A few years ago, I invested in a Lyra Atlas cartridge / pickup. I have moved up, from Lyra Clavis in the early 2000s and Lyra Titan i later. The Atlas was expensive, but I have not looked back. Yet I wonder, can something more be done, to optimize the Atlas, in my system, and others. How can this remarkable pickup run its best. What are the best phono preamp and system matches. Should the system be rearranged. Have anyone done mods or DIYs to their systems to get the "reception" right? What happened? Comments welcome. You dont need to own a Lyra Atlas but you should have heard it, to join this discussion. Comments from the folks at Lyra are extra welcome - what is your experience. Oystein
Nandric...I was writing of your unfriendly comments to our Mexican friend. It would be better to discuss our beloved black boxes instead.
Records are easily damage with one play when torture tracks are negotiated at poorly set up vtf, a/s , - especially with severely cut stylii, etc. which negate any value for their subsequent use.
0_Oholter....the Atlas is phenomenally good at finding all the little differences in all that the record can reveal...performance, production, etc....That's why one pays all that money....however, it will be this microscopic, even if a bit off (we all seek perfection at this level)
Drastic....just wondering if this mistraking is on one record, at the same place....could a damaged record be responsible?
Drastic - breakup in left channel - can you give some examples, I’d like to test this in my system also. I have heard that kind of thing before. Is it mainly on the inner part of the record? Can you check, it is associated with mistracking, inwards or outwards? In my system, I can’t recall my Lyras have mistracked much inwards, mainly outwards (groove is repeated). And the Atlas seldom mistracks anyway.
Stingreen - nice to hear about the arm - I have a VPI HW-19, upgraded over the years, although now I mainly use another player (Hanss T-30). I had a Souther / Clearaudio parallel arm for some years, but could never get it to work well with the VPI.
A little reality check today. I played my three versions of Credence Clearwater Revival: Heard it through the grapewine. If my cartridge is poorly adjusted, I will be confused which one sounds best. I wasn’t. Instead I could hear, not only, that all in all I prefer my latest (Acoustic sound RTI) version, next the Mofi version, and then the original - but I could hear the different plusses and minuses with each version. My gratitude to Lyra.
This experiment does not prove anything, except that it indicates that if the cartridge is fairly well aligned, other matters tend to take over - like the quality of the mastering and pressing. The guitar went from good to great, on the best recording.
Stringreen - Thank you. All this will be done. Though I don't have a Fozgometer (my dealer does this by ear), I presume you feel that having the instrument is important so I'll get one.
Drastic.... After inspecting the stylus and declared it not bent......I would make positive that the turntable itself is level, I would make positive (using an electronic scale) that the vtf is exactly what the cartridge manufacturer recommends as optimum (not a range)... then I would absolutely make sure that azimuth is set correctly using the Fozgometer and its recommended lp using a brand new battery. If that doesn’t work, get back and we’ll go further.
If I may jump into this erudite group with a related question ... My Lyra Atlas lives on a Basis Superarm 9 on a Basis Inspiration table, set up by the dealer, and it sounds superb. But on rare occasions and only with a "hot" recording of piano, I'll hear breakup in the left channel. Cartridge weight was set to Lyra's recommendation. What's the most likely fix, do you think? I don't want to start messing with the wrong parameters.
0_holter....Hi 0,,,,,I use a VPI 3D. In my experience there is non better (here come the rebukes from all).....there are other great arms- 4point et al......they all sound different, but to these ears, ...... There is coming a new mod for the 3D which puts an additional (not different) bearing in play. Harry says it makes the arm even better.....we’ll hear. There are those that say that the arms they use has "perfect" anti-skate adjustments. Harry says he can’t make a perfect anti-skate adjust. That’s because it can not be done...its constantly changing.....no one needs it. (just my and a few others’ opinions - hope all can sleep well tonight) Anyway, the VPI antiskate is the best adjustment I’ve seen - It can be set accurately so the greatest degree of pull on the record can be adjusted for the best place ( the loudest portion) of the record side. Again...for me - I just don’t use it at all.
Dear all, many thanks, for your viewpoints. Who could doubt that Audiogon discussions help progress? I am grateful to you all. Please note, in my case, we are beyond the zone of obvious errors, bleed, mistrackings, and so on. The Atlas sails throught the test record, no problem, and sounds very good. I have compared with a good mid-level Ortofon, in my system - both are good, but the Atlas is clearly superior. So we are beyond the territory of obvious faults and into the one of refinements and optimalization. The Atlas has been a major upgrade from my Titan. But since it is clearly a better cartridge, I want to tune it as well as possible, and my ears tell me, I still have a way to go.
