Andrew,
Cello and I each own a 25% share in a Wally Analog Shop. It works, and using it taught me two things (which Dan has already mentioned):
1. extremely small adjustments matter and,
2. I can set azimuth about as well by ear as by measuring (and with far less fuss).
4yanx also owned a share of our Wally at one time. He sold it after making the same discovery. Wanna buy my share? ;-)
As Tim said, cartridges are rarely if ever so flawless that stylus, cantilever, coils, suspension and magnets all align perfectly. It just doesn't happen in real manufacturing.
I set the stylus close to vertical to prevent vinyl damage or uneven wear. I don't find magnification helpful for this either. After that, fine adjustments to minimize crosstalk yield the best sound.
A good mono record works, but so does a good stereo one if there are well recorded instruments or vocalists in the center. Getting images tightly focused with maximum air is the goal.
Doug |
Doug,
That's interesting. Let me think about buying your share:)
One thing I do that is helpful in identifying "close" to vertical alignment is putting a small level on the headshell while the arm is in it's resting position an varying azimuth till the side to side level is the same as the TT platter. Of course this could only be true level if the cartridge base to stylus alignment is true.
Maybe I should get a mono recording or one with clear certain center image to assist in varying from this point by ear. In your experience, what range of azimuth changes resulted in optimization. 1/8 turn? 1/4 turn? Or less? Also, did your setting through listening equal the setting you obtained using the Wally instrument? Finally, did you have to connect your speaker cables to the Wally device or can you just insert tonearm out puts or preamp outputs?
Thanks Doug as always.
Andrew |
The teeny tiny changes needed to get azimuth right are a reality. I use the cheaper version of Wally's Analog Shop - bought it a few years ago before the price leaped up. Took me several hours of patient patience to move my SME's adjustable headshell just so. We're talking a movement distance of less than or equal to the thickness of a line on a ruler, less than the thickness of a line drawn with a thin-tip ballpoint pen. You cannot breath out while you do this!
The reason I give priority to the Wally instead of my ears is assurance of repeatability from one day to the next, and being able to get the crosstalk lower. Do your best with your ears, then measure with the Wally. My ears got me inside 4dB, Wally got me under 1dB. An expensive cure for audiophilia nervosa but I'm happy to have the device.
Tim
|
doug, I forgot you and Larry were in that group.
Andrew, it's not that the headshell has to be level. The important thing is that the headshell is in the same plane as the record/platter surface. Of course, this is assuming the stylus is at least close to perpendicular at this point. Just a place to start. If you go this route it won't matter what the bubble on the headshell says. If you try to level the platter and then level the headshell it comes down to how closely you can read the bubble. Kind of nit-picky, but it is simpler. Use the little block that came with the Triplanar to level the headshell with the platter surface.
The amount of change that I saw Thom make were in the very fine tweaky range. He used an Allen key and watched the amount of movement with the end of the key to judge how much movement he go. We're talking just nudging things on the threads. |
Dan,
I think we were trying to say the same thing. By using a bubble level you can get the headshell to be in the same plane as the platter. I'm only looking in the x-direction of the level. Not the z-direction. This assumes everything else is level. If the platter and headshels are both level (or a better way of saying it is at the same bubble in the x-direction) ,shouldn't the headshell and platter be in the same plan. Of course as you mention this assumes one is able to duplicate the bubble level exaclty. The only way I can see this not physically true is if the headshell does not have the same thickness.
By the way, I think the strip that came with the Triplanar is not perfectly flat on it's edge becasue you can see light through the middle even though the edges may be flat up against the edges of the bottom of the headshell. I'm thinking of getting a machine shop to make a "perfectly" flat block to use instead. I would agree that that would then be a better method than the bubble level.
Andrew |
I agree, Andrew, we are on the same page. One advantage with the bubble level is that you can get quite close with the cartridge still mounted. And this method is not susceptible to variations if the platter is dished. When I do use the level I pick a spot on the platter, take a reading, then try to match the headshell to the same reading while it is over the same spot on the platter. Hey, it's just a place to start.
