Hi Raul, Yes, I think I've read all of Dlaloum's posts. He's very knowledgeable and we agree about most things. If you're talking about reference to speed of sound in different materials, I think that would pertain more to plinths, than cantilevers. The stylus tracks groove humps and physically moves in reaction. Those movements are transmitted up and excite the generator. The needle talk you hear with your ear near the cart (poetic ain't it) is like heat from a light bulb, a byproduct. It's the movements that are transmitted, not the sound of. My .02
The comparison of Pickering 7500 (low inductance) to another HO with 600mH, is just an anecdote, and conclusions are questionable. The 7500 has extremely high inductance for the output, and 600mH is somewhat high, but I think the 2M series for example, is higher. Comparing a LO to HO doesn't work for me. Carts in the 900mH range and even higher, tend to be rolled. But I agree with him that all aspects of design, in combination, determine performance. Inductance is considered the Achilles heel of HO carts. There's no getting around lowering of hi fr resonance, although this is sometimes used to augment a dip in response. Plug in x capacitance and lower the freq of the peak and roll off the extreme high end.
Maybe this will get a response from Dlaloum. Haven't heard from him lately. Regards, |
Regards, Fleib: I believe it's correct to state unbalanced units connect successive signal grounds together directly through each interconnecting cable. That the chassis is generally used as a signal ground conductor leads to the question that if phono section capacitance is shunted (to ground), and if TA signal and ground are grounded at the chassis, then curiosity is raised as to wether a cartridge "sees" cap./res. through that associated ground.
It's just curiosity.
The quote given earlier does refer to "a" phono section, wether integrated or pre is not stated.
Wiring hasn't been chased down for a while, a good time to try Dover's suggestion of star grounding at PS.
Peace, |
Regards, Fleib, Dover: Spent about an hour this AM re-routing ICs, moved grounds to PS. Listening to Mark Knopfler "Privateering", very quiet, great imaging. Crosstalk & noise levels improved. The rat's nest of power cords, ICs & ground wires built up over five years (they do it in the dark) have been chased, connections cleaned. "You don't miss it until it's gone".
Cart is an F9-L. Luscious mids & lucid hfs, lively bass but a slight overshoot & hint of smearing on sharp transients. Most likely suspects are cantilever rigidity or a tired suspension, a minuscule application of ArmorAll helped. 100k & 200pF (shunted), 1.2gmVTF.
Still curious about the chassis/common ground effect. My bad, going balanced is not in the cards. Very much in the arena of Halcro's (Hi, Henry!) "homegrown theories" & most certainly idle speculation. I've got more, hope to keep you entertained.
Fleib, I've the spec sheet for the AT-12Sa: Vertical tracking angle is 20*. 370mH, 500 ohms, 2.7mV output. AT-10, 11, 11E, 12E, 13Ea are all 670mH/1200 ohm. Output for the 12E & 13Ea is 4.2mV, the others are 4.8mV. Channel sep. for all is in the 20's, 12Sa & 13Ea the best at 26 & 25db/1kHz.
The ATN12S is bonded on a micro mass tapered al. cantilever. Fr res. is 10-45k. Rumors of an ATS12S, nude Shibata. The ATN13 (10-30k) is a 0.2 x 0.7 elliptical, nude on a sturdier but still tapered bright alloy cantilever. For a 2 x 7 nude, the AT 13Ea is a surprisingly "warm" cart. Minor "plastic surgery" is required for a drop-in swap between the 10 & 20 families.
"Ebayed" a Signet TK7Ea with a supposedly new lpgear vivid line stylus, will be interesting to see how it compares to the (IMHO) excellent TK7LCa/ATN155LC.
Peace, |
Raul, That's interesting about the output level. I saw a copy of an owners sheet for the 440 and it said 4.2mV, same as yours, so that must be the spec. This was from an old post in a tape forum by someone who bought 2 in 1981. He seemed pleased with them. The only thing I can think of, off hand, is maybe the magnets lost some of their magnetism. Coils are laminated and normally don't change. If the output is lower on your example, that would make the generator closer to an AT-12S,SA or perhaps a 15/20. I believe weaker magnets would also reduce inductance in a coil with a magnetic core.
I don't think the Precept stylus will fit anything other than an AT-10 or 11 without trimming the plastic. My 550 stylus arrived, but I haven't looked at it yet. I suspect you're having too much fun with yours to mess with it. I'll have to check it out.
