HI CHRIS - ANSWERS IN CAPITALS BELOW:
Dave - just so we understand.
so no noise in your system with NO pump on - stylus in groove - and the preamp volume high. RIGHT
this is with a stock ET2 which is designed to work at about 3 psi. RIGHT
When you turn the pump on there is no noise in your midrange driver up to 3.5 psi, RIGHT
So we can assume the ET2 with your pump works well to 3.5 as designed ? YES
In fact it is quiet to just under 5 psi. So all is good.
but at 5 psi you start to hear what sounds like air (like tube rush) in your midrange driver. YES
It is not a mechanical piston type noise, or drone like noise - it is the sound of air - maybe like air escaping ?
NOT MECHANICAL OR PISTON NOISE OR DRONING, JUST THE SOUND OF AIR, LIKE AIR ESCAPING. SIMILAR TO THE AIR SOUND YOU HEAR WHEN INFLATING CAR TIRES FROM AN AIR TANK WITH NO COMPRESSOR, BUT SOFTER.
It gets louder to 7 psi and then stays the same to 17 psi. RIGHT. MAYBE SLIGHTLY LOUDER AS PRESSURE IS INCREASED.
try something - with your system on mute and the ET2 raised and at rest.
crank the PSI up all the way to 21 and put your ear right next to the ET2 manifold- do u hear any sounds like a balloon with a leak ?
DID THIS AND FOUND OUT THAT THE AIR INLET NOZZLE WAS LOOSE WHERE IT SCREWS INTO THE ARM HOUSING. HAD TO TURN IT 180 DEGREES TO TIGHTEN. NOW AIRLINE FORMS A U-CURVE BETWEEN ARMBOARD HOLE AND INLET NIPPLE. LOOKS FUNNY BUT WORKS. NO MORE AIR LEAK THERE. WILL ASK BRUCE ABOUT THIS.
If yes is there air coming from a bolt ?
I STILL HEAR A VERY,VERY FAINT AIR NOISE FROM AROUND THE BEARING AREA. TIGHTENED BOTTOM VTA ADJUSTMENT BOLTS TO SEE IF ANY EFFECT , BUT NONE. CHECKED OTHER BOLTS QUICKLY. I BELIEVE THE REMAINING AIR NOISE IS COMING FROM THE BEARING ITSELF, BUT IMPOSSIBLE TO TELL FOR SURE.
Try wiggling the tube at the input nozzle around. It would be shame if a great pump system and that connection at the plug is not tight. If there is a leak at the plug - pull the plastic out - cut an inch off so the plastic is tight and fresh - re-insert. TUBE WAS TIGHT BUT NOZZLE WAS LOOSE - SEE ABOVE.
Is there significant air coming from the manifold where the spindle enters and exits? You will feel the air coming out with your finger near both ends. NONE DETECTABLE AT ~3PSI BUT DEFINITELY FEEL AIR ESCAPING AT EITHER END OF THE BEARING HOUSING AT 7+psi - MORE AS AIR PRESSURE IS INCREASED, BUT NO "KICKBACK" OF ARM AT END OF TRAVEL AS OTHERS HAVE REPORTED.
With the info you provided it sounds to me like the HP manifold would fix this as its lungs are designed to inhale the higher PSI. SURE HOPE SO!
Frogman uses the 0910 and says that it does a great job with this HP 2.0 bearing at 17psi.
Frogman provides clear support for the HP ET2 model with the same pump.
It is very easy to spend other peoples money :^)
FROGMAN IS AWESOME!
Since you are hearing benefits of the higher pressure - but you have a stock ET2 it makes sense to me to do it, if you feel its worth it? Bruce charges a reasonable amount for both upgrades ? Making the ET2 HP or by using his magic to transform the ET 2.0 into the 2.5 HP. As you said this would take a few weeks. I WILL CALL BRUCE TOMORROW TO CONFIRM THAT MY ORDER IS STILL IN QUEUE. SURE WOULD BE GREAT IF HE MAGICALLY FOUND A 2.5 BEARING ;^)
Some input from the others?
I recently called VPI about the leakage issue and they sent me some modified round rubber bushings to place around the outside of the schrader valve so that it seals the metal cap to the corner pods. Seems to be working great so far.
What a great service company. I bet they didn't charge you for those either, and if they did a very nominal charge.
THEY CHARGED $2.50 FOR A SET OF FOUR. ALSO GOT NICE PLUGS TO FILL THE HOLES IN THE TNT'S PLINTH WHERE THE TRI-PULLEYS WERE FOR $5 EACH.
I saw a set on "that auction site" for 400 bills. They show some deformation on the top. For that price, I would want an audible improvement over the air bladders in addition to eliminating the aggravation of maintaining level. Any opinion on that?
http://www.ebay.ca/itm/Audio-Technica-AT616-Pneumatic-Suspension-Audio-Insulator-4-pcs-/321244326789
THAT'S THEM
Probably 500 by the time they get to you.
I don't know what to say - everything in this crazy hobby just keeps going up in price.
What you see in the picture may be marks only and not an actual indent.
The seller can verify this.
