Regards, Lew(m), I believe we are essentially in agreement concerning skating and its relation to the somewhat intuitive but verifiable principles of Newtonian physics and yes, thank you both Lew & Jcarr, the ability to communicate using reference terms in common is important.
Continue the discussion if you wish, one of us is actually enjoying it. With any arm, when overhang is introduced, offset angle is required for proper cartridge alignment. If we can get this far, then see how this feels: Friction exists regardless of the direction a cartridge is pointed or how far to the left or right of the apparent center line of the arm it is located, although it does seem logical that in a best case scenario the stylus would ultimately be positioned at the effective center line of the arm. Not to put words in Jcarr's mouth but as it is their nature these forces (vectors) are directional, perhaps from an infinite number of points of origin but on the small scale of our concerns these vectors are never curved, I've yet to encounter a black hole in the vicinity of my TT (although from a monetary perspective it sometimes seems so).
So then, consider the proposition that a tonearm could be 4mm around or 40mm wide, or of any configuration imaginable. As long as it functions it remains a point A to B concern, or from pivot to stylus, and that in increasing overhang, skating force as well as the required offset angle must also increase. Linear tracking vs. pivoted is a different topic and one I'll observe from the sidelines.
If we can continue to agree that it's best to have the cartridge positioned so that the stylus is properly oriented to the groove, then perhaps Raul will tell us what he has in mind concerning alignment, and hopefully do so more quickly than he has in revealing the identity of his mysterious reference MC cartridge.
Peace, |
Regards, Ecir38/Stltrains: Please don't think you're being disregarded, your contributions are appreciated in view of the topic. Do you mind if I reply?
Peace, |
Regards, Fleib: Here we go again. You said "There are 2 factors that effect AS, position on the record and stylus velocity." So far, so good. Next, "skating is CAUSED by the additional vector from offset".
So far there have been four influences identified. Vector one: Centripetal force was defined by Sir Isaac three hundred years ago. Call it side force if you will, it has stood the test of time and is most definitely a factor. Second vector, overhang. As the tonearm traverses the Lp it follows the groove. This groove spirals towards the center. Are you familiar with the Archimedean screw? Sometimes referred to as a screwpump, it is a machine historically used for transferring material from one location to another by turning a spiraled shaft. As the spiral becomes more aggressive, increased forces are exerted against the material being transferred. These principles have been repeatedly observed.
Here's where you'll have to use your ability to visualize alternative circumstances. A spiral groove on a flat surface in rotation will also move an object anchored at one end but free to follow the groove at the distal end. As overhang is increased, the stylus encounters the groove at increasingly greater angle of incidence, side force is accordingly also increased. This is the "opposite and equal" part of Newtons' laws of motion, it was previously agreed upon that the forces exerted upon the stylus by these two vectors are variable, centripetal force is the first, the angle of incident is the second variable.
Both of these principles are dependent on downforce or VTF, this is a third vector and also variable.
We're down to offset now, which is, as previously agreed on, primarily a matter of alignment. Please reconsider the conical stylus and the fact that regardless of azimuth, VTA, SRA or degree of offset, it contacts the groove walls at two points and these contact patches are circular. Two degrees of stylus rake or any amount of rotation, or "offset", will not, as long as it remains in line with the centerline of the tonearm, alter this. It's been so frequently observed that stylus friction is reduced by styli with Shibata, LC or ML profiles that it shouldn't be necessary to offer references. Should one wish confirmation a little research into works published by Norio Shibata of JVC or the papers relating to stylus wear offered by Shure Bros. in the 1970's might be productive. I don't think any of us are so inept that we'll run a cartridge so far out of alignment that "offset" errors are going to be of any great impact, especially in consideration of the scale of magnitude of the forces exerted by the first three variables. "Where's the beef?"
I sincerely hope that these principles remain constant as should you manage to repudiate them, the laws of motion will be revoked and perchance we will all join Misters Tell and Newton in outer space. This would be most regrettable.
Peace, |
Regards, Ecir38,Stltrains: There are fewer reports of concern for AS from those who implement MC carts, it becomes more a concern for those who use high compliance pickups. Downforce is an additional vector and it seem reasonable to suggest that, as groove walls are arranged at a 45* angle, and as MC carts TYPICALLY track at one to two grams heavier than a high compliance cartridge, vertical forces become proportionally equalized with increased VTF and lateral disturbances less prominent. Two examples off the top of my head: Applying more pressure to a screwdriver to keep it from marring the slot of a screw's head, or the classic example of taping a coin to the end of a tonearm. Not terribly scientific but perhaps a good "jumping off place?"
Raul reminded me about the AKG P8E/ES three weeks ago and it has been in use since then. Listener's expectations have been acclimatized and it will be interesting to return to my go-to Signet TK7lc. So that we can compare apples to apples, I've a copy of the Moody Blues "Threshold". Enjoyed them in concert twice, can't recall the program on the first occasion although I do remember having a really good time. Can we dismiss the failure to recall specifics as due to the passage of time? Second concert was in mid '90s at Deer Park (outdoors) in Indy, lots of "oldies", both from the band and also those in attendance.
The LP is Deram DES 18025, Decca London. Stamper is ZAL 0027-A1 and side two, B1, I've had it for quite a while. Side one, track three, "Dear Diary". Flute, cymbal and vocals should be center stage. If you reduce AS to zero, you may hear these off to the side, on my recording it's to the right. Increase AS to max., these parts will shift to the left of stage. Return AS to 1/2 VTF, increase it gradually until cymbal & flute are centered, vocals will be wider but balanced. Listen in particular for distortion from the flute.
"Voices In The Sky", first track , side two of "Lost Chord" is another that will tell you a lot about your alignment. There should be no break-up or edge to the flute.
Take the time to enjoy your P8ES, it may sound somewhat distant at first but it's a very nice cart. It took me an embarrassingly long time to realize that sometimes "air" or "wide soundstage" were alignment or phasing errors. When set up accurately the P8E/S doesn't offer an excess of either but the bass is extended and extremely tight, coloration or linearity anomalies are not a concern. You'll tell us about the even more highly recommended P-100?
Peace, Love & Bobby Sherman, |
Regards, Fleib: Heh, conical paddle. Laughter is good for the soul, so "they" say. It appears that all that needs to be said about AS has been, there appears to be a remarkable state of agreement in the ranks thanks to those who offered to share their knowledge.
In the best traditions of this thread I learned some appropriate terminology, found that much of what I thought to be true confirmed, another example in which I needed to correct myself and in one instance, found that a pivoted arm with no overhang was not subject to skating. I was surprised by this. I'm pleased that you found the provided links to the Sony specs "a bombshell". I thought them relevant to the topic and the diagrams useful illustrations. Thanks for the comment but it really wasn't necessary, I do recognize in it the spirit in which it was intended.