Nandric, Don't abandon hope for your AT-12S it may be a hidden gem with the right stylus. Regards, |
Timeltel, With the bit about separate grounds on each channel, I thought it might refer to balanced. I thought the cap to ground they were referring to was on the tonearm ground? If the cap is on the signal ground but not the hot, would it add capacitance to the mix? I guess it wouldn't be shunt capacitance, but being in series with the ground would add to tonearm cable capacitance? Beats me.
AFAIK, the AT-12S, SA, and the 15/20 series are the only ATs with 500 ohm impedance. If the PC-440/550 have DC resistance as indicated to me, then they probably have the same impedance. There's a thread on Karma with this info. Regards, |
Hi, Fleib: "Beats me".
Me too. In the absence of actual test data, answer is purely speculative.
500 ohm, some Signets in that range, would have to check (not now, company coming) but IIRC, AM-10, TK3Ea & TK7E/SU are dangerously close.
Need to try the ATN440MLa on the TK3Ea, might be a pleasant surprise.
Peace, |
Dear Fleib& Acman, Because of your contributions I looked at my AT 12 S stylus for the first time carefuly. I own an hand microscope (50 x) and was able to see what kind of 'riches' I actually own. The cantilever and the Shibata stylus look fantastic. So the only thing I need is the Precept 220. I am sorry for Indieroehre but I intend to keep my 12 S stylus. For my dear comrade Acman I can only say that in this as well in the parallel universe there is no better cart than his Grace F8. We all can only hope that he is willing to sell this treasure.
Regards, |
Dear Fleib: I will check that 440 output level comparing to the 220 that in theory share the same generator. I think that 4.2 is reffered to 5.0cm/sg but I read somewhere that the 440 had 2.7mv that's why I posted about and because seems to me during listening that th eoutput is lower. I have to try my other sample to be sure.
I don't receive yet my 550ML replacement, I hope you could have the time to post your 550ML experiences.
Regards and enjoy the music, R. |
I forgot, no I'm not speaking of speed on different build material cantilevers. As you well said the stylus/cantilever transmit movements and not music waves.
++++ " I think that would pertain more to plinths, than cantilevers " ++++
agree. Related to that plinth subject and its cartridge performance influence my experiences told me that the very first " link " that is in touch with the LP : TT mat, is IMHO even more critical that the plinth it self. An ideal plinth on TT playback most be innert protecting the cartridge/tonearm of internal/external vibrations/resonances/movements but this is the " ideal " one that unfortunately does not exist yet. That TT mat makes a huge diference for the better or bad.
Regards and enjoy the music, R. |
Dear Raul, Saw an Ortofon MC3000 for sale on eBay. It is said to be an "improvement" on the MC2000, because it has slightly higher output and lower compliance (but still, higher compliance than most very LOMCs). The asking price is sufficiently high that this would be no casual purchase. Have you heard it? Thx. |
|
Dear Lewm: I owned but not an improvement over the MC2000. If you want a taste of that MC2000 the I will go for the MC3000MK2 ( I own it. ) is way better than the 3000 and with the same output level.
The 3000MK2 is very good performer but it is not the MC2000. Both cartridges are different designs from: cartridge body build materials, cantilever build material, stylus shape, suspension and the like. Even the MC2000MK2 is a different " animal ".
Regards and enjoy the music, R. |
Dear Timeltel: I'm not dismissed nothing. Maybe I can't explain it. The cantilever/stylus/suspension-compliance has a resonant frequency point and of course that there are other kind of " vibrations " down there that affect the cartridge performance sound. We all know that the cantilever it self impose some kind of colorations to the final sound but that's not exactly what I was refering but what Fleib posted two you twice about and I agree in that sole subject/characteristic with him.
Regards and enjoy the music, R. |
Thanks, Raul, for sharing your experience with the MC3000. I certainly did not assume that it would be better than the MC2000, as the seller (2juki) implies. His written description on this item displays a much better command of English than does his usual eBay auction. Perhaps he had someone else do the writing. |
Thanks Nandric, that should do it. Something subtle was what I had in mind. We don't want to oversell.
BTW, Where can I get a F8 from a parallel universe? What kind of stylus does it have, and how does it sound compared to the F8 from this universe? |
Dear Lewm: Juki is one of my trusted sellers, my Micro Seiki RX5000 came from there between other items. He now carry Ortofon and his market prices are very nice/lower than even the USA/Europe Ortofon distributors.
Maybe he can get for you the MC3000MK2, this is a cartridge I recommend.
regards and enjoy the music, R. |
Since some of us are using tonearms with fixed headshells, and most of you are using different headshells to tame resonance, would using a spacer of equal thickness, as a headshell, made of headshell materials, ie ebony,titanium, give the same results as a headshell, as long as it did not negatively effect compliance?