Sounds like your VPI fix is working so I would hold off. I'd put money into the manifold ? RIGHT. MAYBE ALSO A NEW AUDIO NOTE WIRE LOOM PER FROGMAN. MY AYRE PHONOLINEPREAMP HAS XLR INPUTS FOR THE PHONO STAGE. WOULD LIKE TO GET THE BENEFIT OF THE DIFFERENTIALLY BALANCED CIRCUITRY AND ELIMINATE THE RCA TO XLR ADAPTERS I AM USING NOW AS WELL AS THE ARMWAND PLUG, ET RCA JACKS AND INTERCONNECTS (ALTHOUGH THEY ARE VERY GOOD ONES).
THANKS CHRIS! MUCH APPRECIATED.
DAVE |
Hello fellow ET owners! I recently resurrected my TNT/ET Two (2.0) rig and thanks to this thread and a lot of advice and encouragement from Frogman, the sound quality is now the best I have heard from my system: Dave's systemAfter converting the TNT to thread drive and eliminating the tri-pulley system, I made a 2 spring I-beam and moved the weight way out on the I-beam (past 6). All three of these tweaks made a significant improvement in sound quality and it was all free! I then started working toward improving the air supply to the arm. I was using a WISA 300 and the ET pump together out-of-phase into a makeshift surge tank (could not find the old Airtech in the attic). On Frogman’s recommendation, I build a 4ft long 4” PVC surge tank and bought a Medo AC0910 compressor. Assembled two regulator/filter units, a standard pressure one between the Medo and the surge tank and a second low pressure unit right before the arm. Also built a DIY baffle box to reduce the noise from the Medo. Made it quieter than the WISA. Pics of most of this are at the link above. One other improvement was adding a high-quality check valve under the table just before the arm. I read about this on another thread and it really makes a significant difference in sound quality, similar in magnitude to adding the bigger surge tank. Called Bruce about a HP manifold for the 2.0 (no more 2.5’s available) and he said it would take about 3 weeks to make one for me, so I am now experimenting with the new air rig and the standard 2.0 manifold. Started at 5psi at the arm. Good improvement over the old WISA/ET pump setup (~3psi at the arm). Went to 7 psi, not much difference from 5psi. Then cranked it up to 12psi. Blacker background, tighter and more tuneful bass, but maybe not quite as open in the highs as at 7psi (only slightly less open, if at all). Perhaps it is just smoother, eliminating some arm resonance occurring at the lower pressure that I mistook for open-ness… I was wondering if anyone has experience with even higher pressures with the stock 2.0 manifold? I think 12psi is probably pushing it, so thought I would ask here before going higher. From my reading of this thread, it seems that most of you have reached a pressure “threshold” where the sound quality starts to fall off. What exactly do you hear when this happens? I really like this thread and all suggestions will be appreciated. Thanks again to Frogman for his excellent tutelage and encouragement. Dave |
Thanks Frogman. I did experiment with higher pressures (15-17 psi) over the last couple days and my ears are telling me that sonic differences between 5psi and 12psi are very subtle and I really can't discern any improvement above 12psi. Maybe that's why Herb Wolfe (Airtech Audio) chose 12 psi for his WISA upgrade way back when (before the HP manifold was available)... I was reading back through this thread tonight and found this: 01-19-12: Apbiii ...My arm is a very early version, so certainly not optimized for higher pressure, and I can feel the air escaping at 19 psi but I can't hear it yet. I have not tried to determine if it introduces significant horizontal force. As I stated in my post I could hear some of the life or vibrancy go out of the music when I increased the pressure... and this: 01-20-12: Apbiii ...Frogman the change in sound with changing pressure was fairly subtle prior to the suspension change and since the change is essentially nonexistent... Seems to confirm what I am hearing with the stock manifold. Can't wait to get the HP manifold. While reading through the thread, I took a look at Ct0517's system(s). Holy cow! That's some serious gear. I was especially stoked to see his TNT setup with the Audio Technica A616 footers: >http://cgim.audiogon.com/i/vs/i/f/1366420145.jpg
I have come to terms with idiosyncrasies of the VPI air bladders, but I sure would like to find some of those feet. Would be interested in hearing Ct0517's impressions of the TNT with and without the AT616s. Best, Dave |
Hi Chris,
Thank you so much for the comprehensive response. Very helpful.
I shamelessly stole the TNT thread drive mod (all the way down to using unwaxed dental floss) from your posts here. BIG improvement!
Ditto for the second low pressure regulator that I installed behind the table (stole it from your posts). There is only 2 feet of 1/8" tubing and a check valve between this regulator and the arm, so all pressures quoted in my posts are essentially "at the arm".
My compressor is the Medo AC0910. Compared to the AC0110, the 0910 puts out a lot more air volume at higher pressures and has a higher max operating pressure (21.4psi vs 17.1psi for the 0110). Frogman uses the 0910 and says that it does a great job with this HP 2.0 bearing at 17psi. The compressor sits in my DIY baffle box in a closet about 12 feet from my listening position. Can't hear it there. The first regulator/filter and 4 foot long 4" PVC surge tank are in the closet as well.