I'm sure your next contributions here will be of an equally positive nature and when you do visit again I know you'll honor us further with your personal insights and opinions, your unique disposition and a sense of humor rarely seen.
Peace, |
Regards, Lew: "I thought we all agreed on this". Yep. Matter of fact, said so. Two days ago.
Being the knucklehead that I am and think of it as you wish, I have a hard time believing that if one were to twist a cartridge in the headshell so that the cantilever was in line with the center line of the arm (zero offset) that with any but the most extreme stylus profiles skating would be impacted to any significant degree and that would depend on what you consider "significant". Really this is nothing more than the idle speculation of an idle mind but look at it another way: Regardless of offset, go for (an exaggeration) 90* if you wish, if a conical stylus is used and the point of the stylus itself is in line with the CL of the arm, would it really result in much/any more side force than if it were perfectly on axis? Really?
Three things I need to qualify. First, I'd like to think that on occasion a quasi-conversational exchange of ideas might take place on this forum, there're some pretty intelligent people here. Next, to remind myself that a sphere (or was that a conical paddle?) ;-) offers equal resistance to a consistent force applied from any aspect. Vector. And finally, as there are those who like to play this particular game, if anyone is intending to ask for proof concerning consistent friction (regardless of offset) with a conical stylus, I'll first ask for hard proof that it isn't so. This isn't a thesis, damn it.
As to additional VTF, tell me that when young, if a Lp tracked badly the first tool you thought of to correct the situation didn't come from the U. S. Mint? As mentioned when written, off the top of my head and not terribly scientific, but in that example the needle obviously wasn't equally involved with both groove walls and this might be a pretty good place to start. Could we please just go with that? If it's thesis time, I'll get back to you in no less than a week. If you have any alternative thoughts or sources to site (either one works for me) as to why Stiltrains (Mike, excuse the impersonal reference) could run a Universe (didn't say but I presume it was in the 1.9-2.0gm VTF range) for 2700 hours, no anti-skating, and still have even stylus wear then fire away, I'm all ears. Err, eyes.
Lew, thanks for the consideration in your manner of asking. Any solutions or alternatives you might suggest for the questions you asked me would be most welcome. It's a subject I'm obviously interested in and I"m always open to opportunities for being better informed, however I'm pretty sure the horse is already dead.
Peace, |
|
"address further comments on this subject to someone else."
Oh no, Fleib, that's not how it works. An open forum, I'll address whom I please. However, it might be best to not address further comments to the other on any subject. No noob here, tired of snide remarks, your call.
Sheesh.
(All else, apologies, and of course,)
Peace, |
Regards, John Gordon: Thanks for the reference. I thought your information useful and presented in a practical and easily read fashion. Input from professionals is always welcome.
Peace, |
Regards, Dgob: You are being too kind. I thought the discussion was educational, entertaining and on occasion deliciously nonsensical. Everyone else made points to be considered and there's still some difference of "opinion" evident so for now, "the jury is still out". I took one look at the fomulae offered by Sony and decided my once fair math skills had atrophied. If Lew can wade through it and make it sensible to the rest of us, I'll be even more impressed with his capabilities.
As to the nonsense, I found this bit "somewhere". Sorry 'bout that.
"Poem" by Henry Gibson
Tonearms swing like a pendulum do. AS calms its travel from rim to spindle through. Take it away and then to late you'll scowl, The inner groove your stylus did plow.
Centripetal force Newton first knew. Then it was overhang Your channel balance further to screw. Magnets and springs, weights depending from a string Unkindly tension and torsion these will make true.
An evenings' journey of Pythagorean jazz, Repetitive Mantras of rock, perhaps something soulful and blue. The mathematical progressions of Bach, this some say will do. Introspection found in music, just think it through.
All said and done in that vector stew, Listen to your favorite, you'll hear it anew. Dial in your anti-skating and AS always, May the force be with you!
Peace, |
Regards, Fleib: Copy/paste from your friends as Wikipedia: "a force which keeps a body moving with a uniform speed along a circular path and is directed along the radius towards the centre. Isaac Newton's description was: "A centripetal force is that by which bodies are drawn or impelled, or in any way tend, towards a point as to a centre."
From Vince Calder, an educator with the Argonne National Laboratory: " When the trajectory of an object travels on a closed path about a point -- either circular or elliptical -- it does so because there is a force pulling the object in the direction of that point. That force is defined as the CENTRIPETAL force. It has not been more simply, or directly stated than by one Isaac Newton in his famous "Principia": ("IN ANY WAY tend, towards a point as to a centre). ""The term CENRTIFUGAL force appears to have come about because of a mistaken perception that there is a force that operates in the opposite direction as the CENTRIPETAL force. But that is a misconception. The "pull" is the force that has to be applied toward the center."
If a screw and a suitable material are turned in opposite directions, the threads will draw it into the material. The size of the screw, the constituency of the material, or wether the screw is held stationary while the material is turned against it makes no difference, the principle is constant.
An arm with added overhang will travel towards the center. An arm with zero overhang will encounter equal opposing forces at the spindle, it's movement will stop when that condition is achieved. An arm with negative overhang will tend towards the rim, it responds to centrifugal force. In the most elementary terms, regardless of size, shape or the nature of constraint, if an object is placed on a rotating surface, it will move inwards, outwards, or reach a state of balance at some point in-between.
The discussion is tending towards unproductive quibbling over terminology. To say that the observable phenomena of skating is subject to the influence of various vectors is not inaccurate, to state that by definition the concept of centripetal force encompasses those descriptions is also true.
A thing either is, or it is not. Adding qualifiers (planet) to the time honored definition is somewhat like the lady's assertion that she was "almost a virgin". Ya'll carry on.
Peace, |
Regards, Nandric: Having a "wry" sense of humor refers to a dry or ironic humor, your post was delightfully endowed with both. If I may remind you of your reference to the VdH warning about destroying records through excessive AS? Observing the orientation of the cantilever is a reasonably effective method of verifying this is not a concern.
"Reading between the lines" refers to a situation when there are inferences beyond what has been actually written or said. An example of such might be if someone were to listen to my ancient rig & then say "I've never heard anything that sounds quite like that". ;-)
As to "authority", I confess there are occasions when I reserve the right to make up my own mind. Nikola, I frequently fail to remember that not all contributors on this forum are familiar with American idioms. Please forgive my oversight. Peace, |
Regards, Fleib: Did you read the copy from the B.A.S. above? It relates cantilever angles differing by almost 25*, the writer seems to suggest that 20-22* is best. I read years ago that cutting angles varied from one machine/producer to another through the mid 70's, however this relates to SRA.
Correct me if needed but IIRC, in 1974 (+-) the RIAA adopted 22-24* as standard VTA & 92* for cutters. Any thoughts on why (other than standardization) the writer places so much importance on the angle of the cantilever? Yes? No? Just curious.
