Telarc 1812 revisited


I've posted several threads about the trackability of this record and have received many scholarly answers, with emphasis on physics, geometry, compliance, weight, angles,price and all sorts of scientific explanations about tonearms, cartridges, VTA, etc, etc. Let's cut to the chase: I have a 1970's Pioneer 540 in the garage I bought for $5 at a thrift store plus an Audio Technica cartridge for which I paid $30 This combo. tracks the Telarc 1812 perfectly without problems while my $4000 Rega and $1200 Project bounce out of the grooves.. I'd really finally like to get some explanation and resolution as to this discrepanccy
boofer

Showing 9 responses by dougdeacon

Heh... I was writing my post while Jonathan was posting his. We're saying the same things, though as usual he says it better and with more authority.
Why in October 2013 after so many many years of analog audio are we discussing...
Where is this we? Who's discussing? The latest 25 posts are but vain soliloquoy.

This thread might cautiously ask of itself, "To be, or not to be?"

Lest some player recklessly declaim, "If it were done when 'tis done, then 'twere well it were done quickly."

;-)
If the stylus does not track groove modulations accurately, the resulting signal cannot be an accurate reproduction of the original. No argument there.

That said, it's conceivable that the ability to track the Telarc 1812's extreme amplitudes, velocities and clipped waveforms may only be achieved by compromising other performance parameters. I'm no cartridge designer, but as Raul well knows, improvements in one area often impair performance in others. In some instances, every solution may involve compromises.

If such is that case here, if better performance on most records can be achieved at the cost of not being able to perfectly track rare and unrealistic extremes, my own choice would be in favor of the music I actually listen to.
Raul, you made 15 of the last 20 posts. Are things a little slow down there? ;-)
An audiophile, speaking to one of the world's premier phono cartridge designers:
I don't have gold ears, I'm a " normal " listener...
... but,
...I can detect some kind of " sound " that you can't because you don't know what to look for...
False modesty and a forked tongue, all in one sentence - ROFL.

***
This cartridge tracking habilities audio subject seems to me similar as what could be happen in a car in specific to its suspension/tires and different suspension quality designs and how different cars performs on the road. You can be sure that exist differences because that car tracking habilities on demanding roads as in not so demanding ones.
An analogy which demonstrates Jcarr's and my point nicely.

For "tracking ability" on extreme terrain, a Jeep Wrangler, Army Hummer or Land Rover Defender have few equals. They motor happily through obstacles that would stop or even seriously damage normal cars. Try driving the family sedan over a boulder-strewn mountain pass or through deep water, soft sand or 12" of mud or snow. Forget spare tires, you'd better have a spare car.

But that doesn't make the Jeep, Hummer or Land Rover superior performers for normal driving conditions - just the opposite. Their long-travel suspensions, huge ground clearance and massive, heavy-duty frames *necessarily* impair performance on normal roadways. In city driving, on freeways or along paved country roads, any decent sedan or coupe will track and handle far better than the extreme vehicles, and be more comfortable too.

Great example of why a machine that's optimized for extreme conditions *cannot* also be optimal for more typical conditions. Thanks!
Peter, it hurts to denigrate my Landy that way, but it is what it is. Hope he wasn't listening. His ex-wife (an RX-8) would never let him hear the end of it! ;-)
I posted three times here and in other threads this sentece that you certainly did not read, here again:

" EVERYTHING THE SAME
Unfortunately, everything is never the same. Modifying a system to enable extreme behavior in one parameter invariably affects other parameters. To wish otherwise is not engineering - it's fantasy.
Raul,

I was never a defender of SUTs, still less the "official" one, whatever that means. Please don't put words in my mouth.

It's true I once used them (as have you). In using them, I learned something of their strengths and weaknesses. I posted what I'd learned when it seemed helpful.

I campaigned neither for nor against them because, as in most things audio, they have their pluses and minuses. SUTs are useful in some systems, less so in others. Those fortunate enough to own $12K+ preamps like your Essential or my Alaap probably do not need them. OTOH, those eager to explore LOMCs on a more limited budget may find that an SUT suits their needs... as I once did. I do not defend SUTs, I defend reasonableness.

As you continue to willfully misconstrue other people's statements, my participation in this thread is no longer indicated.