is the fact that going back and forth between analog and 24/192 is invisible. I have run this experiment with a number of audiophiles and none of them has been able to reliably identify either digital or analog.

@dhcod @rauliruegas I am not trying to win a battle. Raul, how a system should perform is entirely objective. The little tweaks for personal preference are the subjective part.  I am trying to highlight a way to drastically improve the performance of audio systems. I could care less if you want to minimize my arguments. @dhcod Virtually all records made today are made from digital masters with just a few exceptions. If all records give you a headache that is really tragic. I suspect this is just another example of confirmation bias. How you interpret what you are hearing is based on the experience you have had with live music and a variety of systems. How many have you put together? Do you even measure your own system? Have any idea what it is doing? If you have experience ears can be very useful, but you need a reference to be able to interpret what you are hearing. 

I'm hoping that gammaman will share his experience.

@richardbrand Yes, you can see it on my system page.

@rauliruegas, @dhcod ​​@cleeds  I just finished up on gammaman's system. Perhaps he will comment.

@dhcod It seem you do not understand that the audio memory of humans is extremely short and severely subject to conformation bias. Differences of defects have to become very obvious obvious. Under blinded conditions most "extreme improvements" can not be reliably identified. I can drop 3 kHz 6 dB with a Q of 1 and you would never be able to tell the difference. At 12 dB q 1 an experienced would notice it immediately. The best listeners know what they want to hear. Most of us have no idea exactly what it is they want to hear because they never measure their system. Do you have a measurement microphone? Most audiophiles have never heard state of the art imaging because so few systems perform at that level and you can not know what SOTA imaging is until you have heard it. Fortunately, spatial cues are much easier to remember.  

@rauliruegas Raul, passive subwoofers and electrostatic speakers are totally analog. Do you know what raw digital sounds like? You ever heard a fax signal on a telephone? 

I can go back and forth between analog and 24/192 and nobody blinded could ever tell the difference and I do mean nobody. You have obviously no experience with the power of digital signal processing and don't say you do because I know for a fact you do not. Because I can correct room issues and differences between the channels my imaging is vastly superior to anything you have heard. Digital crossovers are more accurate with less distortion than any analog two way crossover. Because I use subwoofers I can adjust the bass any way I want without affecting the performance of the rest of the system. I have the most accurate. lifelike bass you have ever heard. Nobody has subwoofers like mine. 

If you think your system is great, I can make it greater and I mean so much greater blinding would be unnecessary. Differences between cartridges would pale in comparison.  My wife could instantly tell the difference.  Disagree all you want, but I would love to be able to prove that to you. I just digitized a system around Magico S7s and JL Audio subwoofers. The owner's jaw dropped and eyes went wide when he heard it for the first time. He has a Basis Debut turntable with a Graham arm and a zillion records. He will never use a purely analog system again. 

@dhcod I like sound, period. I did not say digital versions always sounds better. Digital sources can in the end provide better reproduction with lower noise and distortion. Whether or not a digital version sounds better is very dependent on mastering. At this point in history 95% of all music is recorded digitally. As for your group think, unless that type of comparison is done very carefully, blinding the panel it is virtually meaningless. 

The greatest sources of signal corruption are the loudspeakers and the room they are in. A system can be measured and these deficiencies corrected with digital signal processing without adding any distortion or noise. If starting with a digital recording it is best to stay digital until the very end of the chain, the amplifier. Going back and forth between formats is never a good thing. 

Anyone who always prefers analog sources and systems has a psychological issue. Nothing in this life is always except death and taxes.

@rauliruegas All my records are in effect digitized as my phono stage runs directly into the ADC of the Lynx Hilo. I have gone back and forth between analog RIAA correction and digital RIAA correction and I can not tell the difference. I can record records either way. As far as the performance of my turntable is concerned, it is right up there with the very best. It has no bling. It is the cost effective way of going about it. I put it together to play music not stare at it. Could it be better? Yes, with the addition of a tangential tracking tonearm. No turntable/cartridge/tonearm combination can compete with the best 24/96 or 24/192 files. I have heard some great analog systems over the years and none of them can compete with a digitally corrected one. 

@richardbrand My DEQX preamp has a Volumio chip in it which connects with a multitude of streaming services. After doing some research I subscribed to Qobuz and have been very happy with it. It is the first streaming service I have heard that matches Channel D's Pure Music program. I'll look into Presto Classical, Thanx for that.

@richardbrand I use a Sota Cosmos Vacuum table with a Schroder CB arm. My current cartridges are the Lyra Atlas Lambda SL, Ortofon MC Diamond, Soundsmith Hyperion MR and the Shure V15 V Jico SAS/B. The phono stages are the MM stage in the DEQX preamp and a Channel D Seta L Plus. 

You might consider have those few records digitized. Those of us with Channel D phono stages can do that for you at 24/192 resolution. I raid friend's record collections all the time. 

@richardbrand IMHO, you should dress it up and sell it then get a better amp or digital processor. The only reason to have a turntable is if you have a lot of records. If you do not, I always suggest you spend the money on digital music. Those of us that are older and have a ton of records have a psychiatric illness, megavinylosis. It is a lifelong illness responsible for the consolidation of trillions of tons of petroleum, rice paper and cardboard, enough energy to light up NYC for a decade. On the bright side it also sequestered tons of CO2. That's great marketing slogan, Save the Environment, Buy Records.  

@richardbrand I think you need to know that I am all over digital reproduction. My phono stage runs directly into a Lynx Hilo, a studio ADC, switcher, USB DAC. RIAA correction is done by computer. I have been using a digital pre amp with room correction and subwoofer management since 1996. 

You are correct. The phonograph cartridge is a vibration measurement device and it does not care where the vibration comes from. However, other than the primary suspension resonance in the 8 to 12 Hz range, a well designed tonearm does not contribute much. Because the moving mass in a cartridge is so low it has trouble exciting any resonance in the much heavier arm. None of my cartridges display any audible needle talk. What I find rather funny is people have their turntables totally open and exposed to the sound their system is making. Ideally, you would have your turntable in another room. My turntable is floating inside a plinth with a heavy duty dust cover that is totally sealed when closed and attenuates sound by a measured 10 dB. In spite of extremely expensive cartridges of all types it still can not compete with a well mastered, high resolution digital file. I play records because I have always played records. Playing records is psychologically comforting because it has given me decades of pleasure. I still go to record stores just to flip through, it's my version of an amusement park. Shopping online can not compare. But, If I really want to blow someone away I'll pick a digital file every time. Even Raul agrees!

@rauliruegas Wow are you nitpicking Raul. Give a guy a break. Just imagine if you could align two identical cartridges in two different arms of exactly the same effective mass and bearing quality. Between you and me most people can't hear the difference between different cartridges in different arms. 

My system have distortion? Not on your life Raul. My system is perfect.....just like yours. 

@richardbrand Exactly right, the best arms do sound the same, like nothing. They have no sound at all. The sound is on the record. Cartridges are not supposed to sound either, they make an electric signal. The job of the tonearm is to position the cartridge over the record so it can do its job accurately and transfer that electrical signal without modification. Speakers make sound. Any sound made by the cartridge or tonearm is distortion. While some distortion is euphonic I am of the belief that all distortion is bad and should be minimized. 

It is not the arm. It is a slight difference in the cartridge alignment. Small changes in overhang and VTA can affect the amount of surface noise you hear. All the best arms of similar mass are going to sound exactly the same as long as cartridge alignment is exactly the same.

@larryi I wish I had your imagination.