BTW, for those interested in such, lots of charts, graphs, specs, hints & testing procedures in the two "turntable clinic" segments linked above.
Peace, |
Regards, Fleib: Yes, I got that, but why so much emphasis on cantilever angle (VTA)?
"---found the VTA of most cartridges too high (average 28 o ) to match the then current 15 o standard. With the change to an 18 o standard, matters were moved in the right direction, but the average remains too high."
Again, a curiosity as to why the 20-24* range is hinted at as being preferable? There's a relation between cantilever length, angle and mechanical rise time/overshoot and a tendency for the cantilever to rotate in its suspension. I can't quite pin it down. Still (just) curious but thanks, anyway.
Peace, |
Regards, Stltrains: The AT7V will readily accept your 155lc styli. Not quite as full in the mids as the TK7LC though. The 7V is a NEAR clone, crisp and accurate but IMHO not quite as involving but then in general I prefer the lower inductance/output impedance carts, YMMV. The TK7LC compared to my P8ES, hfs are clear and presented with sightly greater apparency, warm mids and a very convincing bass. The AKG has a softer presentation in the upper registers, neutral but mildly recessed mids and strength as well as speed of transients in the bass, easily overlooked until focused on. Either cart gets out of the way of the music, the AT7V not so much.
Peace, |
Regards, Raul: El Diablo! (grin). Or something with Grace written on it, or ADC, or Shure, Empire, Azden, or, or, or----.
I did pick up, about a month ago, one each of the SAE 1000 carts. Neither is broken in yet but first impressions are the 1000e is preferable. Although I have a taste for the euphonic, the Line Trace version is at this time overly warm. Hopefully a premature judgement, perhaps with more hours on it the 1000LT will brighten up.
Peace, |
Regards, Nandric/Raul: First, forgive my heresy in introducing a MC cart to a MM thread, especially a HOMC. Nikola, you've made most of the points needed for consideration. No one should think that for US 200.00 they're going to buy a world champion cartridge. For those with a curiosity to try different presentations and not entrenched in rigorous typologies about "perfect sound", the SAE is simply an entertaining pickup and wether you meant it in this manner or not, a most musical cartridge.
Raul, I make no recommendations. Dependent on the priorities of the listener there are not many carts offering this level of enjoyablility at a comparable price. I don't think anyone would describe the SAEs as "refined" but they do make music. The TOTL Astatic are by reputation excellent and the several MA carts (or others) I have are not to be overlooked either. Those who read your comment would do well to give it full consideration. IMHO & as in other areas, a varied audio "diet" of composer, artist, compsition or medium helps hone one's appreciation, and taste, for the finer things. I'm afraid I'd grow weary of Kobe beef at every meal. This is not intended as a contradiction, your opinion is respected as honest, agenda free and based on rarely questioned expertise. The Astatic is indeed on my wanted list.
My post was premature in that neither of the SAEs here are completely run in but according to Alfred they're going fast so there it is. Although the LT version is improving it is at this time leaving more to be wished for in hf apparency but it should be mentioned it is gaining clarity with each Lp. The bass has lost it's initial "boof" and detail is emerging. The LT stylus delivers a sweet midrange and as the suspension limbers up, grain originally heard in vocal "aahs" and "rrs" is now reduced to barely discernible levels. Perhaps I was lucky with my initial alignment, sibilance has not been observed.
At twenty hours, the LT is entertaingly musical. Channel separation is 25db/200-10k, tracking 70um @ 1.8gm. Styli are nude mounted, grain oriented at 20* VTA, eff. tip mass is a middle of the pack 0.3mg. Soundstage extends just beyond the boundaries of the speakers, imaging is stable. Depth and layering are not remarkable, extreme hfs are pushed to the back of the stage. Bass is full, proportionate and without undue emphasis. Mids are endowed with the smooth, cheerful character common to LC/Shibata profile styli. The cantilever is small in diameter, it appears to be an alu. pipe. Pins-out are gold plated, there is no evidence of tarnish or scale on either of my examples, both appear as though just off the assembly station.
There are three SAE threads running simultaneously at the VE site where it's reported that the cart continues developing to around the fifty hour mark, some have abandoned fairly well thought of carts in favor of the LT. If anyone is interested in the two SAEs, a little research at VE would be informational. The cart will soon disappear from the market, those with an interest in experiencing alternate presentations or have a collector's interest (yours truly) in vintage carts might give the SAEs consideration. If hearing the cricket hidden behind the curtain chirp is your thing, look elsewhere.
Peace, |
Regards, Nandric: For discussion purposes, consider Young's modulus: "The bulk elastic properties of a material determine how much it will compress under a given amount of external pressure. The ratio of the change in pressure to the fractional volume compression is called the bulk modulus of the material. The bulk modulus of a solid influences the speed of sound and other mechanical waves in the material, it also is a factor in the amount of energy stored in solid material. For the description of the elastic properties of linear objects like wires, rods, columns which are either stretched or compressed, Young's modulus can be used to predict the elongation or compression of an object as long as the stress is less than the yield strength of the material." (Copy/Paste.)
These concerns are reflected in comments from the successor to Peter Pritchard about the ADC RZL (IIRC) stylus assembly. With this designed by committee assembly the stylus was shared with the Astrion but eventually the assessment was the cantilever lacked rigidity and as a consequence transitions were slurred and definition suffered.
My minimally informed understanding is that with MM cartridges capacitance & resistance are adjusted to take advantage of mechanical resonances. A short list of other approaches include various materials used in the assembly, potting, damping, wether the cantilever is sleeved (mass & interruption of line transmission of resonance), tapered, resonance reductions through coatings, platings, vapor depositions or anodizing, and of course, carefully matched styli. It might be appropriate to anticipate an al. cantilever will, similar to stylus profile, demonstrate certain characteristics but having an al. cantilever or ellipt. stylus is no guarantee of a cart's superiority. Stereotypically MM's exhibit a mid-range slump, the carts you've listed are all MC's which are generically considered to have a rising hf response. Cantilever construction or loading is surely a component in voicing each.
Presume a person has 4 turntables, five tonearms and fifteen cartridges. 4 x 5 x 15 = 300 possibilities. Additionally, headshells, IC's, and ancillary equipment also make their contribution to what he'll hear. It's no wonder the debate over "best" continues. In this regard, reflection on that rascal Voltaire's comment "Best is the enemy of better" adds a valuable perspective. Some might tend to be attracted by the character of LC styli on beryllium, ML or ME on boron, minature ellipt. on thin-wall al. or any of several lab created crystal cantilevers & etc. Thoughtfully implemented, any of these might be considered reference quality but it is unlikely any two will sound precisely the same.
