I volunteer to check and make sure those capillaries are not clogged :-) |
Precisely! And, of course, once that task is done the bearing tube must be inserted into the manifold housing; hopefully, of the high-pressure variety. As always, a high-pressure manifold results in more explosive dynamics and creamier highs :-) |
BTW, the key to using the damping trough is to allow the paddle to just barely touch the fluid. Otherwise the sound gets too slow.
Ct, can you be more specific as to what you mean by "damping". It's possible this is a semantics issue, whereby your "damping" is my "controlled". What I hear with the lower compliance in the spring is slightly smaller images, but better separated, better integration of the highs with the midrange, overall better detail with a slightly brighter presentation. Although, the highs are, as I said, better integrated and less "splashy". Perhaps this is what you hear as dampened. |
****An audiophile wrap ? Hmm this gives me an idea ...... more in a bit :^)****
Yo, yo, yo! Wassup? |
Great tonearm. I have used one for many years and now sits on a VPI TNT6. High pressure manifold/Medo compressor (17psi), homemade surge tank, damping trough, and AudioNote silver wire in one continuous run from cartridge clips to preamp. I can't recommend this wire enough. In the years I have used this arm I have rewired it three times (Cardas, Discovery, AudioNote). The AN is by far m favorite with much more refined and transparent sound, although some might call it leaner than the Discovery or Cardas, but NOT harsh. My experience with the position of the counterweights is exactly the opposite of Slaw's. I have found that in my setup, further from the spindle is best. In fact, the best bass response and stability that I have achieved is with the weights about as far from the spindle as the cartridge is (in the opposite direction, of course). Coincidence? Tip: for best sound, do not over tighten the adjustment bolts!!!
More to come. |
****Are we to take your words literally ? The cartridge is about 7 inches from the spindle ? Have you come up with ET 3.0, a longer I beam that I have only been thinking about, or are you talking about removing enough lead and having your weights positioned at number 6 on the I beam ? ****
I have constructed an I beam (balsa wood) that uses a leaf spring from one of the regular ET I beams which allows me to to move the counterweights up to 6 inches from the spindle; although not the 7 inches that I implied. With my cartridges which are either medium compliance Vandenhuls or high compliance MM's, the improvement in bass weight
and detail is significant. One other way to experiment with moving the weight further from the spindle is by using the threaded brass weights on the threaded rod that secures the regular lead weights to the counterweight holder. This allows the weight to be further back, and effectively "extending" the I beam.
Speaking of the I beams, no one has mentioned the importance of experimenting with leaf springs of different compliances. I have three ET (plastic) I beams, each of a different compliance. The lower the
compliance the more tightly focused the sound is. Higher compliance springs make the sound a little "bloomier", with an all around easier
presentation.
The use of the higher pressure manifold and Medo compressor was a revelation for me. The improvements were very significant, but I found
that in my system higher than 17 psi was too much of a good thing. 17 psi gave me the desired tonal balance. More than that and the sound was too tightly controlled for my tastes. |
Apbii, yes 17 was the best in my system. But keep in mind that this had everything to do everything else in the system. I don't think it is a matter of the ET "working best" at 19 (or 17) psi. I think I can safely say, after working with this arm for many years, that the arm "works better" (tracks better) at somewhat higher psi than that achievable with the original stock or even the Wisa pumps, but after that point (+/- 9psi?), it is probably a matter of personal preference (system). |
Re compliance of the I beam springs: my ET2 came with two I beams of different compliances. The lower compliance is achieved by using two (instead of one) leaf springs glued together. It is possible to lower the compliance further (which is what I did with my third I beam) by super-gluing a thin piece of metal to the existing double spring thus further stiffening it. Ct, when you refer to the stock I beam, I don't know wether what you have is the version with the single or double leaf spring. BTW, I believe Bruce Thigpen makes reference to the different I beams in the manual.
Re the ideal PSI issue: the arm can indeed sound fabulous at 19 or higher psi. But, the result may not be ideal in every system. In mine, the slightly warmer and rounder sound a15-17 psi was preferable.