I just did the Pump test. Turned the preamp volume up way beyond normal listening levels and put my ear close to the midrange drivers. No added noise at 3.5psi, but I hear a slight hissing sound from the midrange drivers starting at 5psi and increasing slightly in volume at 7psi. The noise does not pulse, but is a smooth and faint sound of air flow. Sounds a bit like tube rush. The noise does not seem to increase as I move up from 7psi to 17psi. I can't really hear it at my listening positions at max listening volume, but I think your point is that if I can hear it, it is affecting the performance of the arm. Any suggestions on how to reduce/eliminate this (may be solved with the HP manifold)?
Agree that the air bladders are, and have always been, a PITA. I recently called VPI about the leakage issue and they sent me some modified round rubber bushings to place around the outside of the schrader valve so that it seals the metal cap to the corner pods. Seems to be working great so far.
The AT616s are so cool looking on your TNT. I saw a set on "that auction site" for 400 bills. They show some deformation on the top. For that price, I would want an audible improvement over the air bladders in addition to eliminating the aggravation of maintaining level. Any opinion on that?
Thanks again, Chris.
Best,
Dave |
Hi guys,
I talked with Bruce yesterday. My 2.0 HP manifold is two weeks off. There are no 2.5 manifolds nor setup jigs available right now, but there are tentative plans to make a production run of both in the next 6 months or so. Bruce confirmed that the 2.0 HP manifold is a better match for medium/high compliance cartridges and the 2.5 is a better match for low compliance carts (difference in horizontal effective mass with the 2.5 being heavier as noted previously in this thread).
We discussed the topic of air pressure and air escape. My interpretation of the conversation is that it is normal to be able to hear some amount of air escaping from the bearing and also to be able to hear a low-level air noise at high volume with your ear to the speaker (Chris's pump test). The amount of air escaping and thus the audibility will increase with higher air pressure for a given bearing clearance, consistent with my experience.
After extended listening comparisons, some including my golden eared wife, I have decided that changes in air pressure are audible (similar in scale to VTA changes) and our preference changed with the recording. Keep in mind that this is with the stock 2.0 manifold. Some instruments within the soundstage move forward at higher pressures, creating a better delineated front-to-back separation, but the overall sound is less relaxed and natural, with a change for the worse in tonal balance, particularly on piano. Ended up back at 3.6 psi (at the arm) for best overall performance with the stock manifold. Bruce has said this to me consistently over the years and, being the hard-head that I am, I had to prove it for myself and finally have the proper quality and control of the air system to feel confident in this conclusion.
As always, this is MY preference in MY system and YMMV. I feel certain that all this will change with the introduction of the HP manifold, where the smaller orifices and tighter bearing/spindle clearance will eliminate the downsides described above at higher pressures and further enhance dynamics, bass performance and soundstaging as Frogman describes.
Dave |
Thanks as always, Frogman. I found a decent deal on a new Shelter 901 Mk II. Several reviews and owner posts say that the Mk II has similar tonality but incrementally better overall sound quality and a slightly higher output (.55mV) compared to the original. I am surprised that Shelter uses a .3 X .7 elliptical stylus on the 901. Care to speculate on the compatibility (sound quality/tracking performance) of a Shelter 901 Mk II with the aluminum armwand?
Dave |
Hi Dover,
It would seem to me that the constant corrective motion of the arm to compensate for LP production imperfections, either lateral or vertical (warps), would involve some degree of "overshoot" and, thus, generate some stylus/groove misalignment due to inertia and that a properly implemented damping system would reduce this overshoot while having minimal impact on the initial transient response, ie using a minimal amount of the damping fluid such that the paddle only skims the fluid's surface (per Frogman).
I would not argue that the use of damping is a sonic tradeoff in practice and would not be desirable in a world of perfect LPs and ultra-stable resonance-free cartridges, but perhaps it is a desirable solution in our real world of neither?
