Yes. There are millions of words on this subject on this forum and on any other forum devoted to vinyl. Too many, in fact. Read any thread on cartridge alignment. Try not to get crazy.
30 responses Add your response
Yes. There should also be differences outside to inside due to tracking error. There should also be differences due to stylus drag changes as volume changes affecting anti-skate. Lets see now, if its a uni-pivot there should also be changes pretty much all the time due to everything. But if its a gimbal arm there should be changes due to bearing chatter. There should also be changes as the Earth turns on its axis and magma shifts affect local gravity. The true answer is because the record turns at constant RPM, but the circumference decreases as you go in, then the lower surface speed should result in lower bandwidth and lower sound quality. As with all the other stuff though the operative word is "should". Let me know if it actually does. |
Thanks for the answers. In my opinion, irrespective of the tracking error, which can be minimized with a linear arm, the difference in diameter should have an effect on the sound. We have the same amount of information stored in a shorter span. In my case, my analog system was improving in quality over the years and from a point onwards I began to hear differences as it entered the last two tracks of the album. May be due to better system resolution. Which bothers me a little. I am thinking of buying a linear tracking arm in the future to see if the differences can be minimized. |
Dear @almart1 : "
May be due to better system resolution. Which bothers me a little. " A linear tracking tonearm can't improve per sé the quality recorded sound in those inner LP grooves. Any one can improve the inner grooves quality sound if: the choosed cartridge/tonearm combination is well matched, if the cartridge has high tracking abilities, with a really good phono stage and with a truly rigth cartridge/tonearm geometry alignment set up through an accurated protractor. Regards and enjoy the MUSIC NOT DISTORTIONS, R. |
Dear @thuchan : After all these years I’m sorry to say it but maybe because you still don’t understand the geometry algnment issue you are really wrong with your statements, especially that alignment option that in reality can’t help on the inner grooves distortions levels as you said. You can look here about: https://www.analogplanet.com/content/uni-din-versus-l%C3%B6fgren-b-just-clarify there the Löfgren A alignment inner null point is at 66mm. against 63.3mm of the other alignment. Please explain how that makes not a true difference but is the solution for the OP?, even Löfgren B makes a good work at 70mm and way superior to " your " touted alignment all over the other parts of the LP surface grooves. In the other side: how many LPs has the OP with grooves/recorded at the inner 70mm-60mm ? Do it you a favor and read the last 3 posts in that MF thread linked. Btw, after you understand the main geometry alignment subjects/characteristics you could easily " design " your own alignment and I mean it. Every one can do it. So try to learn by your self because your statements means that after over 15 years you are " seated " in the same chair with out growing-up because you are and converted only in a " follower " ! ! but learned almost nothing. Are you satisfied with? Do not do it through other people and remember that there is no single perfect solution for the cartridge/pivoted tonearm geometry alignment. Always exist trade-offs. R. |
Dear Raul, the MF article is 6 years old. Wally tried to determine UNI-DIN in the vinyl-engine calculator and tried to compare it with the stipulation of Loefgren. It is not only far away from reality, I guess Wally did not understand UNI-DIN (same with you?). Mathematically and under the assumption that the tracking parameters were the same on each LP-side Loefgrens Euclidian Approaching would be correct! As either the one nor the other is correct the bases for the calculation is not right - especially not for Stereo! UNI-DIN was accomplished on the bases of a Stereo-Microgroove LP. The Stereo track, nor 33 1/3 or 45 rpm existed at the time of Loefgren ´s calculation. The same for Baerwald. When you want enjoying a LP with all tracks you better move to UNI-DIN, also regarding the last songs on the record. MIchael Fremer knew why he did not prefer one of the curves at Wally´s miscalculation. Maybe today Michael would see it in a different light? Best E. |