Several years ago Peter L. (SoundSmith) responded to a question regarding upgrading a perfectly good F9-E to the universally acclaimed ruby by commenting that it might not be heard by all as an improvement to the al. cantilever. When listening to a F9-L, it's euphonic nature in comparison with more analytical cartridges is always a charming and welcome alternative, an entirely subjective demonstration of emotional response in preference to measured response.
Peace, |
Regards, Nandric: Hi, Nikola! In a purely conversational mode, here's some more to toss around, this from Dual in the '70s when everyone drank the low-mass koolaide: "The high inertia of a typical tonearm-cartridge combination with a total of 18gm effective mass causes a stylus to dig in when riding up a warp and to take off when riding down. Tracking angle and tracking force can vary as much as 30 percent(!) and a warp as little as 1.5mm can cause distortion of up to 2.7 percent. (---) "Tracking the same 1.5mm warp with a tonearm of 8gm total mass reduces this same distortion to 0.01%, that's 270% less than that produced by the typical tonearm. Not only is the overall sound audibly improved, but stylus and record life are significantly extended."
All appropriate "caveats" apply to the marketing propaganda quoted above.
I've several styli intended for the Signet AM20me, a miniature elliptical on a thin-wall al. alloy cantilever and it performs wonderfully. One of my favorites but when considering the contact area of the stylus then accelerated record wear when compared to LC/Shibata/Gyger or the spectacular Ortofon Replicant (100um major radius) is a concern.
Due to various criteria, some defensible and some not, a LC stylus with a healthy major radius mounted on a be. cantilever has become a first choice. Oh!, the sacrifices we vinylistas make.
Have you listened to the TK9LC yet?
Peace, |
Regards, Lew: Just a small detail, you say? Reminds me of the '56 DeSoto a guy tried to sell me many, many years ago. "Just a rod knocking" said he. Just finished listening to Willie Nelson's 1978 "Stardust" with the F9-L, a delightful combination. Don't laugh, I'm not a dyed-in-the-wool Willie fan but this one is very nicely recorded in a "you are there" way, Columbia #JC35305 mastered by Bernie Grundman. Booker T. Jones does piano and organ on classics like "Stardust", "Georgia On My Mind", "Blue Skies", 'Moonlight In Vermont" and "On The Sunny Side Of The Street". Lively bass, crisp brushes on the cymbals, plinky nightclub piano and Willie just strumming along, it's all good.
I'm a self-confessed midrange junkie so when the F9-E dies, and since to my ears it seems a little forward in the hfs, it'll then get the LC/ruby fix. Check yr email.
Peace, |
Regards, Nikola: In 1992 J. Gordon Holt left his position as technical editor at High Fidelity magazine, this is part of his address: "We speak in hushed and reverent tones about reproducing the ineffable beauty of music, when in fact much real music is harsh and vulgar and ugly. We design the all-important musical midrange out of our equipment in order to try—vainly, I might add—to re-create the illusion of three-dimensional space through what is essentially a two-dimensional reproducer. And whenever we hear a loudspeaker or a CD player that shows subversive signs of sounding more "alive" or "realistic" than most, we dismiss it out of hand as being too "forward" or "aggressive." As if a lot of real music isn't forward and aggressive!
Where did we go wrong?
"Part of this new skepticism about reproduced realism is because we've trained ourselves to listen well—perhaps too well. We've learned how to listen into the fabric of the sound, and hear the small distortions that mean "imperfection," so our ears have become very hard to fool. Yet how often have all of us heard music from a distance at an unexpected time and been startled by it because we knew instantly it wasn't reproduced, it was LIVE? How did we know so quickly unless, in fact, the real thing sounded completely different from what we're accustomed to hearing reproduced? Because that's where we're at. Real sounds very different from reproduced."
Thirty five or so years ago, his name forgotten but an approximation of his cautionary statement remains, "It is possible that some cartridges are so extremely analytical that the musical value of the performance is lost".
There are some very good cartridges that, IMHO, fall more into the "fun" group rather than "fine". The Acutex LPM 315STR-111 with its phenomenal bass, the Grace F9-L's ebullient mids or the reduction in hf brilliance heard when the ATN15XE stylus is substituted for the 20SS.
Micro-detail is desirable but can, in some instances, lead to the reduction of continuity. Extended hfs give one the impression of greater "air" but can become fatiguing, as can extravagant bass during long sessions. Excluding channel balance and separation, exaggerated soundstage may be related to phasing manipulations, there is a most interesting thread relating to a $4000.00 "QOL" device running in the "Amps" forum, it's worth reading. I suspect Tomlinson Holman and Carver "Holographic" amps, as well as Pio. & SAE "sound expanders" were doing the same thing in the '70s. Most musical information resides in the midrange region which is also commonly referred to as the "presence" region, consider all of the above as selective quotes or, from the purists perspective, the indefensible opinion expressed by a "self-confessed midrange junkie".
Fully aware of the difference between subjective and objective, also between "High End" and consumer level gear, it's always difficult to reconcile the position that "If it sounds good, it is good. If it measures good but sounds bad then you're measuring the wrong things". Or, as that muckraker Voltaire said (again) "Best is the enemy of better". Presuming a certain level of quality exists and that one is sufficiently experienced to make that determination, it then becomes a matter of implementation. No matter how highly the cartridge is thought of by another, it's neither a rationalization or unarguable that systems/environments differ so on the most elementary level of evaluation, if it isn't entertaining, why bother?
Do give the Acutex 412 a ten hour spin, it's good little cart.
Peace, |
Better to spend one's time learning Chinese.
Currently enjoying a Pickering XV-15 with a middle of the pack 750D elliptical, clean bass and clear mids but a somewhat sandpaper/raspy hf. Considering a more extreme profile (Shibata or Vivid Line stylus from LpGear or JICO) as an anti-etch solution, any suggestions from the Pickering/Stanton aficionados?
Peace, |
Regards, Nandric: This cart came on an ADC headshell, for which I'm always on the lookout. The stylus pulled from my drawer full of such, the outcome of a bulk purchase from several years ago. Although the XV-15 was never a "cheap" cart, altogether I estimate my cost to be at just under $2.00 US and I'm very pleased to audition a cartridge not previously discussed so inexpensively.
The XV-15 750E is Pickering's version of the Stanton 681EEE, the Pickering bodies were black, silver or gold. Apparently those measuring best were the gold, the specimen I have is silver. The styli start with one designated as "150", a conical, and continue through to the "D750E", then the "D1200E" at 10-30k response, .75 to 1.25gm VTF which offers slightly superior specs compared to the Stanton 881E. The Pickering "D1800S", a stereohedron profile, is 20-30k, .75-1.5gm VTF, 25cu and both the D1200 and D1800S are, incidentally, well regarded by those who have actually heard the cartridge.