Using the block may require one to not have the cartridge mounted. I think the little guage that comes with the arm is close enough but I can understand the desire for accuracy. You might have luck with an engineer's square. These are machined to very close tolerences and can usually be found for just a few bucks. I'd be careful with one around the cartridge magnets though. |
In your experience, what range of azimuth changes resulted in optimization. 1/8 turn? 1/4 turn? Or less? Much less. 1/12 or 1/24 of a turn. It is important to take up the backlash in the threads of the adusting screw BEFORE loosening the two set screws. Otherwise you'll have no idea where you started or how far you've actually rotated the armwand. Also, did your setting through listening equal the setting you obtained using the Wally instrument? Yes, pretty much. With the UNIverse I was able to get crosstalk below 0.5db. Subsequent settings by ear seemed to duplicate that quite well. As other components in the path get better, it becomes easier to hear and adjust accurately. Nick's components and the Valkyra wire really made it clear. Finally, did you have to connect your speaker cables to the Wally device or can you just insert tonearm out puts or preamp outputs? Speaker wire connections work much better. Low level signals like preamp or, especially, tonearm output would require much more sensitive measuring equipment. The Wally just uses a standard digital multimeter. No way is that sensitive enough to measure crosstalk accurately with low level signals. Channel imbalances in the amplification chain don't matter, so there's no reason not to use the more easily measured output from your amp(s). Doug P.S. I don't bother levelling the headshell. That would be useful if the cartridge were dead nuts on from top surface to stylus, but that's unlikely. I just start by making the stylus/cantilever look vertical (under normal VTF on a record). This seems like a logical and simple place to start, at least to me. I noticed Frank Schroeder doing it the same way. Diff'rent strokes? |
|
RE: M. Fremer Orpheus review in current StereoPile:
The man should get out of audio and go into politics. Just another limp-dicked please-everybody review. No mention of break-in time or load resistance values. And in a $100K TT/TA yet! Well, what did I expect . . . . . . . .
. |
Yes Neil but the burning question is, did it make Class A? Or is it in the minority of SP tested products?
:-) |
A, schmAy, whatever (and BTW, how come SP never tested a ZYX cart?) Here's a copy of an email I just sent my friend Tim:
I've not heard an Orpheus, but I love everything about my W,
and it does things all the things M. Fremer apparently forgot from his review of the W in June 2003 (which I have right here!)
As far as I can tell, he's a shameless dilettante like Jonathan Scull, (fraud alert!) and knows nothing about setting up a product for proper evaluation. My scientific background demands that rigorous experimental procedures be followed before any kind of critical listening can take place -- and that requires a lot more than just throwing a new out-of-the box cartridge into a $100K TT/TA.
I'm glad for the reviews and comments by the people on Audiogon. Even when somewhat biased towards a person's pet product, at least they come from real-world experience over a period of time. And if one has a question, the authors are quick and candid in their response. And it's free!
People like Fremer and Scull, are prose writers whose theme happens to be audio. They have no training in physics, acoustics, electrical engineering, or any of the other disciplines required to produce or evaluate audio equipment. They could just as easily (and unproductively) be writing about cars, or model trains. Who cares. . . . . . . |
A quick visit to the Stereophile website shows that they _have_ reviewed ZYX cartridges. At the very least they've reviewed the ZYX R-1000 Airy S, because they provide a link to an online review (done by Art Dudley in May 2004). Go to "Equipment Reviews", then "Phono Cartridges" within "Analog Sources", and you'll have the link.