Re what cartridges to use, I have had success with both Mm and MC types. The best (my favorite) combination was the Monster AG2000. In general, and contrary to the opinion of some, lowish compliance carts seem to work best with this arm; although I have gotten good results with MM's, particularly the Empire D4000. |
Dertonarm's observations are spot on, and mirror mine. His comment about the ET being THE tonearm for opera lovers may raise some eyebrows, but is particularly insightful. For me, the two greatest attributes of this tonearm are it's correct and midrange-complete tonal balance (what some would describe, incorrectly, as too soft), and it's ability to realistically separate individual instruments and groups of instruments. With opera, and how it is typically recorded, it's reproduction of voices (with correct tonal fullness and dimensionality), and the spatial relationship between those voices and the orchestra in the pit is wonderful. |
Slaw, I will post a picture of my ET on my TNT6 next time my son comes over with his digital camera; being a bit of a Luddite, I don't own one.
No, no relation to R Vandersteen. Curious, why do you ask?
Ct, look closely at the leaf spring on your I beam. Is it a single spring, or are there two spring glued together for lower compliance? |
From the ET2 manual:
*****It is desirable in most cases (low to medium compliance cartridges 5x10 dynes/cm-10x20 dynes/cm) to use the minimum number of counterweights, far out on the counterweight stem. This decreases the horizontal inertia of the tonearm while increasing the vertical inertia....
....the weights should end up close to the end of the I-beam*****
Speaking of the manual, I have not seen a better or more informative manual with any other piece of equipment that I have owned. |
Ct, as I quoted before, moving the weight further out on the I-beam improved (in my set-up) the bass performance. By "improved" I mean better control, and weight; two things that don't always go hand in hand. I will say that the best results where always with the less compliant (double leaf spring) I-beam. I think the manual is clear about the benefits of doing this, and my results bear that out. I suspect that with the higher compliance spring (and a higher compliance cartridge/Empire) which you are using the results could be different. I strongly urge you to contact Bruce and get an I-beam with the less compliant double spring. In my set-up the difference is anything but subtle with much better air, detail and refinement. |
****Throwing weight at the I-beam near the spindle pivot does not increase the arms rigidity.****
Exactly.
BTW, there is a (not particularly elegant) way to experiment with lowering the I-beam compliance without use of the double spring. You can wedge (carefully, of course) a very thin piece of some very rigid material cut to fit that space, into the cavity between the spring and outer end of the counterweight cap/clamp. This will effectively allow LESS horizontal movement of the I-beam. I think you will all be very surprised at the
difference in sound.
Ain't this fun? |
Slaw, sorry I missed that. :-) |
****Dampened it****
Interesting! Not the effect that the double spring has, making the sound much tighter with better detail, but less warmth. Perhaps it's the particular material you used. When you did this, did you notice LESS horizontal movement of the I beam.
Yes, I use the damping trough. In my set-up, while I would agree it does dampen the sound, it also makes the sound staging more stable with better separation. |
Chris, I love the Empire. I think it is a terrific cartridge, and have used it long enough to form an opinion. From a technical point of view, I had no performance issues with it in the ET. Tracking was very good, even if not quite as solid as cartridges like my Monster AG2000 (ZYX), and VDH Grasshopper. IN MY SETUP the double spring I beam is a must in order to firm up what can be a bit of excessive fullness. These are some comments I posted a while back in Raul's MM/MC thread. I hope you find them useful:
*****I just received, and installed a NOS Empire 4000D III Gold. I am
VERY impressed. I have been somewhat lukewarm about the whole issue of the claimed superiority of MM's relative to MC's; and still, overall, in the MC camp. I own ATML170, Azden PVL 50, Andante, and while I recognize what they do well (very well, particularly in the case of the AT and Azden), I have still been unconvinced. The Empire could change all that.
I am interested in hearing from you guys about your findings re break-in, VTA, VTF, viscous damping, etc., in order to optimize it's performance.