The D750 stylus is a .3 x .7 elliptical, tracks from 0.5-1.5 gm and is third from the top of the range of Pickering styli provided for the cart. At the time, Pickering thought to aid the consumer by assigning numerical designation in order to aid styli selection for intended use. The cartridge offers a tight bass, excellent clarity in the mids, good separation and a nice soundstage. The hfs are, however, somewhat etched, the forward nature of hfs with the 881 or XSV-3000 are frequently commented on by others. Wether with the XV-15/D750 stylus this is due to the cart not yet being broken in or is the nature of the cart is the question, a Shibata or line contact stylus will often alleviate this.
As to swimming against the current, Marco Polo traveled east and apparently had a really good time, Columbus sailed west and somehow managed to not fall off the edge of the earth. Others also cast preconceived notions aside and journeyed for the experience to be found in doing so. I'm quite pleased with my $2.00 cart but haven't yet tried Lew's suggested upgrade. Anyone know where I can find audiophile grade rubber bands?
Peace, |
Regards, Audpulse. Price is not a concern. As I have already invested nearly $2.00 in this fine cart, this should be apparent. If you know of a review for cyroed rubber bands, I'm sure it would make interesting reading. :)
Peace, |
Regards, Nandric: I was offered the opportunity to audition a gold body 500 by one of our highly regarded contributors. The generous offer was declined, the gentleman sent a wonderful recording consisting of trumpet concertos, sonatas and rondeau from Albioni, Purcell and Holst as a "consolation prize". Although this not-to-be-named fine gentleman (BTW, Hi, Jim!) is an accomplished musician and I have enjoyed his gift immensely, after investing a little time searching specs for the various Pickering/Stanton carts I regret declining his initial offer.
Intuition, not experience, leads me to presume the 500EE-11 is the "cream of the 500 crop". Unknown eddy currents or microphonics aside, the *specs* for the earlier 500s are among the best, later versions show increased impedance and output voltage. For the 500EE-11, 35db. separation is as good as the medium permits, the inductance/impedance (400 mH/535 Ohm, 3.1 mV output) specs are in the neighborhood of some fairly highly regarded carts, the AT20SS at (IIRC) 370mH/500 ohm, 2.7 mV for comparison. For further consideration, the AT22-25 is 550 Ohm, the AT440MLa with its frequently commented on hf emphasis at 490mH/3200 Ohm.
With the correct loading and a high-quality stylus assembly (aftermarket Shibata, HE, vivid line or NOS stereohedon and quad "Q" profiles are available, as well as several well thought of OEM ellipticals at .75-1.25gm VTF), one might anticipate the "lowly" 500 capable of excellent (and a hypothetically uncolored) performance. For those considering sampling the Pickering/Stanton family of carts, adequate research is an absolute necessity. There are wide body, narrow body, MM and MI versions and styli nomenclature relating to compatible options between the two manufacturers is practically indecipherable and as output can differ between the same cart with different styli, there is reason to think magnet strength differs too. Don't bet the farm on it but the rectangular and "J" shaped stylus assemblies are, within their respective group, reportedly interchangeable.
Nikola, I've no hands-on knowledge of this particular cart but I must confess the speculative aspect is intriguing and I hope to procure one soon. The above specs with a line contact stylus on boron, 20-25cu? Hmm. Keep us informed.
Peace, |
Regards, Chopin 123: Welcome to the thread. The DL103, in one incarnation or another, has been in production since 1962. There must be some reason for this. My first "hi-end" audio purchase was an Infinity Bl. Widow TA, first heard in 1977 with a DL103D. The B.W. was occasionally removed from it's box and admired for two years before a "young marrieds'" budget concerns finally allowed replacing the Dual 1219 with a SP-25 for the B.W. Stacked Large Advents at the other end and an AT SUT/Kenwood KA-7100 integrated amp in-between, the rig was everything EXCEPT refined.
Still learning, it would be appreciated if you might tell us what factors led you to your conclusion. It should come as no surprise that there is resistance encountered when proclaiming a particular cartridge as "L'ultimo", the influences of down-stream components approach infinity in their variations and consequently unqualified blanket statements might best be eschewed. There's also the studiously avoided question of taste.
Thanks for the opportunity to reminisce, any elaboration you care to post would be added to the bank of knowledge (and opinion) this thread represents. Around this bunch, gotta' be careful with those absolutes though.
Peace, |
From a simple enthusiast's perspective, regards: A root of an equation is a number which substituted into the equation instead of an unknown then converts the equation into an identity. The root is now said to satisfy the equation. Solving an equation implies finding all of its roots. An equation that is always satisfied, no matter the the choice of values for its unknowns, is called an identity.
Discrete, or IC said the blind man?
In my ignorance, it seems that effect is superior to description, or that function precedes form. Dimensional or other physical considerations excluded, and as I'm not technologically competent, it still seems when there are two means of achieving an identical outcome, to argue the other as the penultimate solution is pointless.
Hopefully there will not be any perceived argument posed in the above. Two teams playing under the same guidelines with the same objectives meet in the NCAA basketball championship tonight. The "unit" assembled with superior "components" as well as appropriate application will be victorious. In this event there is some admitted bias, Go Ky. Wildcats!
Peace, |
Regards, Mechans: The Signet AM series supplanted the TK9/10 family, of which Jmowbray's 100lc is a member. The AM-10 had a slightly higher output than the 20-50 carts, 5.5mV as compared to 5.0 for the higher designations. Your stylus is a .3 x .7 ellipt., the 20 a .3 x .7 nude miniature ellipt. on micro wall alu., the AM-30, elliptical on tapered alloy. The AM 40 (IIRC) was a line contact stylus on beryllium, the 50 a ML, also on Be., gold plated. The AM-10 is 490mH, 780Ohm, tracks at 1.3-2.3gm and recommended load at 100-200pF. These are pretty nice carts, avoiding the mid-range brightness some AT carts demonstrate. Should you wish to experiment, any of the AT styli from the "100" series (120 through 150ML) will exchange. Although the SAM-10 stylus is capable, there are more sophisticated assemblies available.
Jmowbray: Good luck with the Signet, I was tempted. As to the terminal status of this thread, Mark Twain observed upon hearing rumors he had passed: "The reports of my death are greatly exaggerated". It is necessary that this thread attain at least 6999 posts so that Thuchan can claim his thousandth post appearance again. :^)
Peace, |
Regards: All this talk of tweaking, Aunt Natalija and Uncle Boris might be interested in this material I've recently found, F.U.R., or Found Under Refrigerator. My audiophile cat, Pi' Sant, is the producer of this marvelous substance, seemingly in inexhaustible supply.