BTW, among the other cartridge review links Stereophile provides, the Linn Akiva and Lyra Parnassus D.C.t are both yokeless/polepiece-less designs (albeit executed differently from the Transfigurations).
regards and hth, jonathan carr |
BTW, how come SP never tested a ZYX cart? Presumably because Mehran listened to your good advice! ;-) ZYX doesn't advertise, so sending SP a review sample might be asking for death-by-faint-praise. Not that I'm implying anything... BTW, can't we have one thread about a Tranny without you dragging ZYX into it again? You're fixated! <8~) |
Stereophile did do a review of a ZYX cartridge about 2 years ago. Here is a link http://www.stereophile.com/analogsourcereviews/504ZYX/index.html
I do enjoy Michael Fremer's writing. I find it informative and more importantly...enjoyable..like our hobby is supposed to be.
No offense to anyone. |
Is that < a cap, of sorts? Just askin'? |
Doug, my point which I'm sure you understood, was that Fremer drew comparisons to Dynavector and Lyra without talking about maybe two or three other cartridges (ZYX being one) that should certainly be included in that group. Not that I felt his characterizations of the XV-1s or Titan-i probably count for anything anyway ;--)
. |
That < is indeed my dunce cap, worn whenever I attempt a particularly lame jest. Anything I say while wearing it may (and probably should) be used against me.
Neil, that one was just too juicy to pass up - sorry! I'm sure you took it in the utterly backassward way it was intended. :-) Like you, I wouldn't accept SP's characterization of a used Kleenex without seeking an independent second opinion.
|
Knowing how the darn "O" sounds,hearing it on many ocassions,now,what's you're problem('s)?Fremer got the gist of it(sound),"dead on",and I'm not a big fan of his.Look at his "now spinning" list.Mostly rock.Not easy to cozy up to,if you are a classical/jazz lover,who lives for detail,and stage presentation,with nice subtlties thrown in.Like myself,and some of my actual "real" friends.
If you techno geeks(not specific to anyone,pleeeeease!!)want to get to the heart of loading,etc,just look back on the later posts by Bc3!!He got it right,too,and I believe my original comparisons hold up well.
Neil,you have all your answers already,so what's the problemo?The Tempers,as I indicated awhile ago,are not in the league of the "O".That's actually good news.I don't want to spend the money,either,but MUST,as of the last few listening sessions.
Just don't put yourself in a position of disagreeable posting,even if well intended,and targeting anyone who may be SO self absorbed that you will get a nasty(as in cowardly/babyish)E-mail.One that gets read by all of your employees and wife,first,who ALL get a bit spooked,as they have been pre-conditioned by the media as to the number of "overly emotional nuts" who dwell there!You're better off just listening to your wonderful system.Doubled up CLS's or not!
Best! |
Doug LOL (used Kleenix indeed!) And lest I gave anyone the wrong impression, I thoroughly enjoy reading M. Fremer's prose. It's almost always enjoyable -- like the "good" you feel when you STOP banging your head on the wall!
. |
I just got my copy and had to read what the fuss was all about. To quote a concluding snippet from Fremer's review in Stereophile v29.no12, p.34: A superb cartridge. By the way, what happened to the banging noise? I thought it carried both a zestful immediacy and timbral weight in the mid-bass. ;-> Tim |
Speedy, I don't actually READ Stereophile anymore, maybe a page here and there. So when I read Rmaurin's post announcing Fremer's upcoming review, I was ernestly looking forward to the kind of specific point by point comparisons he made in his 2003 review of the Titan/TemperW/Audio Tekne. That was a truly informative piece, the kind that might make a reader to say to himself "I think I'm gonna try that one." (whichever one he decided).
In his current effort, I got the feeling he was writing a fictionalized account of an imagined review -- looks and tastes like information, but gosh, it's really just white noise. How many ways should I say disappointed?
These days, I learn more about equipment from the folks right here, where there are plenty of knowledgable people willing to candidly share their conclusions, with no concern for advertising revenue. And occasionally I even enjoy the ramblings of those who are disposed to speak from the other end of their food tubes ;--) BTW, please send nasty, and childish e-mails. I put them in cheap frames and hang them in the bathroom for -- stimulation ;--)
. |
It has taken me about 2 weeks to review the posts in this thread. While I do not have the deep pockets to get a ticket to the show, I must say I have learned alot about technical issues as well as about the contributers to the forum by carefully reading this thread.