I have been thinking how to modify a terminator arm to use reg. headshells, but thought this might give some advantages until I get around to it. |
Here's a link for a fine thread at vinylengine on loading and capacitance http://www.vinylengine.com/turntable_forum/viewtopic.php?t=6674&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=0 |
Raul,
I have a spec. sheet that compares the Precept 110 to the 220 and 440. The 110 has an output of 4.6, both the 220 and the 440 are stated at 4.2. This is at 5 cm/sec. I've tried to copy and paste this hear but it wont copy and paste. I could forward the email to you if I had your email address. Regards, Don |
Professor i hadn't caught up on pass posts here before i saw the link to the same thread in between super bowl commercials. For sure a long thread that i will spend the time on. As you say peace. |
Thanks Raul, I've been looking for a recommendation for 2juki. I'll buy from him with confidence. Don |
Dear Acman, the parallel universe is a kind of 'show off' about my philosophical 'inclination'. But when I was confronted with 'all possible worlds' I give my philosophical study up. |
Regards Raul, Exactly, ´...the very first "link" that is in touch with the LP: TT mat, is IMHO even more critical that the plinth itself ´. Furthermore, mat itself + record´s (platter´s) speed and especially its stability are the most crucial factors in LP play. In my system I have recently improved both and results are breathtaking. Even mediocre (technically speaking) carts sound relatively good, some even excellent on such decks. Different plinths have different colourations/resonances on sound quality but are only secondary, minor factors. |
Hello Acman, Experimenting different spacers between the Tomahawk wand and cartridge will the most fascinatining, yet inevitable course in Evolution. Aluminium may very well be the best solution for the already fantastic Tomahawk but other materials should be studied carefully. You are the chosen one for this quest and will be the pioneer. May God bless you. |
Dear comrade Don, There are other comrads than Raul and they all like to know if 220 and 440 have the same generator and body? I already own the right stylus (AT 12S)
Regards, |
Regards, Raul: Sorry, I misinterpreted your post. Fleib's comment "speed of sound in different materials, I think that would pertain more to plinths, than cantilevers" was addressed, not to me but to another. Wouldn't tonearms, and the manner in which they're integrated or isolated to the plinth/spindle/platter be a related consideration? I didn't read your post with enough care, mea culpa. Remember the controversy when the Meitner TT was introduced? http://www.museatex.com/at2.htm"Because most of the energy is generated by the cartridge stylus, this is the area to receive most of the reflected energy. The result is a form of distortion read by the stylus and incorporated into the music signal--- the typical record (is) an increasingly ideal half-wave coupler of acoustic energy from the lower mid-range up, and improving as the frequency rises. The record naturally dissipates vibrations, particularly at the levels and frequencies that they occur, to air. Thus air becomes the absorbent "platter", the only substance that does not give energy back to the record." Peace, |
Regards, Stltrains: Hi, Mike. There's a link in that LONG thread to one discussing wave propagation within a cantilever, quite a read.
33 yr. old son has absconded with my SP-25/Black Widow TA. He has the marvelous ability to transform "loan" to "give". The BW is like an old friend whose voice is immediately identifiable. A Shure V15-111/HE stylus was, I thought, a good match.
Peace, |
Dear Harold-not-the-barrel: +++++ " mat itself + record´s (platter´s) speed and especially its stability are the most crucial factors in LP play. " ++++
of course that speed accuracy and stability are the primary targets and that's why exist a TT.
We audiophiles know that the TT mat is important but IMHO almost no one gives the importance that I think it has.
In all the years that I have reading and posting in Agon only Atmasphere and now you are the only Agoners that realy knows what are talking about on that subject becuase took " actions " specific to be aware of its critical role in the quality performance trhough the analog alternative.
Almost all of us already tested and changed mats in our TTs but IMHO many of us never go deeper in the mat research with the same " attitude/emotion " that we did it when discovered , for example, the MM/MI alternative.
My experiences about tell me that's worth to make that mat deep research because the rewards are and makes a paramount difference. Of course that maybe some of you already are " there " even that never posted about.
Regards and enjoy the music, R. |
Dear Griffithds: 5.6cm/sg, that's what I was thinking but can't be sure.
Normaly, the cartridge output spec comes/is measured at 3.54 cm/sg that's what we are accustom to be aware. When some one tell us that a cartridge has an output of 3.7mv almost all of us before listen it more or less have a clear idea where the volume selector will be in our system.