Dear @thuchan : With all respect and only trying to help you as I said you are a follower and geometry alignment is not rocket science. It’s extremely simple. Because is plain geometry/mathematics any one can manipulates numbers and achieve a different alignment. That’s what Stevenson did it and that’s what the SAT tonearm did it too. It’s a way to achieve a perfect alignment? NO it can’t do it and those mathemathics explain you why you can’t do it. Stereo or Mono the main issue does not changes because exist a length in the LP surface, exist the recorded LP area, exist a begin of the recorded grooves ( this is the most out side groove. ), exist too a end recorded groove ( most inner groove ), exist the pivoted tonearm,etc, etc Al those does not changes and it does not matters what you want to do you must take in count that most inner/outer grooves distances to make your calculations ( stereo or not. ). Maybe you can ake other " road " but at the end: the main subject for the alignment calculations ( any kind. ) in any pivoted tonearm is to obtain the overhang and off-set angle to mount in accurated way the cartridge to the tonearm and the tonearm in the TT. From where do you think comes the null points? do you know which is the use of those null points? do you know from where comes the tracking distortion numbers over the LP recorded surface? why exist the inner/outer most grooves different standards as: IEC, DIN or JIS that achieve different calculations alignment parameters values? Do it a favor and find out by your self the rigth answers to those questions with out ask any one and you can be sure that when you achieve the rigth answers then you already understand in deep the alignment subject. That’s all and till today you still just can’t understand it ( because I think that you not even intented to do it. ) and if you follow been a " follower " ( yes I know that him told you discovered the " black thread ".) you will live your audio life deseiving in this specific subject. Is up to you. Regards and enjoy the MUSIC NOT DISTORTIONS, R. "" When you want enjoying a LP with all tracks you better move ....., also regarding the last songs on the record. "" that is a confirmation that even that chart/diagram in the link you can follow it to take in count why you are wrong with your kind of statements.. |
Dear @thuchan : With all respect and only trying to help you as I said you are a follower and geometry alignment is not rocket science. It’s extremely simple. Because is plain geometry/mathematics any one can manipulates numbers and achieve a different alignment. That’s what Stevenson did it and that’s what the SAT tonearm did it too. It’s a way to achieve a perfect alignment? NO it can’t do it and those mathemathics explain you why you can’t do it. Stereo or Mono the main issue does not changes because exist a length in the LP surface, exist the recorded LP area, exist a begin of the recorded grooves ( this is the most out side groove. ), exist too a end recorded groove ( most inner groove ), exist the pivoted tonearm,etc, etc Al those does not changes and it does not matters what you want to do you must take in count that most inner/outer grooves distances to make your calculations ( stereo or not. ). Maybe you can ake other " road " but at the end: the main subject for the alignment calculations ( any kind. ) in any pivoted tonearm is to obtain the overhang and off-set angle to mount in accurated way the cartridge to the tonearm and the tonearm in the TT. From where do you think comes the null points? do you know which is the use of those null points? do you know from where comes the tracking distortion numbers over the LP recorded surface? why exist the inner/outer most grooves different standards as: IEC, DIN or JIS that achieve different calculations alignment parameters values? Do it a favor and find out by your self the rigth answers to those questions with out ask any one and you can be sure that when you achieve the rigth answers then you already understand in deep the alignment subject. That’s all and till today you still just can’t understand it ( because I think that you not even intented to do it. ) and if you follow been a " follower " ( yes I know that him told you discovered the " black thread ".) you will live your audio life deseiving in this specific subject. Is up to you. Regards and enjoy the MUSIC NOT DISTORTIONS, R. "" When you want enjoying a LP with all tracks you better move ..., also regarding the last songs on the record. " in the chart/diagram of the link you can SEE that your statement is not true. Btw, do you know that the SAT tonearm manipulated alignment gives you better " numbers " that all those alignments.? with lower distortion levels? NOW, if you are so sure about then please share with all of us a comparison between " your " alignment and Löfgren or SAT or what ever one of its distortion levels over the recorded LP surface. Easy, please do it. Appreciated. @thuchan , we don't need explanations but numbers>/facts: hard numbers. Got it? |
isochronism:
Miller: "There should also be changes as the Earth turn's on it's axis and magma shifts affect local gravity". So the amount of anti-skate adjustment would be dependant upon the turntable's placement orientation in regard to the direction the Earth is spinning?No. The clue is in the phrase, "magma shifts affect local gravity." That is a clue to this being a question of gravity not spin. If it was spin then I would have said, "magma shifts affect Earth's spin velocity" or something like that. Gravity. Spin. Two different things. In any case its poppycock- or is it? Gravity is a function of mass and so dense magma moving around beneath the crust does indeed affect local gravity. Gravity is what pulls the stylus down into the groove. The stylus being pulled down into the groove is what creates drag. Drag is what affects anti-skate. Therefore logically magma affects anti-skate. Its just a fact. You could look it up. Its also a joke. A great big joke. Because while yes indeed all this is true, it also pales in significance to all the other things we can make so much of that turn out in the end to be insignificant. Which was my whole point. This whole thing is like arguing over how many angels can dance on the head of a pin. |
The question was and is: are the differences between outside and inside tracks on a LP? the answer is yes. Some like millercarbon do not see this as a problem, they are happy with this situation. Others like me have solved the issue by using the UNI-DIN curve which provides a better sound also for the outside tracks - and by using a good system you will hear it! Some may stick to Mono related curves and do not regard it as an issue. Fine! Best E. |
A simple examination of any record will demonstrate that the geometry of the grooves changes continuously from outer to inner grooves as the diameter of the record decreases. It’s the best they could do when conceived over 100 years ago. Yes the technology is that old! Amazing it is still around and somewhat popular. |
It’s the best they could do when conceived over 100 years ago.Actually not true, it just happened to beat out the cylinders. Bit like the betamax vs VHS where the best tech was not truly the winner there either....... Not that I am saying the cylinder was better than the LP in this instance but there was another option. |
| Post removed |
@thuchan : Can you discern between 0.5804% and 0.5697% of tracking distortion levels? Because that's the difference in between two consecutive grooves at near the LP center surface. This tracking distortion level is changing at each single groove during playing and our brain perhaps can be aware of stand alone 0.5% but a little on the middle of the LP surface the tracking distortion level goes down to 0.106% and 0.105% that not even as a stand alone groove you or any one can detect it. Our brain goes accustommed to those very low distortions even that can't detect it so where are the advantages between those differents alignments? The main issue on cartridge/tonearm/TT overall alignment subject has a name and is: accuracy, that the alignment be accurated. R: |
Thanks for the answers. In my opinion, irrespective of the tracking error, which can be minimized with a linear arm, the difference in diameter should have an effect on the sound. We have the same amount of information stored in a shorter span. In my case, my analog system was improving in quality over the years and from a point onwards I began to hear differences as it entered the last two tracks of the album. May be due to better system resolution. Which bothers me a little. I am thinking of buying a linear tracking arm in the future to see if the differences can be minimized. There is indeed a velocity change with the outer grooves moving faster than innner. This does matter and is why for example 45 sounds better than 33. Its why 30ips tape is better than 15. Its why half-speed mastering works. It also changes very gradually from the first groove to the last. Should be needless to say, tangential tracking does absolutely nothing to change any of this. People are notoriously bad and detecting changes that are continuous and gradual and slow. AC power is like this. A lot not only don’t notice power gradually getting cleaner making everything sound better late in the evening, they don’t even believe its possible! This tracking error thing I at least know is happening. Not happy with it. Just silly to try and deny reality. It happens. I don’t hear it. So I don’t care. Some like millercarbon do not see this as a problem, they are happy with this situation. Others like me have solved the issue by using the UNI-DIN curve which provides a better sound also for the outside tracks - and by using a good system you will hear it!UNI-DIN is nothing more than another cartridge geometry. The only difference is UNI-DIN is weighted more to having less error at the very end. For records that even go that far. The other alignments are more evenly weighted. If you are sensitive to this- if you can even hear it at all- AND if the last seconds of each side matter so much more than the first 15 minutes, then UNI-DIN might be worth the money. Oh yeah. Money. Did anyone mention that unlike the other alignments people can download and try for free UNI-DIN is proprietary and requires buying a protractor? No? In other words, this is all marketing malarkey. This tracking distortion level is changing at each single groove during playing and our brain perhaps can be aware of stand alone 0.5% but a little on the middle of the LP surface the tracking distortion level goes down to 0.106% and 0.105% that not even as a stand alone groove you or any one can detect it. Exactly. |