Thanks.****
****Thanks guys. I have the Empire in a Eminent Technology 2 air bearing tonearm with the high-pressure manifold and pump; on a VPI TNT6 with "the works". So far, initial impressions are: Terrific clarity, with good inner detail. Tonally, a good middle ground between the white/bleached sound of the Andante, and the more romantic/golden flavor flavor of the Azden.
Open soundstage with good placement. Sound is definitely weighted towards the midrange, and so far seems a little bloated. That is why I ask
about break-in, and damping; a hunch tells me that things will even-out (tighten) a bit after a few more hours. But, in general, so far I like it better than the vaunted ATML170, which in my set-up seems a little slow/slightly boring in comparison. I am going to try fluid damping over the next couple of days and report back.****
****Dear Raul, thank you for your thoughts. I find the Empire to be anything but boring. It is, in fact, very alive sounding. That quality (or it's absence) is the most important performance consideration for me. If the component does not allow the music to move as it should, it doesn't
matter how great it's frequency extension, soundstaging, or tonal refinement is. That is what I meant by "boring" in reference to the ATML170. It is clearly an excellent cartridge in most respects, but in comparison to the Empire (and my MC's), it sounds just a little bit slow; rhythmically laid back. The Empire, in the exact same system sounds very alive, and lets the music move as it should. The AT has superior detailing of the soundstage, with more stable placement, but also sounds a little
closed-in in the highs; not enough natural color. I know "color" is considered a great sin by many audiophiles, but music has a tremendous amount of color, and some components seem to "bleach" the color out of
instruments' timbre. Everything then sounds very much the same, with a gray(ish) color; mistakenly referred to as "neutral". I am sure you are correct, and that 100K loading would improve that.****
****That is still my main issue with MM's in general. Until I heard the Empire 4000D III, every MM that I had tried, including the ATML170OCC, has sounded too relaxed to me. Not bad by any means, but compared to a good MC, without that essential quality of excitement in the rhythm of the music; like a coiled spring ready to unwind at any moment. I am still getting to know the Empire, and I am still not ready to say that in the dynamics (micro/macro) department it is the equal of my VDH MC's.**** |
For what it's worth, I have used this arm for about twenty two years, and have used more cartridges (of all persuasions) than I can remember. While the effect of lower compliance at the I-beam spring has been most noticeable with low compliance/high rigidity MC's, the effect has been consistent with all types of cartridges, including high compliance MM's. I think it's important to remember that issues involving resonance and resonant frequency can be rather mysterious, and since their effects are audible mainly (but not only) as effects on tonal balance, that system synergy/personal preference re tonal balance are an important part of the equation. |
|
Thekong, congratulations! As should be clear so far, we feel this is a terrific arm. And if you enjoy tinkering...well, you'll be in heaven. I think the ET's reputation for requiring a lot of maintenance is exaggerated and unjustified, as I have found that once you have it set up well it will stay that way; pretty much. As a footnote, I have my TNT on a wall mounted platform bolted directly into the wooden studs in a wall of a 100+ year-old house. I have wondered why the arm needed rebalancing every few months. Then I started to notice a pattern. I realized that the seasonal shifting of the studs/walls due to seasonal temperature changes was causing the arm to need rebalancing.
I would be very interested in learning how you accomplished direct-coupling of the counterweights, so please keep us posted. As posted earlier, I made an I-beam with less compliance than even the double spring stock version in an attempt to get vas close as possible to a dc arrangement. Apbii, does a good job of explaining the theoretical pros/cons of more or less compliance at the I-beam spring. From the standpoint of sonics what I can tell you is (as Ct found out out) that the effects of less compliance are not subtle. As always, you will have weigh your personal tonal balance preferences against what will be a much better organized sound, with more tightly controlled imaging and over-all leaner sound. You may also come across a cartridge that simply requires higher compliance for good tracking; I have not owned one that didn't track at least adequately with the lower compliance I-beam. |
Slaw, glad the changes yielded good results. You said:
"With regards to the damping trough... if the best results come from the paddle lightly touching the fluid, would there be any sonic difference in trying different weights of fluid or is that going way too far out in left field. Has anyone tried this?"