Now I have as many more questions as you have opinons. I will open a few threads soon to ask for your opinions on matters important to me rather then going off topic hear and now.
Thank You So Much
Till then Just Listen!
Groovey Records
Listening to
John Coltraine Blue Train Blue Note BST 81577 TELDEC Direct Metal Master |
Neil,hope you know I was NOT referring to any of your well intended E-mails.I had received an E-mail from a poster who did not like my candid, albeit "baiting",attitudes,regarding the "superb"(I knew it/he actually didn't)Orpheus.My intent got the "debate I was looking for",but some folks are so "ego driven,and self centered",that they only perceive this as an attack(which it was not).Of course there is always the buddy system at play,which could instigate things,a bit,but that's life.
I took a while to perculate,but after being "threatened to be outed as a liar,with intentions of disrupting posts,on purpose",I'm not about to be bullied off these threads.Though I have lost a significant desire to post,as a consequence.
To the party(who I actually liked,prior to Prissy outburst)feel free to be the HP of the web,which you so clearly identify with.I am content to hear my music.
As to the Fremer review,the criticism,to me,comes off as a bunch of "GEEKS" at a Star Wars convention.C'mon,anyone wanting to know actual tracking force(he gave parameters,and differing turntable use too,btw,as well as overall good,reliable input,which WAS accurate "to the nines" regarding performance over the Temper series).Of course some may have wanted to know what he had his "Phazer" set on for loading,etc,but,anyone can come up with that info on his/her own.Like actually "touching" one's own set-up,and NOT relying on others(know -it -alls excluded)to be a guage of what you like.I don't know any hobbyist who admits(in his hear of hearts)that what he owns,assuming it is good,is not his real preferrence.
Fremer is being bashed unfairly,IMO,and wrote a darn good overall piece.Sorry if he did not give the actual "azimuth angle of choice",but what do I know?
Fairwell! |
Does Anyone know the song by the Kinks "Stop Your Sobbing" The Pretenders covered it in 78
It is Time for you to stop all your sobbing It is time for you to Laugh instead of crying and keep on smiling whoa oh oh. There one thing you gotta know to make your dreams come true. You gotta stop your sobbing now Stop stop Stop stop
Gotta stop your sobbing now. Stop stop Stop Stop your sobbing! Your Sobbing!
As best as I recall
Listening to the music that lives in my soul.
regards
Groovey |
While none of us have the same room, few of us have the same system, and many of us don't even have the same records, I think there is merit in review descriptions sufficient to allow a reader to reproduce the music the reviewer heard. And its not much of stretch to take that same perspective to equipment setup and use.
Generally, more information is more useful and less is less. Imo, the bare minimum for a review is reference to the records - preferably to the tracks - used as the basis of a description. I know I try to get as close to denoting what I hear ("the opening triangle in the Allegro... blah blah blah") so my reader can at least get to the same sound even if he doesn't have the same equipment. You don't want to over do it, but its very helpful (for me anyway) to cross check my ears and my system with what someone else hears and the more information you give me so I can do that, the better.
So sure - even if I don't own a $100k Kielbasa (or whatever is Mikey's table), I would like to know where he ended up with load or VTA so I can gauge the state of the O in my own system. No different a question for him than it is for any other owner or longer term user. Geeky - ok, call it geeky, but read most of the threads here - folks invested in multi-$k gear value info about the details.
Admittedly few readers will have the component they are reading about, so a majority of the reviewer's audience may not care about setup details. Until, of course, they become owners. Imo it is not a complete waste when a review lacks information about product setup and use, but a review can be so much better when the writer includes it. That info takes the writer out of the realm of prosaist into the realm of product user. Maybe that was Neal's point.