Stingreen - what arm do you use, the vpi? what is wrong with it? Folkfreak - azimuth important, yes I know, and thanks for link. Trying to set up my microscope to get it good enough. I went to a shop in Oslo with my older Clavis and Lyra cartridges, and asked for a microscope analysis. However they could not do left-right. All they could tell me was that that the styli were worn, from a side view, and I knew that already.
Dear @stringreen : """
I always set my vtf to the manufacuter's recommendation. They designed the cartridge and know what is best for it. I don't care at all how the cartridge does with test records... """
You are absolutely right. The manufacture VTF range is to achieve at least two main targets: coils centered and a range to preserve cartridge suspension. The cartridge was tunned/voiced inside that VTF range.
Ignorance level is always the name of the audio game.
Nandric....I always set my vtf to the manufacuter's recommendation. They designed the cartridge and know what is best for it. I don't care at all how the cartridge does with test records...only how it sounds with my records. In my experiences test records that measure tracking ability can be damaged in even 1 play, and ruin any hope of accuracy.
Folkfreak...You're absolutely correct. Some companies are worse than others, (AirTight is one of the better ones) but that is why an arm has to be able to make all adjustments.
o_holter -- regarding setting azimuth be aware that ensuring that the cartridge is level may have no bearing whatsoever on whether the azimuth is correct. What matters is the orientation of the stylus and many styli are far from accurately attached to their cantilevers. For example I own an Air Tight PC-1 and this brand is quite notorious for some sketchy stylus attachment -- 2 out of 3 of the Air Tight cartridges I observed at the last Newport show were canted visibly off to one side, including a brand new Magnum Opus. There’s no problem with this and if this is the correct setting for azimuth so be it (mine is a good several degrees off level as well)
As far as the right method for setting azimuth by all means try a fozgometer but in my experience setting it by ear using a method such as this gives the best results
Good luck!
ps getting azimuth right has far more impact than any change anti skate, at least in my experience. With my current string/weight A/S set up I simply set it somewhere in the middle and am done, not sure I cam reliably hear any difference one way or another with this parameter
0_holter....If your Atlas is distorting on one side or another, something is wrong with your setup. I am using an Ortofon which sails through anything ..no sibilants, no distortion, etc....no a/s.
0_holter....when azimuth is properly set there is great depth ...instrunents are in front of and behind others, the soundstage is very wide...sometimes beyond the side walls, images are sculpted in space with (almost) a black line around them...no bleeding left, and right...especially with the Atlas ( Or Etna which I also think is wonderful) All these elements, are what we audiophiles cherish in presentation. I need an arm that provides for this adjustment....I use the Fozgometer and its accompanying lp as my tool of choice. Providing I use a new battery every time, I find the results accurate, and easy to accomplish. I personally find that the use of anti/skate is detrimental to the sound. It may lessen wear of the stylus, but I have no concern about that. Using a/s on my system knocks some of the polish off of all that proper alignment contribute. If anyone reading this post disagrees with me, that's fine...I've heard all the arguments....however, I maintain my stand. Should you want to try to listen without a/s to find the differences, listen to only 1 instrument (I find percussion easiest to hear the differences). When you can hear what I'm writing about, it will be easier to find that sonic clue on all the other instrument and singers. My personal take is that a/s prevents the stylus from vibrating freely by exerting that outward force, and so reduces the stylus's ability reproduce those wiggles on the record. I only write what I hear....I'm not a scientist, or an engineer.....just sayin'
Some more visual checking today - now with a USB microscope. Very interesting, although so far, I haven’t been able to stabilize the setup enough to get sharp close up images of the diamond. It seems to be OK, on my lower scale images.
Since, from visual testing, the azimuth seems good, I did more listening, trying to get the antiskating optimal. The flute in the first Alpha Centauri track works well, and also my Lotta Lenya mono. I listen for how well the voice or instrument is pictured at the front even with large background dynamics (the "guru method" of listening).
I find that the arm behaves very good with the anti-skating a bit relaxed from the weight, perhaps 1.4 ot 1.5. Listening to female vocal, going lower to 1.1 makes the sound more relaxed and open in a way, but also made the voice "crack up" a bit, as if she had smoked all her life. I tried to correct this with a bit more weight, but that did not help, so I went back to standard weight (1.72 g).
In my system, if the antiskating is set too high, the whole soundstage sounds more controlled, but also restricted, tensioned. So it is a good idea to relax it a bit, but not too far from the setting equal to the weight, since then the sound will crack up, become too loose; it can sound like using too little weight.