Yes, I did. And yes it's probably going too far in left field. Eighteen years ago or so, before I had kids and had a lot more time on my hands I actually tried, among other things, vegetable oil and hair conditioner (which dried up and made a mess). Bottom line: same results can be accomplished by controlling how far into the fluid the paddle goes. BTW, you don't need to remove or add fluid. Simply turn the paddle one way or the other with needle-nose pliers to raise or lower it. |
I am using the ET supplied silicone fluid. |
Slaw, apologies. In did not mean to come across as heavy handed. My comment was simply a statement of what I heard IN MY SYSTEM; not a suggestion that you should do the same.
Regards. |
Apbiii, I have never experienced what could be described as a decrease in performance by increasing the pressure; although I am sure there comes a point, as I think you found out with your regular manifold, at which the arm does not work optimally due to the higher pressure. The reason I like 17 psi and no higher is that because of the way my system is tuned, 17 psi is the most complementary. Higher pressure produces a sound that is too lean and overly controlled. I have no doubt that in a different system, with my cartridge, the arm would sound better at the higher pressure.
I am intrigued by your observation that with the rubber ball suspension
(lower compliance) you don't hear as much of the dulling of the sound with psi above 15. If your non-high pressure manifold is given higher psi, it's possible that the resulting instability due to the "turbulence" in the larger gap between the manifold wall and the bearing tube is made worse by the higher compliance of the tt's suspension.
A couple of other comments/ observations that come to mind about the arm:
-The capillaries do get clogged over time. Years ago I experienced a gradual dulling of the sound with eventual poor tracking. The problem was clogged capillaries. It is tedious but not difficult to clean them. DO NOT do what I have seen suggested in a couple of forums. Do not try to clean them by forcing alcohol through "the system". I tried it and made matters worse. The manifold must be removed and all the capillaries unscrewed off the manifold and cleaned individually with alcohol. The difference in sound from doing this was significant.
-Do not over tighten the two bolts that secure the manifold housing to the pillar. In some arms (mine) the holes for the bolts are tapped too long and will actually go into the inside of the manifold housing and dislodge the piece of tape that is in place to seal and make airtight the housing. The result is escaping air and decrease in pressure. |
Apbii, please describe that technique. Thanks. |
Slaw, apologies. In did not mean to come across as heavy handed. My comment was simply a statement of what I heard IN MY SYSTEM; not a suggestion that you should do the same.
Regards. |
Ct, please keep us posted re the use of the double spring. BTW, I have been tempted, but resisted so far, to super glue the stylus assembly/carrier to the cartridge body. I did it to my ATML170OCC for a nice improvement in refinement. Those removable stylus carriers even though they appear to fit tightly in the body of the cart will benefit from the extra rigidity.
Apbii, my comment about clogged capillaries was a general comment. It doesn't sound like yours are clogged. But I realized that I misspoke (miswrote?) in my comment about the over tightening of the bolts. I was
referring to the two bolts (four total) on either side of the VTA block. I never asked Bruce about this in the handful of conversations I have had with him over the years, but I suspect that in the case of my arm it was a machining error that caused those holes to be tapped so long to pierce the manifold housing. Perhaps not, and all arms are that way so careful with over tightening.