Cheers,
Tim
|
Tim, you're right that was my point. |
Doug, Dan,
Here are some comments with respect to azimuth adjustment that were discussed earlier in the recent past of this thread.
I finally got around t ocleaning some more of my calssical records and have been now playing some mono recordings. Using these it is much much easier to adjust azimuth. With samll changes I can get the image very centered in the middle.
Now I know what you mean. It is very difficult with Stereo recordings but relatively it's a cinch with mono's. I don't think I'll need to invest in the Wally analog shop.
What a great hobby. Don't get this level of learning satisfaction with cd's.
Andrew |
I have a question about this mono-LP/azimuth adjusting technique:
Do you set the preamp's mono/stereo selector switch to 'mono', or do you leave it on 'stereo' when making your adjustments?
. |
Doesn't matter for me, Neal, as I don't have a mono switch. I think for those more experienced at this the desire to use a mono recording is not as great. My experience is much like Andrew's, I have more confidence in the adjustments I make when using a mono recording. YMMV. |
Andrew,
Glad to hear the ole' trial and error is working for you too! Larry found the Wally buried beneath some old record sleeves and used pads from his cleaning brushes, but now I guess you don't need it. :-)
I'll have to try a mono LP for azimuth adjustment again. Whenever I've felt like fiddling with it I've just used whatever was on the table at the time, which is likely to be stereo (around here anyway). If nothing else I can verify what I've done, and if it's easier I'm all for it!
Nsgarch,
I don't have a mono/stereo switch either, but if I did setting it to mono would make azimuth adjustment impossible. Summing the info from both channels would negate any L/R adjustments made to the stylus. Azimuth is about reducing crosstalk, whereas a mono switch forces 100% crosstalk. |
Neil,
I did this in Stereo. If I had a mono switch I would not use it for the reasons Doug mentioned. This should only work if using a mono record in Stereo preamp operation. It may not be perfect but it did get me close. |
|
I wanted to provide some feedback in optimizing my Orpheus set up.
I have tried to further optimize the VTF so far. Recall, I have been running the Orpheus VTF at 1.92g. I suspected this could have been contributing to a slight leaness and brightness. I went up to 1.97 g based on the suggestions of Bc3. This improved things in all ways.
First, the leaness disappeared to a very large extent. The sound became much fuller and smoother without sacrificing detail or upper end extension. In fact, it is more detailed and extended. Most importantly, it has a lot deeper and tighter bass, it now has a very full, smooth and natural mid and treble and has more power and dynamics.
I think this is a lot more what a Tranny is supposed to sound like and I'm enjoying the system even more.
I'll try experimenting with the Boston Mat. I've been told that this tends to brightness. I suspect removing this will make the sound even more natural, romantic but yet detailed and neutral.
Lastly, I'll try some different settings with the VTA. I'm using ~1.3 degrees based on the method proposed by Nsgarch. Before optimizing the VTF, I thought reducing the SRA muddied the bass a bit although it did reduce, but not eliminate, the leaness and brightness. I think the VTF made a much larger difference.
I'm now enjoying a very transparent, detailed, open and clear sound but with very good natural timbre. I think this cartridge really bridges these objectives very well.
Andrew
|
One more thing I forgot to mention. Soundstaging emroved greatly with the higher VTF.
Andrew |
Andrew,I posted this on Raul's Essential thread,but this is a more appropriate place.Could you report back at some time,as to where you finally wind up setting VTA?I am very close to getting my Orpheus,and have not visited my friend,who has one,in a while.
I have no other agenda,other than getting some good input.
Also,I want to take this time to appologize to Doug(and Paul),"for a second time,sadly."I definitley came across as disingenuous,in some of my posts,here.I,truly,did not mean to be mean spirited,but can understand why Doug got ticked off.