Perhaps the best way to set antiskate by ear - after listening to mono recordings for rough adjustments - could be to select the best-sounding stereo recordings. With this in mind we listened to Shelby Lynne, Just a little lovin. It sounded very good at ca 1.5.
I am sorry but I was provoked by Raul's comment. Nobody mentioned in this thread anti-skate test records. I mentiond the tracking ability test and possible use of this test. What Raul deed is attributing to me statements about anti-skate test constructing this way the known ''stroman''. But tracking abiity test is not an AS test. His confusion of both illustrate his technical knowledge. However this tracking ability test can be used to determine possible probleems with both: VTF and anti-skate.
Nandric - as related above, the test record method doesn't work in my case, I end up with far too much antiskate (2.7), and adjusting by ear I've gone down to 1.5 or so. And I recently got a clear message from SME saying don't use these tracks, instead start AS equal to the weight and fine tune by ear from there. These distortion tests are more for a rough first check perhaps - is the cartridge very off (or damaged). The Atlas sails through them without problems.
Heavier arm - perhaps - I think J Carr wrote that it is possible to tweak the mass of the arm. I thought the SME V would be an OK match. I’ve tried some more mass (damping material) on the headshell and the arm but it didn’t work for me (not even some ’magic dots’ I had). I did some eyeballing tests now, using a loupe and then some 20x glasses. Stylus settles as before, a little to the right, in the hole in the front. Mirror test; it looks vertical. I had to turn down the AS to 1.1 to avoid the arm sliding to the right (the platter is level). I wanted to have a look at the stylus tip also, but the glasses are too weak. So I tried a little 100x microscope with light. I got nervous, however, it has to go extremely close the cantilever. Perhaps later I will try a small USB microscope that I also have. But well, so far, there is no visible sign that the azimuth is off. So it should be an OK starting point for listening tests.
The SMEV is a great arm, but not for a cartridge like the Atlas. The compliance is ~ 12x10 cm/dyne bei 100 Hz You need a heavier arm to get best results. I had a Kleos in an Origin Live Conqueror with 18gramm eff. mass and in a Reed 3P with the same mass.
The SMEV is a great combination with Van den Hull cartridges.
Stingreen, thanks, I agree, the Atlas is great, the best cartridge I've had in my system also. All the more reason to give it optimal conditions. What you say about azimuth is interesting. I will check it out. Can you say a bit more, what you hear when it is right?
I don't dispute what anyone on these posts says...everyone hears differently and everyone has different components. I can only tell you what I hear. To these ears, there is no better cartridge that I have experience with, than the Atlas. I have had the SME V in my system, but although built like a tank, didn't have the alacrity I was looking for and replaced it with a VPI 3D. Perhaps (I don't know for sure), the difference was in the ability for the VPI to very accurately provide for correct azimuth. The difference in the presentation/performance of the cartridge having proper azimuth and being even a "smidge" off is enormous.. not just audible, but enormous... maybe the most important adjustment (for me). Another point is the (seemingly) never ending dispute regarding the use (or not) of antiskate. For these ears on My system, I hear an improvement with no antiskate...no matter which arm that I adjust. I am at present trying to evaluate the sound with/without a/s for a dispute on another site....but for the here and now, its no a/s for me. There is a very definite difference...its not in the increase of distortion on one side or another....my arm/cartridge tracks flawlessly with both methods....but its in presentation.....(still evaluating).
I mailed SME, and got a clear answer: do not use the HFN test record with the SME V arm. Instead, start from the equivalent of the weight, and fine tune by ear, from there. OK! I am glad that my listening tests the last evenings led to the same conclusion.
Ninetynine - thank you, I will try this some more, may make more sense now.
7. Adjust the skating force to zero and prepare yourself for a mean experience. The right channel will not show dynamics at all; it will sit in the corner totally bored and ignoring you. The left channel will sit in its corner like an evil ghost, considering to attack you in the next moment. It will sound very dynamic in a way that numbs the left half of your body. However, the dynamics will be nightmare-like artificial.
Now you increase the skating force to a quarter and then to a half of the expected value. You will sense that the right channel comes more-and-more alive and the left channel sounds less dynamic, intimidating and artificial. This reduction is less than the increase of dynamics in the right channel; the while system becomes more dynamic.
You increase now the skating compensation by *very* small steps until you reach a point where left and right channel sound equally dynamic. Then you increase further very small steps; both channels will grow more dynamic. One step too far and both channels loose their dynamics completely and sound dead. So you go back to the position where dymics and microdynamics were maximum.
Listening tests make me think, better go back to the SME tuning, or a bit below .