David, re suitable tables: I first mounted my ET on a VPI HW19 Mk 2, upgraded to a MK 3, then a Mk 4, and currently my TNT Mk 6 (actually,
it's a bit of a hybrid. Mk 6 with a Mk 5 platter). That series of tables make terrific platforms for the ET. There is ample space for the arm, and the spring suspension can be replaced with less compliant sorbothane or cones which is ideal for the ET. When the ET first came on the market it was the general consensus that a non-sprung table was best; although I always found it interesting that the ET website and manual shows it mounted on a SOTA which is sprung. Another popular combination was the ET on the Oracle; and man, that combination LOOKS cool. Personally, I would look for a HW19 MK2,3, or 4(best) if you want a
moderately priced table. Not sure what you consider moderately priced, but an older TNT is even better. I am currently lusting after a Technics SP10 MK2, which I suspect would be a fantastic combo with the ET on the right plinth. |
Slaw, while I agree overall with your comments re type of suspension in the VPI line, I would qualify them with these observations IN MY SYSTEM:
The "overly warm" description is definitely system dependent. What might be overly warm in your system might be perfect in another. This also highlights semantics issues. I experimented with all types of suspensions in my sequence of VPI's (HW19mk2, 3 &4, TNT with spring and currently rubber ball suspension. I found spring suspensions (particularly with the HW19 series) to produce a more diffuse sound, not necessarily warmer. In fact, I found the sound to be less even linearly, with some highlighting of the lower highs, producing overall a sense of a brighter, not warmer, sound. This also gave the sound a livelier character; although I believe that was the result of the tonal highlighting, and less so a result of any issue of dynamics. Upturned metal cones (least compliant) in the HW19 produced a very tight, brighter and detailed sound, but too lean in my system. Sorbothane pucks with upturned short tiptoes was best. With my TNT, which began as a TNT6 plinth with original spring corner towers, the sound was again livelier but edgier and diffuse/bloated compared to the current rubber suspension. |
Philcoffino, a couple of things to check.
- Make sure the ARM is level, not just the platter. I will bet you an I-beam that your arm (spindle/housing) is not level, and is slightly higher in the rear. Even if a bubble level tells you that it is, try raising it slightly at the front.
- Check the dressing of the tonearm wires to make sure they are not pulling on the arm when it reaches the end of the record.
- If you are using a clamp on your tt, check to see that it's diameter is not so wide that cartridge body actually hits it at the end of the record. Had that happen with a certain carbon fiber clamp. |
Ct, glad it worked out; I had a strong suspicion that you would like the result. Maybe not a silver bullet, but a significant way of optimizing cartridge performance and system tuning. Again, issues of ultimate technical performance aside (tracking), in my system with certain cartridges one spring is obviously preferable to the others, otherwise the sound can be either too lean (lower compliance spring), or too full, even bloated and diffuse (higher compliance spring). Having said that, I seldom use the single spring anymore since the improved detail retrieval and refinement that I generally hear with the double and triple springs are difficult to give up; and when the system starts to move in the direction of too lean a sound as a result of the lower compliance, I find that I can make adjustments elsewhere (VTA, slightly higher VTF, a different tube, etc.) and retain the benefits.
Regards. |
Hello fellow ET2 enthusiasts. Been a while and I hope everyone is well. Just wanted to share some very preliminary impressions of a cartridge that I have had sitting, new in the box for a few months. I know some of you follow and/or contribute to Raul's MM mega-thread. Several months ago, there was some buzz around a new-found source for the NOS Acutex 420STR. Well, I bit and bought one from the overseas vendor.
After only a few hours of play I can tell you that this is a great cartridge for the ET2. I know some other recent purchasers, while acknowledging that it is very good, were somewhat lukewarm about it overall. Perhaps
synergy plays a major role here, but I can tell you that it is a fantastically dynamic and alive sounding cartridge, with the best bass that I have yet heard from my ET. When I say best I don't mean just quantity. The bass is very powerful, and very tuneful. One of the few criticisms I have had of the ET is bass with a slight softness and lack of definition compared to a good pivoting arm. The bass now sounds as part of the same musical fabric as the rest of the frequency range. It is not a "beautiful" sounding cartridge. It is very direct sounding, with outstanding dynamic gradations,
and fine sound staging. Just wanted to share in case you come across one.
