Dear Leicachamp: +++++ " Do you think it would a sideways step going to the Soundsmith? " +++++
it is very dificult to compare apples with oranges: don't you think? and this is what you are asking for, let me to explain it:
your Zyx as any other LOMC/MM/MI cartridge performs ( along its phono stage. ) according to the RIAA standard curve as other straing gauge cartridges but the SS that the designer choose on porpose a different approach not performing according RIAA standard curve.
Almost all your LPs were cut with the RIAA standar curve eq. ( pre-emphasis. ) and when the signal of your Zyx pass through the Whest phono stage what happen is that the cartridge signal pass through an inverse RIAA standard eq. curve to attain flat/linear frequency response with minimal deviation, usually around 0.1db when the SS is over 2db.
Well the SS don't pass through that inverse RIAA standard curve but through its dedicated preamp where the natural cartridge SS curve is procceseed with the inconvenient that what you heard through the SS is not what is in the recording but an " adulterated "/equalized version way different from the RIAA standard curve that was how your LP was recorded.
That you like it more the SS or the Zyx does not means one is better than the other both are different: we IMHO can't compare in between. All depend what you want, do you want to listen what is in the recording or it does not matters?, if you care about then you need a MC/MM or MI cartridge and if you want to listen a different approach then you could hear the SS or add an external equalizer to your system and you can be done.
Regards and enjoy the music,
R. |
Dear Leicachamp: Yes, correct. Has a different equalization curve that what is in the recording and in your Whest.
regards and enjoy the music,
R. |
Dear Mosin: That could be great just great. Hope some one doing in the future.
Regards and enjoy the music,
R. |
Dear Slowlearner: +++++ " You don't own a strain gauge... " ++++
no I don't because I don´t have any single LP that conforms with the SS strain gauge eq. curve. I heard it in different systems. Mr. Doobins know what was my comment a few time ago when I heard it at his place and that was before I been aware of the whole SS straing gauge facts.
++++ " because your true issue is that you don't have the ability to listen " ++++
yes I accept this statement, not all people have that ability but the best of all is that always exist the opportunity to improve and I try hard every single day. I'm not there but sooner or later I will arrive to other listeners top level.
++++ " tired of your attacking my products " +++++
IMHO my comments to Leicachamp are in no way an attack but what I understand about. If what I posted is untrue then just say so and the best way to tell me I'm wrong ( Certainly I can be wrong. ) is to post the SS strain gauge eq. curve where everyone could see that that ss curve even the inverse RIAA. eq. one: easy, not big deal.
+++++ " not identifying yourself as a manufacturer " +++++
sorry but I'm not a manufacturer, I'm not selling any audio item .
+++++ " I will NOT work on any more of your cartridges ever " +++++
your privilege.
++++ " If you were a real engineer, you would post a curve of your stereo from your listening position - which by your requirements would have to be flat within .1 dB, and if it is not, then you would have to explain why that " +++++
certainly not 0.1db.
+++ " But you can't " ++++
why ask for something tha's impossible to achieve.
In an open forum like this we can read several different opinions in different audio subjects/items where the most of the time almost we can't find out two similar opinions with ( example ) the same cartridge model: one person like some characteristics and dislike others and the other persons likes something different and dislike what the other likes:
Peter, what these two persons dislikes and they posted are considered a product/cartridge attack?, becvause from this point of view this as other forums all over the net are full of product attacks!
I'm not against any of your products per se or against you, I just like to analyze " things " and share my findings.
++++ " have caused you to lose many friends " ++++
I really sorry to hear that and I mean it. Maybe in the future to avoid that fact I will post opinions that goes against my own true/knowledge/findings that in some ways could be a deceit for my self and obviously to other persons.
Anyway, I think I can't do that because that's not my " own nature ".
Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Regards and enjoy the music,
R. |
Dear Slowlearner: This is what you posted:
+++++ " I can tell you that it is a different animal altogether from magnetic devices.... " +++++
++++ " It is a different animal - that is the bottom line. Nothing is perfect, " +++++
these are what I posted:
++++ " That you like it more the SS or the Zyx does not means one is better than the other both are different: " ++++ " All depend what you want, "
+++++ " and if you want to listen a different approach then you could hear the SS " +++++
and this what Dougdeacon posted:
+++ " They are very different cartridges with very different strengths and weaknesses. " +++++
You can see that what I'm saying is not different from what you or Dougdeacon stated.