Dear @thuchan : Sorry for my ignorance but I need your help. You posted: "" stick to Mono related curves.."" and posted too that you use a stereo related curve. What happens when you want to listen a mono recording, that according you is different curve,: do you have to change the alignment or your " curve " knows ( somehow? ? ) if is mono and not stereo. How swtich it in between? Can you explain it?, appreciated. R. |
Hi. Thanks for all the responses. What I was looking when I started this thread was to better understand the difference in sound, if any, between a smaller diameter groove and a larger diameter groove. Not the effect of tracking error or cartridge alingment. Assuming zero tracking error across the record, will there be differences in sound between the inner and outher tracks? |
Dear @almart1 : ""
Assuming zero tracking error across the record, will there be differences in sound between the inner and outher tracks? "" Yes, always will be differences in sound. As a fact you posted somewhere in the thread. Even with over LP surface zero traking error the only way to put at minimum the differences ( we can't avoid it. ) in between is to have a very well matched cartridge/tonearm combination and that the cartridge it self has high traking abilities. R. |
I read an interesting example of this on Peter Gabriel's "So" album. "In Your Eyes" was slated to the the last track on Side A, but Gabriel and engineer Daniel Lanois realized that because it was such a bass-heavy track, they would have to start off Side B with it as the bass is more pronounced on the outer part of the record than on the inner. I don't know the acoustics/physics behind this, btw. |
The curvature of the record is greatest with the inner grooves which would effect tracking and low frequency modulation the most ie its a form of distortion. Records are 100 year old technology. Good stuff and a beloved format by many including me, at least records from the golden age, but flawed in comparison to modern technology in many ways. Tracking a record is like trying to write legibly on a rollercoaster. Not easy! |
It’s not that bass is more pronounced on the outer grooves versus the inner grooves, it’s that in the outer grooves the stylus is moving with greater velocity. this allows for a wider frequency response, both bass and treble can be more extended, and better sound quality in all ways, compared to the situation in the inner grooves, where the stylus velocity is reduced due to the reduced circumference of the LP at the inner grooves. As someone else aptly mentioned, it’s analogous to using tape to reproduce sound: high speed wide track tape is sonically superior to low speed narrow track tape for similar reasons related to the physics. To put it another way, it’s the law. |
Good point! Of course low frequency noise and distortion with outer grooves also tends to be typically most noticeable from record warp and other common defects in record structure and that is where a better tracking rig will clearly shine the most over a lesser one, ie where the roller coaster ride is the most extreme. Double whammy there. Record rotation velocity is highest and warps also tend to be most pronounced with the outer grooves. |
Dear @thuchan : It's obvious that you really support the unidin alignment that's " the best " not only for you but for several other low knowledge level audiophiles. Now you as many other gentlemans bougth the unidin protractor that comes with the Löfgren A/Baerwald Löfgren B, Stevenson and unidin with IEC and DIN standards ( why no JIS?. ) and paid for when the " best/one " is unidin. Make sense to you pay for something/alignments that are way " inferior " to the " best "? and I know that people do not paid 200.00 but a lot lot more money: why more money? Because as @millercarbon said: all is about MONEY nothing more. Takes money from the people alignment very low knowledge levels. Nothing wrong with that because business is business and nothing comes by " free ". Maybe @lewm has a different opinion on that protractor alignments use. Btw, the information in these links could be useful for you and maybe other protractor owners or to any audiophile: https://odysseytonearms.blogspot.com/search/label/Formulae https://odysseytonearms.blogspot.com/search/label/Dennesen%20Soundtractor At the end: it's really a better alignment unidin than the Löfgren ? , certainly not only different and with disadvantages. R. |