More to follow.... |
Revel(l) models! Man you just sent me back 40 years. Loved them! And yes, the Acutex looks like something that would go underneath the wing of my F-100 Super Sabre model plane. Glad you are enjoying the cartridge. It will continue getting better for a few weeks. |
Hi Chris, I agree; bass quality can be a very subjective thing. I think you know how I feel about the ET2's excellence; bass included. But I am not talking about a lack in the quantity of the bass with the ET2; it is excellent by any measure. IN MY SYSTEM, the ET's bass can sound just a little bit diffuse (even with the high-pressure pump/manifold) and a little "soft". Over the years that I have used the ET2, I have also used several good pivoting arms including the SME V, Theta, and SyrinxPU3 (which I still own). None performed as well as my ET2 overall, and I agree that they can (particualrly the SME) provide an unwanted bass "bump". The only area where they had any advantage was in being able to provide bass detail of the kind one expects in the midrange; the ability to clearly hear inner texture in bass notes, and clarity of the bass notes themselves in the musical (harmonic) context. A minor issue, but real in my experience. Anyway, I have been surprised by the Acutex's ability to provide bass
quality reminescent of that of the pivoting arms. The bass is tuneful and very speedy, like a good MC. I find the overall sound a little bit dry ("not a beautiful sounding cartridge"), but it only has a few hours of play, and I suspect that it will improve with time. BTW, I am using the double leaf spring. I haven't tried the others yet.
Regards. |
I will try and post some pics in the next couple of days. |
Bh80231, if you provide your email address I would be glad to send you some pic that I just took. Luddite that I am, I can't figure out how to post pics.
I looked at the link in your post. Personally, I would purchase wire with higher pedigree; Audinote, Cardas, Discovery. The quality of the wire will make a very significant sonic difference. Wiring the ET2 with a continuous run to the preamp is not difficult, and just requires some care and common sense. Re the damping trough (which I use and like very much): make sure that the paddle just barely touches the fluid. With that in mind, you don't need so much fluid in the trough that it will spill out.
BTW, if you live in the NYC area I would be glad to loan you either a Cardas or Discovery wiring loom that I am not using. I am currently using AudioNote wire.
Good luck, and let me know if you want the pics. |
Another tip re the trough: make sure that the trough itself is level. If it is not, the amount of damping will vary (decrease) as the arm travels towards the inside of the LP. The trough has a tendency (especially if the Velcro has gotten a little wet from the fluid spilling unto it) to sit lower at the end farthest from the arm. If that is the case, put a small foam square underneath the trough at the far end to prop it up as needed. |
****I recently purchased a double leaf spring I-beam, re-read the manual and my (2) counterweights are now at the end of the I-beam. To my surprise, performing the cart in the groove test now results in NO rumble. Hallelulia! **** -Slaw
Hah! |
Slaw, sorry I wasn't clear. My Hah! is definitely a good thing! It was an exclamation intended to be an acknowledgment of and agreement with your findings. It was also a bit of a pat on the back (my own back, and hopefully not too arrogant on my part) since I pointed out the benefits of the double-leaf spring and of moving the weight as far out on the I-beam as possible a while back.
I am very glad that you were able to solve the rumble problem. Like you I have my table on a non-load-bearing wall shelf. I used to have it on a rack and had terrible issues because of springy floor. While the move to the wall shelf solved some problems it created others. I constructed a multiple-layer constrained-layer platform that the table sits on on the shelf and it works very well. Overall, it is a better solution than on the rack.
BTW, I love your idea of using a common or agreeable LP as a reference to discuss our findings with out ET2/cartridge set-ups.
Regards. |
Chris, my Acutex 420 STR has continued to improve and after a couple of months of exclusive use it seems to be settling at a point where the only harshness heard is harshness that occurs naturally in music. I think this has got to be one of the greatest bargains in my experience. I am not prepared to say that it bests my Empire 4000DiiiGold in every respect, but while the Empire (in my set-up) tends to gloss over some of music's natural aggressiveness and nasties, the Acutex doesn't err nearly as much in the direction of being overly aggressive up top. It is also more natural in the dynamics dept. It is sounding very very good on the ET. |
Slaw's idea of using an agreed upon recording as a reference for discussion is a great one. As such, I would like to get the ball rolling.