Dave |
Okay, guys, how 'bout some MC cartridge recommendations for mating with my ET Two. I'm currently using my tried-and- true van den Hul MC Two HOMC (2.25mV output with vdH 1 stylus). I really like the sound of this cartridge with the ET Two (transparent, fast, dynamic, and ballsy) and the vdH 1 stylus is the quietest in the groove of any stylus I own and is claimed to last for 3000+ hours. Just testing the waters to see what is out there that would be better. My requirements are: 1. must be an excellent match for the ET Two with the base aluminum armwand 2. 0.5mV or greater output (.65mV or higher would be preferable) 3. cartridge weight <10g (the lighter the better) 4. selling price <$2k 5. <250 hours if used or freshly retipped/refurbished 6. must sound significantly better than my vdH MC Two (this cartridge is tragically under-publicized and under-rated IMO) I listen mainly to acoustic jazz, blues, rock, and a little classical. You can see associated equipment in my "System" link. I have been eyeing a Colibri XCP HO for sale here on Agon right now: https://app.audiogon.com/listings/cartridges-van-den-hul-colibri-high-output-as-new-excellent-condition-2013-11-17-analog-NetherlandsThis one meets all of the above criteria, but I am a little spooked of the Colibri due to some horror stories I have heard about its fragility and quality problems with recent vdH retips/rebuilds, plus I can find nothing on the web about it's compatibility with the ET Two or similar air bearing arm. If I can't find something that meets all of my criteria, I will just stay with the MC Two, which is probably what I should do anyway ;^). PS: I also have a nice stable of MMs: Empire 4000D/III, Signet TK-7LCa, Sonus Gold Blue, Micro Acoustics 530mp and 2002e, Astatic MF200, ADC XLM II Improved, and Shure V15 Type III MR. I read that some of you have liked the Empire with the ET Two. Is that still your opinion? What about the others? Dave |
I found a rare reprint or Myles Astor's TAS review of the Motronix Acuflow Air Regulator: http://www.whatsbestforum.com/showthread.php?5653-Linear-tracking-Turntables!/page3&highlight=motronixApparently, two of the people involved with designing and reviewing this unit are still involved in audio. Miles Astor, PhD is Senior Assistant Editor at Positive-Feedback Online and Marlen Mogilever, PhD, who is mentioned in the TAS article as being "of Motronix" is now the principal designer at Blueberry Hill Audio: http://blueberryhillaudio.com/index.htmlAfter reading the TAS article, I realize that this unit was more involved than what most of us are now using, i.e. two spring/diaphragm regulators with a surge tank in between. I wonder if we contacted one or both of them that they could/would give us enough detail to be able to reverse-engineer the Motronix unit or, at least, to mod our existing setups to duplicate the Motronix unit's functionality? Dave |
The HP manifold for my ET-Two 2.0 arm arrived from Bruce yesterday. After a much easier-than-anticipated swap out of the manifolds (simple thumb-push out and in), I cranked up the regulators to deliver 17 psi to the arm and settled in for a listening session that stretched into the wee hours of the morning and much of today.
To say that the HP manifold made a significant sonic improvement would be a colossal understatement. Each and every aspect of reproduction improved by a major step function. No need to specify micro/macro dynamics, impact of attack, clarity of decay, detail retrieval, low-frequency definition, warmth/richness, soundstage imaging/layering, space/air/transparency, or other descriptives. It simply improved them all and by a large margin. Night and day. REALISM!
Keep in mind that I had already recently upgraded the air supply system (Medo compressor, DIY surge tank, dual regulators, etc) and, while these were not revelatory until coupled with the HP manifold, surely all of those upgrades now contribute substantially to the overall result. I would be thrilled even had these upgrades cost 10 times what they actually did.
Many thanks to all of you on this thread, either by documenting these improvements here or by response to me directly, and especially to Frogman for providing advice, information, and the inspiration to achieve this elevated level of performance from my analog rig.
I am eager to rediscover the sound of my LP collection "as if for the first time".
Dave
|
Hi tequila,
I am using one Medo 910 pump (very loud) and built a silencer box similar to what you describe, except that I used two computer fans ported to/from the outside of the box to cool the pump chamber and built foam labyrinths on either end of the box to pass the forced air in and out to the pump chamber while deadening noise. It is not dead quiet but barely audible when placed in a closet just outside my listening room. The pump still gets hot even with the added forced induction, but stays much cooler than in a sealed box. Hope this is helpful.
Dave
|
Fellow ET Two lovers,
What has happened to us? Nothing new to say about this fantastic tonearm? I continue to hear new and amazing sonic revelations with every tweak or, most recently, improvements in my system that show I have not yet heard the full sonic capability of this arm despite many years of audio partnership.
I hate to see this thread fall into oblivion. Miss the "good ole days" of gushing enthusiasm and assaultive debate. Wish I knew how to revive it. Could use some help from the "Founding Fathers"...
Dave |
Hi Chris, You are and always have been the perfect patron/owner of this thread. Totally agree with the points you made re: the overwhelming enthusiasm perpetually demonstrated in this thread and the resulting post count. Who wooda thunk it? Outstanding job, buddy! The point I attempted to articulate the other day was that I easily recall three, four, and sometimes many more helpful, enthusiastic, and occasionally argumentative responses from the ET Two-faithful to a newcomer’s inquiry. It struck me in reading your multiple but lone responses to tequila that we may have hit an engagement lull by our old buddies and friends, myself included. Tequila’s inquiries define the opportunity for us all to share our love for and experiences with this superlative tonearm. Let me lead by example in belatedly offering tequila (and others) any and all help and support that I can, being a long-time owner/lover of a VPI TNT/ET Two rig. This is a great combo IMHO and benefits tremendously from a few simple and inexpensive tweaks that I learned from you and frogman (and others). I tried to dutifully describe my mods in the "My System" section for this purpose: https://systems.audiogon.com/systems/3778Be sure to click on the easy-to-overlook "Toggle details" button to read my comments. I still humbly acknowledge being on the perpetual learning curve with my analog setup (and my system in general). Best to you as always Chris, Dave |
Hi Raul,
Thanks for the feedback. I am grateful for your helpfulness to me over the years on the MM thread. I still enjoy my Empire 4000D/III in my vintage system, as well as the other MMs I picked up, many of which were recommended by you.
