2. analog
  3. 1235522919

Tracking error distortion audibility

I recently unpacked my turntable from a couple of years of storage. It still sounds very good. Several times during playback of the first few albums I literally jumped from my chair to see which track was playing as it sounded so great. After a while I realized the "great" sound was always at one of the "null" points. They seem to occur at the approximately the proper place (about 125mm from spindle) and near the lead out groove. Questions:
Is this common? I have improved the resolution of my system since the table's been in storage but I don't remember hearing this before.
All others geometric sources of alignment error not defined by the null points (VTA, azimuth etc.) are essentially constant through out the arc correct? If so they should cancel out. I assume the remedy is a linear tracking arm but I am surprised at how obviously better the sound is at these two points.
Table - AR ES-1, Arm - Sumiko MMT, Cart. - Benz Glider, Pre - Audible Illusions, Speakers - Innersound electrostatic hybrid
Do linear arms really sound as good across the whole record as I hear at only the nulls with my set-up?
feathed
Ag insider logo xs@2x
rauliruegas
13,088 posts
 
Dear Feathed: +++++ " It's so simple I just assumed everyone did this. " +++++

everyone that wants to change the effective tonearm length.

+++++ " You get the exact equivalent of a longer effective length tonearm. " +++++++

and a " little " different performance.

IMHO the designer tonearm voicing was taking in count that spindle to pivot spec along the overhang and " original " effective length.

How do you know what the tonearm designer intented through its original specs? IMHO it is not only the geometry tonearm parameters what define the tonearm performance. Nothing is perfect and has trade-offs: how do you know which trade-offs choose the tonearm designer?.

You can change those parameters but like I told you the performance will be different.
So, IMHO that spindle to pivot spec is still useful and necessary.

There are times where is important to preserv/guard a little respect for the designers.

Regards and enjoy the music.
Raul.
feathed OP
16 posts
 
Thom,
Your longer effective length calulations show lower distortion and there is NO downside. You just proved the point. You claim to respect Brooks and you don't know everything yet you will
"set him straight".
feathed OP
16 posts
 
Raul,
Not mounting a cartridge exactly where a manufacturer's direction say is not disrespecting the designer at all. The arm manufacturer has to allow for inaccurate drilling of the mounting board and has to accommodate all possible cartridges. I bet all designers would applaud taking the effort to tweak the most performance out of their arm. I'm not insisting anyone has to do this. You, like the manufacturer may want to drill in the middle of the range in case of a slight error during the drilling or in case you later wish to sell the table to someone with a very odd cartridge. I very much doubt the increase in length will make a significant improvement but why not optimized all you can?
thom_at_galibier_design's avatar
thom_at_galibier_design
729 posts
 
Feathed,
Your longer effective length calulations show lower distortion and there is NO downside. You just proved the point. You claim to respect Brooks and you don't know everything yet you will "set him straight".

.02% (that's .0002) is not audible, and even if it had some marginal effect, all other variables need to be taken into account in order to understand the cost (if any) of this small gain. One needs to remember that this is a sub-system and not a single isolated parameter.

As Raul correctly points out, all design and implementation parameters of a cartridge/tonearm sub-system are interrelated with each other. I pointed out one potential downside to extending the cartridge to the very front of the headshell in my point (b) above - the possibility of compromising headshell/cartridge interface.

Because I respect Brooks does not mean that he is any more infallible than I am. I walked a fine line in my comment, and gave you the benefit of the doubt that you understood Brooks when I wrote: "If indeed your memory of your conversation with him is accurate, then I'll take the opportunity to set him straight."

Can you help me understand why I should believe that you are accurately conveying Brooks' explanation any better than you are assimilating Raul's and my comments?

Thom @ Galibier
Ag insider logo xs@2x
rauliruegas
13,088 posts
 
Dear Feathed: Normally who makes the drilling is the TT manufacturer or the tonearm manufacturer if the tonearm comes with the TT ( VPI, Avid, Rega, SME, and the like ).

Now, if we have to make the drilling normally too we leave 2-3mm for " to play " with the tonearm position in order to put on the precise position, at least in a fixed arm board, because in a round and with movement one like in the Micro Seiki or Acoustic Signature, I think Galibier and others to find out that precise tonearm position is extremely easy and there is no excuse not to do it, even for a non experienced person.

Yes, I'm with the tonearm design instructions and with the designer.
IMHO there is no reason why has to be in other way. I know that many people don't do that and send to build a dedicated protractor ( that several times ( almost always ) goes against the tonearm designer targets. ) or build by it self, I'm not in favor of any one of them ( hear things different not always means better ).

Well this is my opinion, I respect yours.

Regards and enjoy the music.
Raul.
More to discover