It is clear that many of you guys are very decent folks,and based upon Raul's comments,I am ashamed for some of my provocative remarks,made awhile ago.They were actually designed(stupidly) to get as much input about the Orpheus,as possible,and I "really" thought some of you guys kind of knew me already,and would not get so peeved.I was wrong!My real life audio pal's are worse,but we all know eachother for many years,and kind of like all the discourse and banter that follows our listening sessions.Sorry!
I absolutely do not expect any response here!!!!Also,any comments,made by me,after realizing I had ticked off a kindly poster,were made in reflexive mode,as I was a bit surprised(and a bit hurt)Sorry #2!!
This post is,in reality, a "selfish" one,as it is designed to make me feel better,as I don't hold grudges,for long,but am sensitive to other's felings.Like I have stated before...the web-world does not easily show us others' feelings,and it is so easy to be emboldened,to say dumb stuff.I do it ALOT! |
Speedy, the 7 or so people I've assisted in following my procedure for establishing zero SRA, have then set their stylus rake angle to a nominal 1.5 degrees (+/_ .20 degree) and found it to yield the best sonics achievable simply using measuring tools and mechanical adjustments. It is possible to refine the SRA (and the sonics) further on a record-by-record basis, the way Doug likes to do, however that requires you have a tonearm that permits easy SRA/VTA adjustments on-the-fly.
I don't have a tonearm that allows me that luxury-cum-obsession, however, it is possible to achieve almost the same results (as adjusting VTA on-the-fly) by increasing/decreasing VTF slightly:
If one normally runs their MC cartridge at the high end of the recommended VTF range say 2gms, then adding or subtracting 0.2 gms won't substantially alter the alignment of the coils in the flux field, but it will change the SRA by a tenth of a degree or more, for high compliance cartridges like van den Huls, somewhat less for Transfiguration, Dynavector, ZYX and other low-to-med compliance designs.
. |
Andrew,
Your increase in VTF (1.92 to 1.97) had sonic effects that would be similar on our cartridge, or maybe any cartridge. A slight increase in overall heft, sturdier bass, less edginess in highs. Those are fairly normal effects when you move from near the mistracking point to very slightly higher.
A spot some few hundredths of a gram above the mistracking point is the sweet spot for every LOMC we've used. On a UNIverse the spot is about .02-.04g above the mistracking point. Apparently on an Orpheus it's about .05g above the mistracking point. Different suspensions, different results, but not by very much.
We're obviously both splitting hairs to maximize the performance of extraordinarily sensitive and responsive cartridges. As Raul observed during his visit here, we play right on the edge. Our bass was a touch light at one point so I replaced a thick O-ring with a thin one, increasing VTF by about .02g. He was fairly amazed at the audible improvement from such a tiny adjustment. This degree of nuttiness is the only way to get the most from these cartridges, at least in our experience.
BTW, don't think that just because it sounds perfect at 1.97g today that it will do so forever. That kind of stability will probably never happen. Weather will change it. Amount of use or lack thereof will change it. We often find ourselves reducing VTF by .02-.03g after the cartridge warms up from playing several sides. The sweet spot is always a moving target.
You're right that VTF must be absolutely spot-on before you can truly optimize VTA/SRA. Doing that by ear requires listening for:
a) the integration or timing of fundamentals vs. harmonics (what Frank Schroeder and I hear) or,
b) the quickest rise/fall times and greatest amplitudes of individual notes, especially bass notes (what Paul hears).
Best,
Doug |
Nsgarch,
Your suggestion to use small VTF adjustments as a proxy for fine-tuning VTA/SRA would indeed have the effect you described. Unfortunately, VTF fine-tuning does more than center the coils in the magnetic field. A fairly large increase like .2g would cause other effects that might fairly swamp the VTA/SRA change.
As Andrew described and I affirmed, a change of .05g or even .02g can have a significant impact on sonics. These tiny changes barely effect the coils/magnets relationship, yet if we're near the cartridge's VTF sweet spot they have significant sonic effects. Why?