Collected with proprietary vacuum attainment procedures, when applied in sufficient amounts to the stylus, friction is totally eliminated and even the most damaged Lp plays in total silence. When collected specifically from the evaporator unit, cyrogenic benefits are obtained without exposure to the concerns of helium boil. Liberally applied to the cavities of one's amp, when it becomes sufficiently heated the thermoregulation benefits produce smoky female vocals, hotter hfs, and one will burn CDs as never before.
As Pi' Sant is a tortoise coated cat, coloration is blended, ground hair is ample for the reduction of static. Ears (and furniture) will be pelted by the genuine homozygous recessive nature of Pi' Sant's guard hairs when used as acoustical absorbers in Boris and Natalija's listening room. Liberally infused with the agouti gene, A/a chromosomes guarantee correct coding for signaling proteins. Although one may not hear it immediately, when used as insulation in speakers there is proven elimination of the agouti shift phenomenon.
When collected in sufficient quantities, one can fashion room treatments that will "weave" texture into your every listening experience. Coming with the "seal" of PETA approval (Prof. Ecological Treatment of Acoustics), one "otter" hear it.
Cost effective, I'll ship Aunt and Uncle a tightly packed vacuum bag full of this 100% organic treatment for only $25, add 3% for PayPal. As a bonus, any small change inadvertently collected is free. Hairballs are available at an unbelievable price of only $4 each, shipping is free and there is a substantial discount if you pick them up in person. Limited supply, act quickly.
Peace, |
Regards, Ct0517: Stay tuned for next weeks episode when Professor Peabody reveals to Sherman why Boris' ADC parts were off limits to Natalija, or, why Boris will always be, but poor Natalija is no longer Gudenov.
Peace, |
Regards, Fleib: Dgarretsons' worrisome question, -" whether cantilever and stylus replacement (---) can raise the performance of more affordable mid-line bodies to surpass those $500 exotics. And if so, which ones?"- well, the considerations may be somewhat more intricate than one might wish for. Stanton 500/Pickering V15 and NP, two coil moving magnet. Stanton 600/Pickering Phase IV and others with "IV", four coil moving iron. Stanton 680, 681, Pickering XV-15, four coil moving iron. Stanton 880, 881, 980, 981, high or low impedance, Pickering XSV-series, XLZ7500, 4500 & 3500, quadraphonic capability, four coil moving magnet. "Mk-11" models have samarium-cobalt magnets. But then things get a little more complicated. Collected this, and the previous cart associations, from Lenco Heaven. "Carl" worked on this, thanks, Carl: STANTON 980/981HZ: 800Ω, 450mH 880/881: 900Ω, 510mH Collectors Series 100: 500Ω, 270mH PICKERING XSV3000: 600Ω, 270mH XSV4000: 900Ω, 510mH XSV5000: 600Ω, 290mH XUV4500: 600Ω, 290mH Anyone see any errors? For stylus compatibility: http://www.kabusa.com/stantonx.htmSo the ability to vary loading, as Dlaloum advises, is obviously a factor. Stanton was (according to others) also involved in aerospace metallurgy, what appears to be a cheap alu. cantilever may not be so simple after all. There are also snippets suggesting that the elliptical styli for the low impedance "hybrid" carts are not to be dismissed as "also rans". Lots of options here, further complicated by the incompatibility between MM & MI groupings and styli that physically fit both types. Makes stylus swopping with an AT look easy. Hey Mike, the ATN155lc is a good selection. Looking forward to your comparison with the 15Sa/ATN20SS. ATN15XE for a more relaxed presentation, maybe too much so for some. Peace, |
Regards, Raul: One less Pickering XLZ-4500. http://www.pickeringuk.com/hifi.html. Diamond Stereohedron Output 0.33mv (MC level) Frequency range 10 to 50k Tracking force 0.5 gram to 1.5 grams Tracking ability 100 microns Compliance 25 cu Channel separation 35db Load 50 - 250 ohms pf no limit Effective mass 5g Peace, |
Regards, Nikola: If possible, I'd prefer retaining the "renegade" description as I fear that, although honored with the nomination, party membership might result in being placed on a committee. Then I'd get nothing done at all. :-)
Carts are interesting little devices and I've learned a lot by cart selection via the buffet mode, "I'll have some of this, and more of that". The XV-15/D750 is performing much to my satisfaction. Good soundstage but not excessively wide, stable imaging, layering is deep but not as tall as some. The Pickering is moving more to the front of carts in rotation. Eventually, a stylus upgrade is likely but for the time being it's pretty good for a $2.00 cart.
Peace, |
P.S. Jorsan: Replacement (OEM) 3500 & 4500 styli are available, IIRC Lewm is using the Pickering 7500 stylus in his LZS? Lew?
I've dealt with Pickering UK previously, no concerns. PayPal.
Peace, |
Regards, Dgarretson: "The old 500EL is 12Um/mN and had an output of 1.0mV/cm/sec. The output of the 71EE is .9mV/cm/sec, and the Emk2 & EEmk2 are both .8mV/cm/sec." Found this here: http://forums.audioreview.com/analog-room/stanton-881s-stylus-replacement-new-cartridge-28162-5.htmlwhich is a cornucopia of info from two former Stanton employees, 500/V15, 681/XV15, 881/XV3000 & 981. The 500 is (depending on stylus) typically described as nom. 3/4/5mV output. If you'd like me to describe the difference in measurement, someone will need to explain it to me first :-) . Peace, |
Regards, Lewm: You've got it, 10:1 into MM phono at 47k. Presumed your friend is running his SUT into MM input, not line/aux, took it for granted & failed to mention it. Excellent deductive work, BTW.
Peace, |
Regards, Griffthds: I tried my best, but ON NO!, you had to ask. An example of don't ask, you may not like the answer, for sure.
Rather than musical or analytical, it may be helpful to think in terms of speed or fluidity. These terms do avoid the typical negative connotations. Favored carts offer a fundamental connection with the music; a realistic tonality, dynamic, appropriate transient behavior, a robust solidity and satisfying uncongested flow.
If the choice MUST be between neutrality and transparency or fluidity and coherence, we're in trouble. Consideration is given to the design of a transducer for the desired effect. Arguing this is not so would be unrealistic and fortunately there are numerous carts to choose from. Although differences can be subtle, each is invested with it's special character and appeal. One perhaps suited for the purist who listens analytically, or another capable of meeting the expectations of the enthusiast who is appreciative of the involvement of a less structured live performance. Although analog is a mature medium it's unfortunate that the perfectionist must be forever frustrated in that the faultless system has not yet been developed. Consequently the subjective element arises, an element that can't be dismissed.
Anyone want to go on record as preferring a cart that isn't musical?