While I am not very familiar with the musical tastes of the contributors to this thread, a popular and commonly mentioned recording on this forum is Donald Fagen's "The Nightfly". While not necessarily my favorite genre (post '50's jazz and any classical are) it is a great example of the kind of the urban-hip sound/witty lyrics sensibility that made Steely Dan so popular. It is a recording that some days (depending on my frame of mind) I think is fantastic, and other days I can't stand to listen to it because of it's slickness. The playing is unquestionably great on all counts. It is also notable (IMO) for being fantastically well recorded and produced, and great sounding for a purely digital (Horrors!) recording. I have the original Warner Brothers pressing as well as the later Mobile Fidelity version and prefer the original, with the MF having a strangely dynamically polite quality.The track "Maxine" is a favorite and there are two musical moments on it that I often use to test how well I have fine-tuned my arm/cartridge set-up. The track features the incomparable and sorely-missed Michael Brecker on tenor saxophone, and both of these musical moments involve his brilliant (as usual) solo. I will mention each of these moments in reverse order, as the second one is more obvious and less subtle.
The tenor saxophone solo begins at 2:29, and ends at 3:02; or so we think. It culminates with two ascending runs followed by one final short statement at 3:02. At 3:03, however, the overdubbed vocal chorus comes back in singing "move up to Manhattan". At that precise moment one's attention is drawn to the vocals following the saxophone solo, and it is easy to not notice that at the very moment that "move..." is sung, the tenor saxophone plays what is in fact the true end of the solo. He plays a one note final commentary, that is a kind of musical exclamation point.
When the VTA and azimuth are not adjusted properly on my ET2 it is easy to not notice that final note; it disappears into the fabric of the vocal chorus. When things are adjusted correctly, that final note is heard clearly and distinctly from the vocals; it gives that solo even more meaning.
The second example occurs at 2:51, also in Brecker's solo. One of the things that made Brecker's sound so distinct was the post-Coltrane technique of "splitting" a note. What is meant by that is that the player is able to play a note and make other notes sound at the same time; gives the sound of that note a very dramatic quality. The way it is accomplished is by (in this case) playing the high G on the tenor by fingering the G an octave below and sounding the harmonic one octave above. In the process, if the player has enough control over the instrument, a third note "E" can be heard; he is in effect playing a chord on a melody instrument.
When tonearm/cartridge settings are not correct, what should be heard as three distinct notes becomes simply distortion in the sound of the note. The closer I get to correct VTA and azimuth, the more distinct the three notes become.
I have always felt that one of the beauties of this arm is the ability to adjust so many parameters easily and repeatably. It can truly get the best out of most cartridges. |
Thanks, Ct0517. I look forward to your remarks on KOB. It's a fantastic record with well-deserved popularity. |
I too am happy to go along with recordings that other have. KBO is a no-brainer, the Simon is also good. No reason not to use more than one recording; including the Fagen. Re the Fagen, and some general comments applicable to all (IMO):
While it may seem anathema to use a digital recording (LP) for an experiment such as this, there is no reason not too when we consider that what we are looking at is the ability of the arm/cart setup to retrieve the info in the grooves for us to compare. Obviously, the digital recording should be an exceptional one; and wether we like to admit or not, there
are some. I like the idea of analyzing and comparing tonal qualities, but for that to be meaningful we have to be very specific and use either personal experiences of live music attendance, and/or comparisons to other LP's; in order to establish a meaningful benchmark. I don't think that comments about "the voice sounds a little bright in the upper range" will suffice. Brightness to one listener is clarity to another; unless we can also say "on this other LP XYZ, I heard a similar effect (at a specific point on the rec)". Then, we can establish some sort of pattern that will be meaningful. This could be a very rewarding experiment. |
I look forward to your impressions of the 412, Chris. Actually, I have been seriously considering buying a 415 on the assumption (perhaps mistaken) that the body/motor of the 415 is the same as for the 420. I would like to experiment with fashioning a different (wood or...), non-plastic mount/ shell for the 420, and don't want to risk damaging mine. If anyone has definitive (or simply educated) information about the motors of the the various Acutex(i) please chime in. |