I even not posted any statement regarding " preferences ", I don't posted that I don't like it or said to Leicachap: " don't buy it " or stay away from it ".
Even Dougdeacon posted that prefer the A-90 or Olympos in some audio performance areas over the SS. I did not nothing like this and I never posted anywhere in the forum any cartridge comparison trying to dimish the SS. I think that all I made it was to say is different.
You can read any of my posts elsewhere on the subject, IMHO there is no single attack but a simple explanation on the ss differences against MC/MM/MI cartridges and that's all, you said is different and I agree with you!
As I posted, I'm not against you in anyway: I have no single reason to.
Regards and enjoy the music,
R. |
Dear Dover: I respect your point of view but for me is relevant and not matters what the cutter-head angle been because this fact does not affect the RIAA eq. what we do on playback is to set the SRA according with that label recordings. Somewhere is a list where we can have that recording information for we can adjust/set that cartridge SRA according to.
About different recorded eq. cuve you already know that exist over 10+ of them other than the RIAA standard. Before RIAA standard curve almost each LP label recorded with its own eq. and that's why exist some phono stage designs with several inverse eq. curves additional to the RIAA even the ones that include the Neumann correction at high frequency.
I owned the Win and Panasonic sstrain gauge but these ones conformed according to the RIAA standard.
In the SS that is not happening this strain gauge gives its " natural response/curve " with almost no signal manipulation ( and that's why sounds and perform DIFFERENT " from any other magnetic cartridge. ) to make its response flat according to the RIAA standard and this is why shows a RIAA deviation around 2db when the RIAA deviation in a phono stage ( for magnetic cartridges. ) that deviation are around 0.2db to 0.1db as something normal ( the Atmasphere phono stage shows 0.07db and if I remember one of the Rowland's: 0.05db. ).
Now, in my case one of my main quality audio system performance level is to add and lose the less from the cartridge signal. Yes, I know that that SS 2db frequency response deviation could be maybe not so important when we can have 10+db frequency deviations on the speaker/room response but this is not my point: my target is add and lose the less from the cartridge signal.
I almost don't care what happened during the LP recording because I can't have any control about.
What I care is what is in my " hands " to preserve the cartridge signal integrity.
Now, Mr. Ledermann choosed that the ss signal instead to pass for an inverse RIAA eq. curve process ( as any magnetic cartridge signal. ) to shows its " natural response/curve " with that frequency response 2db deviation.
He made something that in his opinion could gives a better quality performance level.
As always in any audio choices/alternative exist trade-offs: he choosed what for him was and is his best trade-offs: to have that frequency deviation instead the ss signal pass through the RIAA. inverse eq. proccess.
In both cases the cartridge signal " suffer " a degradation in its " integrity " over what came in the recording.
Which is the best trade-off?, I think that this is up to any one of us.
I prefer that if the LPs I own were recorded using the RIAA standard eq. curve on playback the phono stage must apply the inverse RIAA eq. curve to achieve flat frequency response at this stage/link on the audio system chain. Other people could like a different approach and this different approach is what is the ss device.
Mosin posted something that could be the best of both " worlds " ( with almost no trade-offs. ): a strain gauge design that can performs the inverse RIAA eq. curve with out the necessity to pass to that proccess on playback and with out no frequency response deviation other that the normal 0.1db one. This could be just great! and I think that this idea could be a good challenge to Mr. Ledermann to work about because he has the knowledge.
I hope Mr.PL does not take this post as an " attack ".
Regards and enjoy the music,
R. |
Dear Royj: This can shows you that the SS does not mimic the RIAA as you are assuming ( see those magazyne pictures. ):
http://www.sound-smith.com/cartridges/article.pdf
and here MR. Lendermann told us about that deviation level:
+++++ " I have measured the SG in many arms, and recently in my Schroder Reference SG, the new SG design (which you did not hear) it was +/- 1dB from 50 Hz to 12K " +++++
weird on the frequency range, he does not given how the ss performs between 20hz to 50hz and between 12khz and 20khz.
Royj, I'm not against the SS device and obviously not against Mr. Ledermann: I'm only share my findings about, that's all. Why that so " big distress ", that's not my opinion ( I reserve to me that opinion. ) are only facts coming from other " sources " ( SS site and Mr. Ledermann. ) but me.