You are correct, the statement you quoted from my earlier post is poorly stated. What I intended to say was that as my system improves, I feel that I can hear more of what the ET can ultimately do, and, perhaps my system has not yet caught up to the sound quality this arm can provide, i.e. it never seems to be the "weak link". Thanks for keeping me straight.
Thanks also for your thoughts on my component selection. Certainly not the visually-flashiest equipment around, but the older, often more-utilitarian looking, but time-proven SOTA pieces from Jim Thiel, Dave Reich, and Charles Hansen always make great sound for me.
Regarding the RELs, I have had them for several years and always set them at the lowest possible crossover point (A1) and at a very conservative volume. The big Thiels don’t need any bass enhancement, but loading the room with the REL’s LF sound pressure seems to improve imaging and openness in my system.
One thing I think is spectacular and unique to REL is the high-level input fed from the system’s amplifier(s) outputs that seems to make the REL mimic the sound of the upstream components, helping it integrate better than most. Wouldn’t mind the slam of the best JL Audio offerings though ;^)
Glad to see you here on the ET thread, Raul. If you don’t still have an ET Two in your stable, why don’t you pick one up so you can join our journey to ET perfection, perhaps sorting through a few of your cartridges to clue us in on the great ones. ET Two’s would suddenly start selling for 3X+ their current price if you become infatuated with it... ;^)
Dave
|
Raul,
Before reading your post in the link you supplied, I had already heard and described the "unexpected to me" influences that the dual-REL subs have on my system’s sound, perhaps using somewhat different and less precise descriptives than you do in that post.
Like you say there:
"- better quality low bass ( you can have at least one more octave ) and mid bass "
"- An improvement in the soundstage reproduction in all parameters: deep, front/side location, wide of the stage, etc..."
In my system, I would add something like:
"-an improvement in imaging, air, and a sense of infinite space around the performers and within the soundstage itself"
The other key point you bring to that post is improvement resulting from relieving the main speakers and amplifiers of the difficult lower-octave reproduction challenge. I understand this to imply introducing an external crossover into the signal path of the main system (if I am mistaken, please correct me). I do not yet do this, as it concerns me regarding tampering with Jim Thiel’s ingenius 1st-order crossover and the (extremely) low probability of my feeble speaker design skills bettering Jim’s in this regard. A mental picture of Jim turning over in his grave comes to mind (I assure everyone that I mean absolutely no disrespect or levity to Jim’s passing).
A very good friend of mine has a stratospherically high-performance and high-priced system. He recently wrote me singing the praises of the room-correction software that he acquired with/for his dual JL Audio Gotham subs. He only uses digital sources, asserting that "turntables do add a certain pleasing warmth to the sound, but are ultimately inferior in accurate high-performance sound reproduction". We agree to (strongly) disagree on this for the sake of our continued friendship.
I would think that, with the almost unimaginable capability that today’s computers have to capture, analyze, and process billions (trillions?) of data points that this would indeed be the way to go re: add-on crossovers compared to the analog domain ones I have used (the then-SOTA external crossovers provided with the Apogee Divas I set up and meticulously tuned in my installer days), but I EMPHATICALLY REFUSE TO DIGITIZE MY BELOVED ANALOG SIGNAL SOURCE!!
I submit for your consideration (very Rod Serlingish, don’t you think) that some of the improvements you attribute to implementing additional crossovers are perhaps due more to the magical effect of loading the listening room with gobs of hyper-LF sound pressure that works in effect to "relieve the ROOM of the difficult lower-octave reproduction challenge". This of course assumes (and we know what happens when we do that) that the subject amplifiers and speakers are of sufficient quality to handle the task of accurately reproducing the lower octaves of our musical content (I admit to having an extreme aversion to most organ music so I may be exposed there) .
Dave
|
Hi Eric,
I have the Bright Star Audio "Big Rock for TNT" sandbox/air bladder combo. After some experimentation, I chose not to use the air bladder in my rig. My house is build on concrete slab and I have the VPI/Firestone air bladders in the TNT corner columns (feet). Your results may be entirely different.
Also, I ended up with my TNT sitting on a corian piece with the corian sitting on top of the edges of the sandbox (not bedded on sand). VPI motor is bedded on sand. You can see pics on my virtual systems page if you wish.
Hard to predict what what will ultimately work best for you. Just experiment with and without air bladder and also creative combos of slabs and placements. Fun, fun! You are in for a treat my friend!
Best to you,
Dave |
Hi Raul,
I trust that you and many others have heard the benefit of eliminating the low frequency signal to the main speakers. The YG Acoustics speakers that my friend has have separate powered woofer sections and also he uses JL Audio Gotham subs. Again, he relies on digital room equalization to make all of this complexity work together and well, according to his reports.
True, the RELs have no high-pass output as they were designed to do something different and that they do well IMO. What sub that you own or have heard has high-enough quality internal crossovers to do this well without introducing other compromises to the sound? I would prefer to handle the high pass/low pass filter this way vs modding the Thiels (which would also not relieve the low-frequency-reproduction challenge for my amplifiers). But then there is the additional long runs of low-level cabling needed to use a sub crossover solution...