Testing, first, Lotta Lenya sings Kurt Weill (mono 1960ies heavy vinyl version), and next, Tangerine Dream: Alpha Centauri (1971). It has been argued that quadrophonic recordings are best, to set the anti-skating. I don’t have the quad version ot Alpha Centauri (twin virgin label), only a stereo version, but this works well also.
In both cases, turning off the light and just listening, I tended to go down on the antiskating scale - it can be adjusted while playing, on the SME V - and towards a setting more like the factory default (calibrated scale), to get the best sound. Listening for the holographics especially (Tangerine Dream very good at that point), I went towards a weight equivalent 1.7 (corresponding to the 1.72 g Atlas weight) or even a bit down, to 1.5 or 1.4 on the scale. Much lower than the HFN test record results (2.7 - 3). I have to recheck - this is my impression so far.
A comment on setup: I have assumed that the anti-skating on my SME V arm was correct, and have dialed it in approximately like the weight (1.72 g), or a bit less. I think I have been wrong. I tried various methods: look at the cantilever deflection when it settles in a groove, use a blank record, use the HFN test record (side 2 track 1-4-8) - and even, my ears. Results are similar. A-skate needs to be set to 2.7 to avoid distortion in the right channel on the HFN tracks. I come roughly to the same conclusion using my ears. Music sounds fuller and both channels more in sync, at around 2.5 or so, or even higher. Although I have not found the exact spot, and my methods are limited. Since my arm is ca 15 years old, I wonder if the anti-skate spring has lost some tension over time. I have also found that the arm needs to be lifted a bit asymmetrically at the back, to get the best azimuth (cannot be directly adjusted on SME V). One behaviour seems a bit odd. When the cartridge is lifted, not playing in the groove, the inner part of the cantilever is quite precisely centered in the hole on the green front (looking in a loupe). When it settles in a groove, however, it changes downwards and to the right. This seems to happen pretty much regardless of where I set the anti-skating. The inner part moves this way, even when I cannot see any deflection of the outer part (with the diamond). I wonder, is this normal behaviour?
Hi Sunnyboy1956 - thanks. For me, every step up the Lyra ladder has been worth it, although the cost level is now very high. I am mainly very satisfied with the Atlas, also compared to the Titan i that I used before. I have no reason to think it performs sub standard. My question is more about getting into the best optimal terrain. Thanks for the tonearm cable burn in advice, this is true, but mine is well used. How do you like the performance of your three Lyras all in all? Where do I want improvements? I want the music to sound even better. I think it is possible. I have recently confirmed, this is very much a matter of signal to noise. A stereo is like a radar picking up interference, and we don't want anything to disturb the sound. Since my main phono stage is on repair, I use a small solid-state stage. Today I found that by turning the plug, the noise from the unit was considerably reduced. Dressing the tone arm cable (singled ended Kimber KCAG DIY) also helped lower the noise level.
Hi Oystein Like your self I have been a Lyra fan. I currently own the Atlas, Etna and mono Kleos. A quick question why do you think you are getting sub optimal results with your Atlas ? Have you heard it sound different/better to your ears in another system ? If your cart is properly aligned with a MintLP, VTF and VTF are properly set, I can suggest a tweak which paid huge dividends in my system, namely burning in the tone arm wire. I was told by the good folks at Lyra that the majority of tone arms probably underperform given the minuscule mV current that the cart generates. Best Pradeep
I bought a used a Lyra Clavis pickup in 1997. I heard a Lyra Helicon in the system of a friend, later. Then I moved up to a Lyra Titan in 2005, a Titan i in 2008, and the Atlas in 2013.
Thank you! I have heard advice from others also, in the direction that the Lyra Atlas might sound better with better tone arms than the SME V. Although this is a good "work horse" I think. Suggestions are welcome, and if Lyra can comment, I am grateful. Regarding tubes - yes, I agree, maybe too much, but I like good tube sound. I have tried the Atlas with solid-state phone stages, and that is not my preference. I agree that the system has to "land". I am very happy having a system that lands, in the sense that it "grips" and "plays along" with my room. Best regards, Oystein
Dear @o_holter: Because I owned/own or listen in other audio systems I already heard almost all the Lyra cartridges included that.
Years ago I was convinced that the SME V was a good mate with Lyra's but latter on my mind changed. So, my first advise could be a diferent tonearm
/better mate tonearm.
In the other side I think your system has too many tubes where the Atlas can't really shines. I know very well your 3 tube items and the I/O is the one that makes more " damage " to the critical phono cartridge signal.
Your system has " land " to improve but each one of us have a diferent opinion how to improve it and you can confirm it when other gentlemans give their opinions.
You must have a verified phone number and physical address in order to post in the Audiogon Forums. Please return to Audiogon.com and complete this step. If you have any questions please contact Support.