Why Mr. Ledermann and other persons try to blame me for something that's not my opinion?, makes no sense.
Regards and enjoy the music,
R. |
Dear Royj: I don't know what kind of cartridges are you accustom to hear or like it but the ones I like almost all are dead flat, you can take the EPC100CMK4 frequency response diagram and you can't see/detect any minimal deviation ( not even 0.1db. ) from flat.
+,- 1 db means a 2db swing. I can understand that this kind of performance level achieve your targets but certainly not mines.
++++ " SOUNDSMITH cartridge is equal to the RIAA curve " +++++
this is a non-sense an IMHO almost a stupid statement against evidence on that pictures.
+++++ " If you did not like the Soundsmith Strain Gauge " +++++
where do you read that statement?, please don't infere what could be or not my opinion on preference.
+++++ " As a side note, I hope we all can agree that passing the 1812 LP's torture track is no indication of a cartridge's musicality. " +++++
musicality?, where I heard that " term "? oh yes, an audiophile term that means colored/distorted performer aways from accuracy/neutrality. I don't use that term any more for very good reasons.
Yes, the Telarc 1812 could tell us several things, between others if the cartridge always stay in full touch with the grooves ( at microscopic level. ). A cartridge that pass this music recording normally has low very low tracking distortion that the ones that did not and lower tracking distortions means IMHO more MUSIC and less colorations. It is a lot better to have a cartridge that always is in the groove that other cartridge that are " jumping " ( again: microscopic level. ) in between because poor tracking habilities. No contest here between one and the other. IMHO the better the cartridge tracking habilities ( everything the same. ) the better quality performance.
Low cartridge traking distortion is one main cartridge design desired characteristic and of course that this characteristic per se can't tell us if we will like it or not during playback.
Poor tracking cartridge habilities perhaps is the factor that makes more harm to what we hear in a cartridge, problem is that almost no one but the designer cares about and I can see that you don't care enough and nothing wrong with that.
I don't where do you want to arrive? or why are you questioning me? why not question to that magazyne or SS people?. I'm just an audio customer and an Agoner that like to share its findings/experiences as any other person in this and other internet forums.
Btw, my opinion is as valid as yours nothing less and nothing more.
Regards and enjoy the music,
R. |
|
Dear Royj: I always am prepare to learn, learn to me is a main target in audio for different reasons.
Nothing you posted I'm not aware of it. In the 1812 recording only two of the shots can really say " are macro " but the whole point it is not this one and maybe you can't understand it because you have no deep experience about, let me explain it a little and with this I would like to end this discussion that till today has no additional " light " on the ss main subject:
years ago I decided to understand in a better way different kind of distortions generated in an audio system and especially those one by the cartridge playback so I begin to investigate what is what the cartridge makes when in the groove and what makes during cartridge playback that distortions generated go higher or lower and how I perceived to know that was a tracking distortion type or an overhang wrong set-up or a SRS subject.
To make all these very difficult work I started with the normal LP dedicated test recordings ( Shure, CBS, Denon, Ortofon and the like. ), these ones help to understand part of the subject but really can't give and telling me the whole " history ".
So, I change to five-six LP recordings with real music that I knew and know so well that I can tell you in the tracks I use any single tick/pop on the recording and not only that because the tone on that click/pop I can tell you part of the cartridge performance. I use several months listening and learning about to be sure that what I heard and what I think on any cartridge performance level be repetitive and not only because in that cartridge " I have luck to predict " about.
Today with any unknow cartridge to me and from the very first five minutes on playback through one of my listening tracks I can tell you a nice cartridge " history " that you can't believe could be true till you listening and confirm it. I have this kind of hard training and that Telarc recording is only one of my music test recordings along my music tracks recordings to set up. All these has nothing to see ( directly ) with mathemathics or the like but with a deep training and that's all. You could do it as any one else with a training about. I have my own proccess but any one can works in his own: no big deal and not only a learning " job " but very revealing.
And yes: cartridge traking habilities is one of the main targets/characteristics that separe a good performer from the excelent one.
Do you know why Dougdeacon preference was for the A-90/Olympos over the ss in some performance areas?, I know why but this is another topic.
I'm done for now in the whole subject, thank you for your time and learning posts.
Regards and enjoy the music,
R. |