Peace, |
|
|
Hi, Lew: Maybe I should expand on the previous post? The quoted text "The Pickering XLZ/series cartridge was designed to be used in stereo systems which have high gain, low impedance MC input or use external head amps with input impedance of 100 ohms or higher." is from the brochure that accompanied the Pickering XLZ 4500S. Stanton offered a dedicated pre, the BA-26, vaguely described here: http://www.gramophone.net/Issue/Page/June%201981/113/761952/#header-logo. Pickering UK offers a specifically designed unit, the PLZ: "Made in Britain especially to match the quality of the Pickering XLZ Hybrid range and takes your existing phono stage up to Moving Coil sensitivity, this enables you to use your amplifiers normal 47k MM "phono" input for MC and will work with most MC cartridges. Totally discreet circuitry - no IC's, specifications are... Gain 27db S/N ratio 85db Freq Response 5 - 150k. Raul, the AT 630 had laid ignored for a long time. I'm quite aware of its quality. It may be "cheap as chips", however it's a functional tool and the cart is still exceeding expectations. So much so, it has no resemblance to what Lew describes his friend as hearing. I've had no need for a preamp for twenty (+) years. Right now I'm pleased to be able to listen to the XLZ, and exceedingly pleased with it's performance---in spite of the redundantly "fumigated" 630. If you're suggesting I should obtain an upgraded pre to listen to the Pickering, I'll give it consideration. Your well meant suggestions are appreciated. On a different "note", although some may observe negative connotations when reading the term crisp, in this instance it refers to quick transient response with rise time (see linked article) of less than 20 microseconds. I see little hope for either explicit terminology or reference recordings, too dang many audiophiles hanging around. :) Peace, |
Regards, Dgarretson: Just curious, what do you estimate the eff. mass of the arm you're using with the 981 LZS?
Considering moving my Pickering XLZ (your Stanton's "twin brother by a different father") to a 7gm eff. mass EPA-500H arm. Performing nicely on an EPA-250 arm/Yamamoto ebony headshell, hf tracing is exemplary but bass seems somewhat damped. The 250 arm has this effect with certain carts. Any mention of the quality/quantity of bass heard from your Stanton would be appreciated.
Peace, |
Regards, Dgarretson/Lew(m): Where did I read the cantilever is viscously damped? Pickering UK has original styli, the D7500S (981) stylus is gone, other appropriate styli still available, both Stereohedron and ellipticals. The 4500S XLZ (NIB) was just over 4 bills US. Paypal protection, shipped, arrived w/i a week. Il Positino was not interested. If possible, I can recover my 3gm eff. mass Inf. Black Widow from son #2, the one who thinks "loan" means "give". Meanwhile I'll try the XLZ on the 7gm. EPA-500H wand, the arm enables a strong bass presentation.
Looking hard at "pre-pres", anyone have any experience of Graham Slee's Elevator EXP? Raul? Good reviews, Stereophile AAA list (for what that's worth). Lots of loading options into MM phono. High expectations of the cart, have an intuition it'll be worth it.
Peace, |
Regards, Dgarretson: Never mind. Found time to sit & listen attentively for the first time in about two weeks, came to the conclusion that what I'm NOT hearing is ambient information. Most likely suspect is a bottleneck at the lowly AT 630, looking into preamps for the first time in decades. (Raul is laughing, "I told you so!")
Will be watching for any additional info on the hybrid carts, thanks.
Peace, |
Regards, Dean_Man, Nandric: Thanks for your input regarding the 881S. In the past, the Stanton/Pickering carts were viewed as broadcast DJ or homeowner quality, the mistake was mine. Lew's positive hints relating to the 981 inspired investigation.
Jim, the AT leads are a favorite. Also of twisted copper and relatively thick, Hitachi SSL-101 (search ebay) leads are comparable. LCOFC rather than PCOCC and slightly more flexible, and also slightly warmer sounding than the ATs. I've also an MG10 headshell, suspect there's an 881S in my future, thanks again for your comments and set-up tips. BTW, have briefly auditioned the Stant. 500EE-11/D5100 stylus, a two coil/solid core design. A straight-forward performer, need to listen to it more before reaching any understanding of the character of this "primitive" transducer, surely there's good reason for it's fifty year production run.
Nikola, from what I can gather, any of the carts with the "11" designation have samarium cobalt magnets. As appropriate for the decade of production, quaintly referred to as "Space Age" magnets. A lowering of moving cantilever mass was the intended target for MM carts. In contrast to some of the more verbose posts (eh-hem?) found here, the economy of words in your approval of the 881 is appreciated.
Peace, |
Regards, all: Think I'll fire up the Ferrari F-10 & meet the pit crew at the country store three miles down the road for a sandwich. Smoked turkey, lettuce, tomato, mayo & mustard on dark bread sounds good.
Taste is the ability to make discriminating judgments about aesthetic and artistic matters.
As remembered from long ago, Immanuel Kant (Kritik der Urteilskraftwork), maintained that taste is autonomous and appreciation of art an extension of subjective experience, reflecting personal interpretation. Veblen (the conspicuous consumption dude) cynically argued instead that honor is attached to possession. Standards of taste do not reflect autonomous and eternal standards of beauty, but rather a sense of costliness passing under the pretense of beauty.
Critics of mass culture argue that contemporary standards of taste are evidence of a degradation in individual autonomy and independent judgement, this is in contradiction of the current values assigned to egalitarianism and inevitably the homogenization of value is perceived as detrimental. It should be explicit that A'goners are rarely influenced by the "lowest common denominator". Among those with an interest in music, some are characterized by an openness to a variety of musical expression which may include unamplified or acoustical instrumentation but are not restricted to it. An omnivore/univore pattern might be observed, creating a division which is strongly supported by adherents of either position, distinguishing omnivores or those who prefer a wide range of musical experience from univores, whose preferences are more restricted, some would say refined. Either type of listener may have an audio system.
W ether this leads to subjective relativism is a source of delightful, spirited and sometimes heated discussion. If there are no objective criteria of evaluation, the equalization of all hierarchies is the consequence. Wether this is seen as a failure to reproduce technically accurate aspects of audible response or whether an openness to a variety of experience as desired by the particular expectations (or peculiar, if you will) of the individual is the cause. To paint with an admittedly overly broad brush, this distinction may serve to define the difference between the sociological or technical perspectives of "high class" and "high end".
If it is accepted that taste is developed and sustained through exposure to a variety of musical forms or presentations, then an informed preference is an integral element in the selection of both composition and supporting gear, or mode and means. Just as there are those who have argued an objective evaluation can define value, others seem to suggest an exclusivist mentality results in the restriction of variety and and consequently a rigidly defined hierarchy of the acceptable. Some would find such a narrow definition of rewarding experience unnecessarily restrictive. Others maintain that if what is heard does not reflect, for instance, the intent of the composer then the result is an artificial construct, a facsimile and of diminished value. They may point out that critics of functionalists such as Emile Durkheim or Robert Merton will recognize this as teleological, that is, reversing the usual order of cause and effect by explaining things in terms of what happens afterward, not what went before.