Thanks Acman, I just ordered a 412. |
Lew, mine too sat in the box for months because of some (not all) underwhelming remarks. My experience so far proves, once again, that even the cognoscenti are mistaken at times; especially when they are not patient enough to allow for proper break-in. As has been pointed out, however, there appears to be a special synergy between this cart and linear tracking arms. I encourage you to try it, and please report back with your findings. |
Dear Nandric, I am still waiting for my commission for the use of that endorsement :-)
****I forget the first rule for any component whatever: listen
first for yourself****
Aha! How true; nothing like listening for ourselves. I find most descriptions of equipment somewhat lacking. A comment that cartridge X is "better" than cartridge Z is not very helpful unless the listeners' tastes are identical and they have very similar systems. I have tremendous respect for Raul's ears and for his contributions. I don't think it would be doing any "injustice" to mention that I have disagreed with a couple of his assessments (at least in part). The Andante and the ATML170 are two that come to mind, and highlight how important personal sonic priorities are. Realistic (to me) dynamics is probably what I am most sensitive to. The Andante is very good in the dynamics department but I find it lacking in midrange timbre faithfulness. The AT does almost everything extremely well, but I find it to be dynamically polite. The Acutex has the "alive" quality of the Andante (and more), and the superior timbre, staging, and bass reach of the AT, while possessing a very direct quality instead of the AT's "always pretty" quality. Yet, Raul wasn't impressed. Perhaps you are correct that his sample was defective. Raul, if you are listening please chime in. Likewise, since you still own one sample please give us your impressions; but do give the cartridge some time to settle.
You are fond of colloquialisms and sayings. And since "Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery", I will end with:
Regards and enjoy the M(M)usic. :-) |
Chris, thank you for your dedication and diligence in loaning BT the Acutex and soliciting his comments. I agree, getting more folks back into vinyl is a great thing; I will contact Bruce and thank him. I found his comments about his preference for the ET2 with this cart to be interesting; I wish he had elaborated on the reasons why. My ET, while it uses the high pressure manifold, is still a 2 not a 2.5 since it uses the regular diameter spindle. |
I agree with Dg. I would only add that I would use the shim only if absolutely necessary. With my 420 on the magnesium arm wand and with Cardas cart clips on the VDH wire, I can just about fit the clips in a way that does not stress the wires/clips; although it's just on the cusp of making me feel uneasy about it. |
Dear Nandric,
****Well I expressed my indebtedness to you already but I had no idea that you are also a lawyer.****
Lawyer? Heavens no! A mere musician. Although, truth be told, it may come as a surprise just how many similarities (in a way) and parallels exist between our respective professions; albeit in very different realms. Clearly the subject of a different discussion, but I have always found a tendency among non-musician music lovers to romanticize the music-making process; when in actuality, humans that we all are, much negotiation, personality analysis, reliance on precedent, etc. comes into play (pun intended). |
Dear Nandric, I do hope that you know that my comments are merely in jest, and for fun. I hold no bias towards your esteemed profession. In fact, I owe a debt of gratitude to at least two of the lawyers who I have had to employ over the years. On a tangential note (won't go into many details here), the end result of one of those instances is the relationship with my spouse, who because of her amazing work ethic has taught me that there can be be as much art and devotion applied to any endeavor; not just music making. (Please pass the box of tissues.....)
Regards. |
Dover, very interesting. The ET2 manual states that overhang should be set in such a way that the stylus lands on a perpendicular line which intersects the platter spindle. I have always found that I get better image stability (particularly with center image), and an overall more relaxed sound if I extend the arm wand so that the stylus lands a tiny bit beyond that line. Is that what you mean by "run a tiny amount of overhang"? Interestingly, the effect is more noticeable with low compliance cartridges. |