Yesterday, I experimented with using my HT processor to alter the low-frequency hand-off between the Thiels and the RELs. Some promising results in the bass, but there was pervasive degradation to every other sound criteria as one would expect from this "mid fi" approach.
Since I cannot afford the latest and (maybe) better-than-what-I-have-now plug-and-play components, I find satisfaction in experimenting with carefully-chosen tweaks and acknowledged "better-than-they-could-possibly-be-for-the-price" components from the past.
Right now I am enjoying power supply upgrades to the SR cables/cords’ active shielding (great results for small $$) and, soon, SR Black fuses (due to arrive Friday). I just picked up a Sony 5400ES SACD/CD player that I may have ModWrighted with improved clock, separate dedicated PS, and tubed output. Claimed to be a "Giant Killer".
Begging the pardon of my ET Two friends (particularly Chris) for this shamefully non-related indulgence.
Thanks as always, Raul, for your contributions and advice,
Dave |
Chris,
Another intelligent and insightful post. The path in the carpet to my subs is worn from countless trips to and from for adjustment or simply turning them on or off depending on the media. From recording to recording I find that the subs either augment or detract from my musical enjoyment and your posit on the variability of mastering decisions, which cannot be altered after the fact, is the best theory that I have read or heard to date.
Additionally, having a dedicated room, I have the freedom to place the subs wherever I like, and have spent many hours trying to tune placement to best effect, yet periodically wonder if the sweet spot is yet to be discovered.
Is it worth it? Depends on one's level of OCD affliction, the subject room/system and, as you describe, the media itself.
Best,
Dave
|
|
Hi Chris, I think the feet in the pic from the link I posted, if rigid, are maybe used in conjuction with the Symposium footers, perhaps for improved weight distribution or additional vibration transfer/absorption. I really like the piece under the bearing housing. I may inquire about that. BTW - I posted a better (I think?) explanation of the Empire 4000 D/III cartridge orientation on my system page in case you didn't see it... I have been playing with a used Sony SCD-XA5400ES SACD/CD player with good results on premium SACD material. I have a Modwright-version of this player headed my way soon. High hopes for this Modwright player as my final digital front-end based on listening to the stock unit and the raves, both in reviews and from friends, about the Modwrighted unit's sonic performance. In the pursuit of my TOTL SACD material, I found this: http://www.stockfisch-records.de/pages_art/sf12_dmmcd_e.html#textThey use a DMM master played as an LP on a cutting lathe with an EMT arm/cartridge to feed the recording/mastering equipment. The Vol 1 sampler delivers the best sound I have ever heard, even using the Redbook layer on my Ayre CDP, including, yes, my analog rig. 8^O The SACD layer is even better. Best to you Chris, Dave |
Hi Chris,
"I would add "in this room" to the end of that statement."
Agree, but is this not true of all masterings and much more so of the offerings by MFSL, etc that use "standard" mastering techniques? An engineer uses whatever speakers they prefer played in whatever acoustical environment they have concocted to perform "adjustments" to the master to sound the most pleasing to their ears?
According to Stockfisch, this "mastering" step was eliminated and the sound of the un-molested product was compared to the master as was their non-DMM version of the same track available on other Stockfisch offerings, also un-molested, just sans the "analog" step. Of course the sound of the room entered into this comparison as this is unavoidable, just as the personal preferences of each person’s ear/brain are unavoidable.
My wife prefers the non-DMM Stockfisch versions as she is accustomed to the less-analog-like sound of normal CD/SACD. There is an audible difference between the two versions. Preferences are what they are, based on what one perceives to be more realistic or pleasing to their ears/brain.
I would encourage you and others to try this comparison through your system and in your room and share your preferences.
BTW - I am admittedly one of the old farts that vehemently refuses to introduce computers into my primary source of relaxation and escape from angst. I have no others, by rule, to mishandle my media and personally enjoy the rituals of touching, reading, cleaning, loading, and even storing/arranging the real-matter versions of the media. I may well be a librarian at heart. lol
Best to you Chris,
Dave
|
Hi Chris,
You were right as usual re: the Symposium-modded TNT using Rollerblocks as the sole support for the plinth and the corner footers being for show only. I will attempt to contact jloveys hoping to get some pointers. Thanks for the tip.
nandric: Have to agree with you on the best MC vs MM. The Orpheus L on the ET Two (jabs aside) is on another level vs my MMs/Electrets, yet I still enjoy the latter in my vintage system, especially on beloved non-audiophile rock LPs from the 70s/80s..
Best to you both,
Dave
|
Hi nandric,
I don’t think you will experience reprisal here over your comments on the ET Two, made in jest or otherwise. We are all confident in the virtues of this arm based on years of listening (and also of tweaking) and comparing, thus knowing that the majority of criticisms come from those that have not made the effort/lack the knowledge to set it up right and/or tried to use it on an incompatible turntable.
Will do re: starting a new thread on the Electrets IF you will help get it off the tarmac.