Cars, the teleoligical and the visceral experience.
The BMW M5 is so well soundproofed, "Car and Driver" reports BMW introduces an exterior recording of the motor played through the stereo. Lexus has contracted with Yamaha's Advanced Sound Technologies Division in treating the V-10 engine in the awe inspiring LFA as a generator and developed componentry to direct the V-10s shriek to the cockpit. The Mustang GT is equipped with a resonator attached to the firewall, the Boss 302 (wow!) adds a second pair of exhausts tucked behind the rocker panels, open these up, punch it and grin while watching startled pedestrians run for cover. Returning to Europe, VW's GTI utilizes an audio file ("Soundaktor") stored in the car's computer. Played during advanced throttle application, broadcasting ALL under-the-hood sound through a dedicated speaker located near the throttle body. Can you hear me now?
Even Porche, the "nuts & bolts" driving machine, fits a Sound Symposer to the 991 GT3, 911, Panamera GTS. This consists of a tube, valve and diaphragm, when the "sport" function is selected the sounds radiating from the intake plenum are amplified. The stated objective is to ensure driver awareness of the current state of performance.
Closer to home, my new grocery-getter, a V-6 Honda Crosstour is equipped with a noise canceling application in the sound system, tuned to eliminate all cabin noises except those frequencies generated during full-throttle acceleration. This I attribute to a purely psychoacoustic intent. Cars with an abundance of decals always go faster. Don't they?
Carts (remember them?).
Moved the hybrid XLZ-4500S to the EPA-500H mid-low eff. mass arm, bass is more evident than with the 14gm eff. mass 250 wand which is a very neutral device, especially with the Yama. HS-1As ebony headshell. Personal thoughts are that the elimination of cart/arm/headshell self-resonances may not always be desirable, wether 'tis coloration or evidence of tonearm/cart matching is an open question. Virtual or visceral, car or cart---for the enthusiast, the operator's apprehension of performance just may be the most important component. The purist would, of course, have different criteria. The ongoing debate is at what point do high class (musical at the expense of accuracy?) and high end (accurate to the point of being overly analytical?) merge.
So, I've listened to the XLZ and in transient speed, imaging and absence of grain it compares well with the AT20SS and TK9/ATN25 stylus. Bass is controlled and hfs clearly defined. Mids are clean and avoid confusion during congested passages. There is an impression of distance not heard with the two others mentioned, this is most likely the fault of the entry level SUT which was ignored for decades but has now become a problem. Maybe not the equivalent of the F-10 in the realm of carts but the Pickering offers a tantalizing glimpse of exquisite performance. Problem is, it's being run on an 87 octane SUT.
I'm going to have to think about this one, and wether to try a D1800S (stereohedron), D2000Q (quadrahedron) or D2400Q stylus for the surprisingly good XV-15.
Anyone with experience with the 881S?
Peace, |
Hi, Lew: Learned a little about cantilever materials, resonance, stylus profiles & loading from swapping styli, would like to know more. Must confess, even tried a few "square pegs in round holes". Fortunately, curiosity didn't kill the cart.
F-10 or F-18, wouldn't either be a memorable experience?
Peace, |
Regards, Danny: Initally mounted on an ADC mag. shell, spotlight was a little too heavy on the lower mids. Moved the Empire to a Yokohama HS3 8.5gm boxwood headshell & fat AT twisted copper leads and thought this put things in better order, even though I am a confessed midrange gourmand. Sounds very nice. Sometime in the future will try it on alu., carbon fiber and one of Henry's 9.5gm ebony headshells, I suspect greater mass may challenge the cart's high compliance. I appreciate the rich tonality and dynamics of the cart as set up now. If "listenability" could be measured I'd give this one high marks.
Moving magnet generators are either over, under or critically damped, the same for mechanical considerations. In the strictest interpretation of your question, no, overdamping will not improve the performance of the cart and always keep in mind that for every action there is an equal and opposite criticism.
Was not aware there was a solid mount version of the 4000D and I'm somehow distressed to hear that there is as now I'll be looking for yet another cart. The back plate for the pins-out on yours is white?
Any impressions of your Grace F-8(E?) yet?
Peace, |
Regards, Halcro: My good friend Henry, I have to agree with your thoughts that if mechanical resonance is transferred from cart to arm or vice versa, something's awry. Your insistence on perfection is inspiring. As to mechanical resonance, like Custer, who probably thought things didn't work out perfectly at the Little Big Horn you're surrounded, in this case by members of the Itexists tribe.
The 1000 Z/EX, too long a time since last listen, thanks for reminding me.
Peace, |
Regards, Griffithds, Raul, Acman3: Thanks for your efforts, guys. It would be nice to have a spare for retiping.
Peace, |
Regards, Lew: It's recognized MM carts have resonance peaks at high frequencies. The height of these peaks can be varied by changing load resistance. Resonance frequency, or the center of the peak frequency, can be altered by changing the load capacitance. If cap. is increased then the resonance freq. is lowered. The *audible* outcome is that by increasing KOhm, hfs become more apparent, when capacitance is adjusted, the upper mids are more influenced. Extending resistance to 100k does enable hf response into the nom. 35kHz+ range where the rear signals for four channel playback are embedded, the majority of carts discussed here have that capability. To this layman/listener, resistance essentially influences "how much" hf response, capacitance "where". Visualize a bell shaped curve. Resistance will raise or lower the response in the vertical plane, capacitance moves the center left/right on the horizontal scale. By combining settings, equalization through loading is the effective outcome and a variety of responses can be obtained. I'm not sure manuf. recommendations are are to be adhered to as if written in stone, they're just recommendations. Neither should they be disregarded. Awareness of these references can help in cart selection or in identifying the source of unbalanced response. Avoiding the always debatable subject of preference, it's probably safe to suggest system and room influences are a factor. Silk dome, aluminum, horn, beryllium or foil tweeters, air suspension, ported or planar speakers, MOSFET, tube, IC or discrete amplification? Cantilever build, damping through suspension or tie-wire, stylus profile &c., all contribute to a situation where "best" is best avoided. PERSONALLY, unless hf response is noticeably not proportionate, 47k & 150pF suits the majority of my AT carts, a Shure M75E-T2 or M97xE (YMMV) at 100k. Acutex's at 100k/300-350pF. With the two Grace carts here (9E & L), hfs are spectacular at 100k but sometimes distracting, for these "tweeners", a set of loading plugs would be handy. Back "in the day", it was not unusual for an audiophile to obtain a number of ICs of differing capacitance, these were matched to the cart in play. For a fun read, 35 years later, pgs. 8-13: http://www.bostonaudiosociety.org/pdf/bass/BASS-06-01-7710b.pdfI enjoyed in particular the cryptic comment; "some manufacturers may design their cartridges for non-flat playback response." Peace, |