I believe the reason has to do with a kind of mechanical damping. Increases in VTF increase pressure between the suspension and cantilever, by definition. Once we have sufficient downforce to assure clean tracking, additional pressures very quickly become detrimental. HF response is dulled, micro-dynamic shadings are lost, the music goes dull, drab, lifeless - in a word, overdamped.
Our anti-skating experiments (described on other threads) support this understanding. Anti-skating, like VTF, increases pressure between suspension and cantilever. Using more than necessary to maintain clean tracking sounds exactly like using too much VTF. HF response is dulled, micro-dynamic shadings are lost, the music goes dull, drab and lifeless - in a word, overdamped.
For the sufficiently obsessed (Andrew and I know who we are!) increasing VTF as a proxy for adjusting VTA/SRA would produce unacceptable side effects. Of course Raul did observe that Paul and I play our rig right on the edge. He was certainly right about that. ;-)
Doug |
Thank you, SirSpeedy.
Best wishes for the holidays and the new year,
Doug
|
Doug, you and Andrew have Triplanar tonearms, so you can have perfect SRA at all times no matter the record thickness or the engineering preferences of the lathe operator. In any case, even .2gms wouldn't make enough of a difference with most of the top cartridges which are low(ish) compliance (except for vdH).
. |
Thanks for the response,Doug.I truly,was not "fishing" for one,and you demonstrate your "uniqueness",by responding.As far as I am concerned,there will ONLY be harmonic discourse,in the future.
I just could not have let much time go by,without making some kind of gesture.Sure,you surprised me,with the E-mail(actually,I was shocked),but there was a disingenuousness,on my part,to bring it on.I'd be happy to buy you(and Paul) a nice "cheap" glass of wine,should you attend the Stereophile show,in May.
I DO "SO" like to be a bit provacotive,in some posts,but PLEASE,don't anyone ever take me SO,SO,SO seriously!!!I am simply a hobbyist/music lover,like you and many others.Never any malice,in my posts!!Never long grudges,either! :-)
Best!
BTW---Nsgarsh....You are a "mensch"! |
Sirspeedy,
I'll re-look at VTA but so far, the 1.5 degrees seems to be working well prior to the change in VTF. But as I said, I'll take another listen.
doug,
thanks for confirming my findings. I wonder if the optimum range one uses above the mistracking point also has to do with the compliance of the cartridge. The Orpheus has a lower compliance than most and it would seem correct to be on the higher end of the range. I'll begin to experiment around 1.97g. I basically went directly from 1,92 to 1,97.
Happy Holidays to all. I'm presently in milan, Italy on business and have been enjoying some nice food and wine! i'll have to restart my diet on the 1st!
Nsgarch,
thanks for your help. Have not heard back from you in a while.
Andrew |
Bon giorno! I wonder if the optimum range one uses above the mistracking point also has to do with the compliance of the cartridge. The Orpheus has a lower compliance than most and it would seem correct to be on the higher end of the range. That theory makes excellent sense, to me anyway. The weight of the cartridge probably also enters into it. Dan_Ed doesn't need to substitute O-rings for the antiskate weight on his TriPlanar, because his hulking behomoth of an XV-1S squashes the scales at 12g or so. His sweet spot might also be farther above the mistracking point. (Dan?) Lighter/more compliant cartridges probably have a smallish sweet spot centered close to the mistracking point. Heavier/less compliant cartridges probably have a larger sweet spot centered farther above the mistracking point. Great speculation. We probably just learned something. Ciao, Doug |
Doug's and Andrew's comments highlight my reason for advising folks to break in their cartridges slightly above (like .2 or .25 gms above) the high end of the specified VTF range:
That way the suspension will be flexed enough so you can be sure it will exhibit a stable coefficient of elasticity just beyond the top of the normal VTF range. If you don't do this, and you try to find the VTF "sweet spot" somewhere near max. VTF, you will have a hard time dialing it in.