Best to you nandric,
Dave |
|
Awesome Eric.
Before you polish further, I have found that a product called "Detail Doctor Instant Restorer" I discovered in the "As seen on TV" section of Walgreen’s/Walmart works wonders. Just wipe on and wipe off. Take care not to get any on the glossy acrylic plinth.
Care to share your impressions of the effects of the Brightstar platforms on your TNT’s sound?
Have you tried using unwaxed dental floss in place of the belts?
Best to you Eric,
Dave
|
Hi Eric,
Sounds like you are off to a good start. My experience agrees with that of your friend re: the sandbox vs the air platform. If your TNT has springs vs air bladders/handballs, the air bladder under the sandbox can be of additional benefit. Your ears will tell.
Current thinking (at least my understanding of it) is that soft interfaces do indeed dissipate external vibration coming from beneath, but trap internal resonances within the component on top (wrong-way isolation vs transmission). Check out the Symposium website for further (better) explanation. I recently installed metal footers (SR MiG 2.0s) between my SACD player and Symposium Svelte metal-foam-metal sandwich-type platforms and recognize the sonic benefits of reducing internal resonance there.
It never occurred to me to consider the sand type. I used play sand that I let dry for a long while. I did place some industrial heatsinks hidden within the sand to dissuade the sand from packing and to provide additional mass. All sorts of creative ideas can come into play here.
On the floss drive, the drugstore variety of unwaxed dental floss is fine. Use the belts you have to determine the length needed. Tie it off with your best knot (check the web for suggested knots if you are so inclined) ensuring that the knot will not slip under pressure/tension. Dental floss is surprisingly strong so no worries about breaking it. Place the floss around the center platter groove. It helps to have a patient someone assist. Now, while holding the floss under slight tension, work it around the flywheel pulley while moving the flywheel outwardly to apply moderate tension as you let go. Do the same between flywheel pulley and motor pulley.Turn ’er on and see what you think.
You could even use two runs of floss positioned as your belts are now for better distribution of the load on your platter/flywheel/motor bearings, but I wouldn’t suggest trying that on your first attempt. Explicatives are probable.
In my case, the sound is much faster and my TNT lost a great deal (the right amount) of its tendency to sound fat and slow.
Cheap and not time consuming, so if you don’t prefer it little is lost, assuming no unfortunate incidents with your arm/stylus.
Best to you Eric,
Dave
|
Hi Chris,
I don't recall exactly, but I did have to change the setting. It is set at 58.04 FWIW.
I did forget to include that above. What a kind and clever way to point that out :)
Best to you Chris,
Dave
|
"Why am I able to remember this but can’t remember where I left the keys ?"
Someteimers (vs Alzheimers). Frequent syndrome for fathers of teens and post-teens.
Best to you Chris,
Dave
|
Hi Chris,
I don’t doubt (at all) your experiences with your TNT nor with your Verdier and I agree that I am working against what was envisioned by HW in the TNT’s original design. He did, however, move away from the complex pulley system with the later TNT/HRX models. He also switched to an inverted bearing, perhaps to better deal with the increased side-loading force?
Strangely, I have had no issues with longevity of the common sewing thread I first used nor with the floss. The latter has lasted seemingly indefinitely, even with extended periods of heavy rotation.
I also have no doubt that there are better tables out there than the TNT, yet I am satisfied with my TNT’s sound in its current modded form and feel that it still is a superb foundation for the ET Two.
Best to you as always Chris,
Dave |
Hi Chris,
Anyone who has let their ET Two-equipped table go off-level knows exactly what you are describing with the term "groove anxiety".
As we have discussed before, my TNT's VPI Firestone bladders leak and are a PITA to refill/recalibrate, so I have to admit to "hoping for the best" on occasion (laziness). It usually lasts for around one cut before the pump comes out.
Best to you Chris,
Dave |
Hi Chris,
It only happens rarely. Please don't tell Bruce! lol
Best to you Chris,
Dave |
Hi Chris,
Had to break in here to adamantly endorse your statement:
"The most resonance can be heard in the bass.You need to get the bass right in any room."
This includes vibration-reduction to/from components. Working on that right now. Big gains with minimal investment.
Best to you Chris,
Dave
|
All true, pegasus. Thanks for sharing.
Dave |
Looks like we're both Cluckers at this point!
Experience is a strong influencer, especially catastrophic experience.
Dave |
Excellent post VPI. Keep spinnin' :)
Dave |
No worries frogman. I have known a few Dutch and I think they do spell it "Nederlands". ;)
Dave
|
Re: removing the body of your VdH, Harry, I tried it on my MC Two and it is no more. No doubt my doing, yet I have never destroyed any audio component before or since in some 30 years with hi-end audio. I recommend that you proceed (or not!) with great consideration and care.