. |
Hi all,
I would say that we all seem to be moving in the same direction regarding vtf. As Doug mentioned the XV-1s is a heavy cartridge at 12.6 grams with a compliance of 10. I don't know exactly how that compares with the Orpheus, but it is heaver and lower compliant than the Trannys I could find in the cartridge database. I broke in the cartridge much like Neil advises, up around 2.5 grams, for the first hundred hours or so. After that I tried Thom Mackris' preferred setting of around 1.87, but have since settled in around 1.92. Could be that mile high thing at work in Denver. However, I am still dialing this parameter in and could end up higher. I'm trying to listen and let the cartridge tell me what it wants. All in all, it does sound like what Andrew is reporting.
This theory of running close to the edge (great song, btw) sits well with me also. Trying to balance the nimble sound achieved with the cart just off mis-tracking with the added authority of extra vtf. It's very much like trying to control a helicopter. If you've ever studied control theory then you've probably heard that the helicopter is a system that is always on the edge of stability, and I think we have a similar system with arms and cartridges. Too much control and the music becomes dull, too little and we crash in the grooves potentially damaging the record.
The o-rings work great for quick vtf tweaks. With the weight of the XV-1s the tiny ones alone don't work for AS, but I do think they work for a tweak here as well. Take about twice what Doug uses for the same change. The metal AS weight that comes with the Triplanar is maybe 2-3 mm up the shaft. Just far enough to allow a little buzzing with the HFNRR test track, (#6 I think). If I hear a little break up I throw on a couple of the o-rings for that LP. I have to believe that the compliance has a similar effect on the AS settings. I'll have to start logging some of this information when I tweak thinks so we can compare notes.
No, I'm not quite to the point of using sticky notes. :)
Merry Christmas to all! |
"Trying to listen,and let the cart tell me what it wants"....Dan a SUPERB point,and one all serious hobbyists should take into account.
Best |
|
Thanks for the link, Neil. That was very enjoyable! Speedy, my problem is that my "cartridge-eese" is still underdeveloped. :) |
Andrew, I owe you big time! Your recent post regarding vtf has prodded me to re-examine my settings. The results are very impressive and have opened up a whole new side of my tonearm/cartridge combination.
I've spent the last day and a half listening to the changes with vtf at .1 gram increments, from about 1.92 to 1.99. The veil really began to lift at 1.95. I believe I've settled around 1.96-.98. But wait! There's more!
I don't know any other way to say it, but AS is a necessary evil that must be kept to a minimum. What I have found is that by going into the same range with vtf that Andrew posted has greatly reduced the propensity for my setup to mis-track. Doug and I have discussed this effect in the past but I have to admit to being somewhat skeptical. Well, I'm a true believer now! I've replaced the 3.9 gram AS weight with what amounts to just under 1 gram with no mis-tracking on any of the LP's I own that used to cause me to bump up the AS. The increase in dynamics and resolution has my jaw on the floor! |
Want a good laugh?I have been experimenting with Pre/phono/table connections to "balanced/symetrical/regenerated A/C",vs other alternatives.I have three dedicated lines,and a new,high quality circuit breaker box.Also,I live in the suberbs,and usually have very good power.The difference with the balanced/symetrical regenerative power is ASTOUNDING!!
If you thought you had a slightly hardened sound,or slight grain/haze,or whatever,you would be shocked at where A/C technology is,now.
What got me started,was buying a PS-Audio P-500,for front end stuff(digital takes a nice bump up,too).This was an eye opener.I previously tried a load of stuff,settling on Ultimate Outlets.Sadly I went through two different P-500's which just were NOT made as well as the Exact Power stuff.The P-500 failed in three weeks,with a secod unit lasting six days.There is absolutely nothing wrong with my lines,but I did find a small resistor loose,in the second unit's bag.Hence,I started to do some serious research and wound up with the new Exact Power "Ultra Pure" unit.It is superb,but I am now seriously considering the EP-15a to go along with it and run my entire set-up in regenerated symetrical power.Think "set" sound,but full range.Best to all,and your families during this new year!
|