Dave |
Brad, I assume you know that you need to remove the manifold from the housing in order to thoroughly clean it. Gentle but firm thumb pressure on one end of the manifold while securely holding the housing should break it loose. Don’t strike or pry the end of the manifold with anything, just keeping working with it until it starts to budge. Check back with issues/questions and once you are done with this as there are a few things that are very critical to proper setup that are not completely detailed in the manual. There are several here that are experts and we will help. You can view my setup on my Virtual System page for reference. Click on "Toggle details" tab for explanation. https://systems.audiogon.com/systems/3778Dave |
Hi Brad,
Measure the pump’s PSI output and remove/clean the manifold and the spindle. Unplug the connector cap at the front end of the spindle/joint. Only remove the joint at the front of the spindle (loosen the allen screw first) and take care not to pull the wiring plug inserted into the front end of the spindle out with the joint. Be very careful with the wiring while removing and re-installing the spindle. Joint is not indexed and the armwand should be parallel with the I-beam when properly reassembled. The I-beam will have lateral movement per its design.
Dave
|
|
Hey Brad,
Also check for obstructions in the airline and nipple feeding the body of the manifold housing.
Dave |
That’s great Brad! When you get it re-assembled, make sure the stylus is tracking directly straight down the imaginary centerline aligned with the platter’s bearing spindle (not to the left or right of the centerline or even slightly diagonal) and move the weights out on the I-beam as far as possible even if you have to remove some weight to hit your tracking force (VTF) target. Do not put to much torque on the screws that tighten the arm base to the armboard as this can warp the base.
It is good to get the platter completely level but the only real way to level the arm is to use a test or other LP with blank sections where the second or third track would be and at the fifth track (the two points where you would measure the cartridge alignment with a pivoting arm) and try to get it leveled to where the stylus does not try to wander toward the center of the LP or away toward the edge at these two positions. When you get it close, you will find that even the slight tension of the wiring coming out of the end of the arm will create enough force to influence the arm's movement. Try to minimize that. It takes some doing, but will pay big dividends in sound quality.
Dave
|
Consider yourself lucky to have that alignment gauge, Brad. I never had one and had to get creative to set the trajectory.
Re: the queuing problem, did you get the joint pushed back on the spindle far enough?
Dave |
frogman,
Completely agree with your point about rotating the tonearm assembly.
Since Brad’s table and arm was already setup when he bought it and knowing that he had removed the joint as part of his cleaning process, I thought it prudent to recommend checking his work there first vs altering the queuing eccentric adjustment.
Dave
|
Yes frogman, it should be close to flush but I might cheat it a wee bit (since there is allowance on the other end of the spindle tube) to correct Brad’s problem rather than alter the queuing eccentric setting unless it is far off. I seem to recall messing with the queuing eccentric once and wishing I hadn’t.
I have not forgotten where I learned a great deal about the ET Two... ;)
Dave |
Great Brad! Let us know how that baby sounds!
In order to post pics, you have to either transfer them to your favorite online pic depository and then link it to a post using the "Insert URL" tab above the post or simply create a Virtual System page here on Agon and upload your pics. The latter is my recommendation and very easy once you get the hang of it.
Dave
|
Hi Chris,
Welcome home! It is nice to hear from you again.
Dave |
Hi Chris,
Merry Christmas my friend!
I am a bit confused by the last statement above. If the cartridge’s generator is misaligned, I can easily see why listening will give a better result than setting azimuth using visual alignment tools, mirrors, etc. that use the cantilever orientation (or even worse the cartridge body) to try to roughly approximate true azimuth alignment. But, given the same misaligned generator scenario, why would using a test instrument (say a Fozgometer or an oscilloscope) that reads each channel’s signal output independently and also the output signal balance between both channels give an improper result?
Best to you Chris,
Dave
|
Hi Chris and pegasus,
I think that Ledermann’s video has some subtleties that merit further clarification. At least to my understanding of his dialogue, he is discouraging use of electrical measurement primarily for setting azimuth with his Soundsmith cartridges, which he goes on to explain at length are very different than other cartridges, having extremely high channel separation that defies using channel balance as the criteria for optimal azimuth setting. He also makes statements indicating that electrical measurement tools can work well on other brands of cartridges IF the coils and stylus/cantilever alignment are not significantly out of whack.
Certainly, if the Fozgometer indicates that severe rotation of the cartridge is necessary to achieve lowest indicated channel crosstalk, then its use is counter-indicated for that cartridge.
In my particular case, the azimuth of my Orpheus L looks perfect using traditional azimuth setting tools (visual) after setting azimuth optimally according to the Fozgometer, which indicates zero channel crosstalk and that each channel reads exactly the same output level when tested individually. Listening tests confirm that channel balance and separation are indeed very good to my ears and soundstage depth/width excellent as well.
Maybe I am lucky but I would be more than a little upset if my $$$ cartridge had misaligned coils or a poorly aligned stylus-to-cantilever relationship to the extent that measurement is impossible. Apparently it is not that uncommon which, if so, is a shame.
I do share the idea that extended critical listening may help further improve sound quality once one has achieved best results with the Fozgometer, but at least it is a very good starting point for tweaking by ear vs eyeballing it with no idea of a proper starting point and it can also show if the coils are misaligned (as per the above where the cartridge must be tilted to an extreme to get good readings).
We all have our methods and whatever works for you and your individual situation is always best.
Best to you both and Merry Christmas to all,
Dave
|