That 4.2mv for the 220/440 seems to me to high for what I was and am hearing and that's what I posted that the output is lower than that spec, your post confirm that that 4.2mv PC440/220 output was not measured at the normal 3.54cm/sg but at 5.6cm/sg.
Thank you for put some light in the subject. Yes, I appreciate if you email me that cartridge sheet: rauliruegas@hotmail.com
Regards and enjoy the music, R |
Dear Timeltel: Never mind. What is really interesting in what you linked ( thank's. ) is that in some ways confirm what I posted here and in other threads about the critical importance of TT mats:
+++++ " The point at which the record contacts the mat or platter is an energy interface that vibrations, traveling at high velocities, must traverse. These vibrations will not be completely absorbed by the interfacing surface, and a significant portion of the energy will be "mirrored" back into the record. Because most of the energy is generated by the cartridge stylus, this is the area to receive most of the reflected energy. The result is a form of distortion read by the stylus and incorporated into the music signal. " +++++
that feedback is " terrible " because makes a signal degradation, so as better the mat to dissipate that stylus/LP energy and impede the feedback as lower will be that degradation.
I used several TT mats over the years and in all cases with different results. Was like two years ago during the work in our tonearm design that I ask my self and share this question with Guillermo ( friend and tonearm co-designer. ):
hey!, why not test what could happen if we build a TT mat with our propietary same build material that we are using in our tonearm? , at the end is working ( the material. ) great with the tonearm so why not? and that's what we made it and what we achieved was and is overwhelming and unspected.
We discovered " something " there. After that I again asked my self: why not use it in all the tonearms other than our desing through the headshell? and that's what we did and build several headshells that's where I mount and make the cartridge tests, these headshells are plug-in tyupe this is that do not have the universal headshell connector bayonet but just plug-in that gives/permit me easy changes in azymuth and overhang.
This kind of mat and headshell I'm using permit me too to be aware of distortions tiny distortions that we can hear in normal set ups, in the past I made the tests between universal headshells against my headshell for I can make that kind of statement.
Timeltel, time for the Precept PC 220/440 or 550ML.
Regards and enjoy the music, R. |
My mistake:
+++++ " that we can hear in normal .. " ++++, wrong: we have to read it this way:
THAT WE CAN'T HEAR IN NORMAl......
R. |
Regards Professors, In the case of the Meitner and others alike the Transcriptors way back in the 1960´s "The record naturally dissipates vibrations, particularly at the levels and frequencies that they occur, to air. Thus air becomes the absorbent "platter", the only substance that does not give energy back to the record." This is exactly happening with the Reso-Mat, the modern implementation of the then (and still futuristic) Transcriptors platter. I put the Reso on my platter and the improvement in audio quality & purity is breathtaking. I began to experimenting on hard mats in the early 1990´s. Originally I had a very dence and smooth sorbothane rubber mat, and it gave very nice audio with my very compliant MM carts. So I experimented hard metalacrylic mats with my very compliant MM carts. I also had a GOLDMUND STUDIO DD TT with metalacrylate hard mat but I find its sound quality unconvincing with my MMs. Oh, wish I had had a proper MC like Shinon Red (boron/MicroLine) then ! But in my younger days couldn´t afford one... they were insanely expensive at the time, and second hand/used were extremely rare. Heavy DD TT and Shinon cart, just couldn´t have them both. I never abandoned sorbothane and I´m still using it under the Reso-Mat. However, hard mats (compared to soft mats) may very well fit better certain, less-compliant (MC) carts. Anyway, it was "hip" in the late 1980´s to use low-compliant "high-end" MC´s and obviously hard mats were designed to fit them. Professor Timeltel, Glad you´re experimenting a nude TT. Without knowing your equipment I knew you MUST have something extraordinary there ! |
Dear Harold-not-the-barrel: I tested years ago the same approach as the Reso-mat and it works, no doubt about.
What I used was tiptoes like directly to the TT platter and a clamp. Maybe I have to test it again against my mat, right now I think I have a better tiptoe build material than in the past. Thank's to bring here that Reso-mat.
Even that I almost agree with the Reso-mat about clamps I think that a light clamp improves the souns.
I use a wood light weight clamp that an Agon friend gives me ( he builded, is a copy of the Shu Monk one but light weight. ) and I put/glued at the side where the clamp is in contact with the LP 2mm of our tonearm build material.
In the past I used every clamp that was out there till by my self falled in count that the traditional clamps made it more harm than help. I started to listen my LPs with out clamp till my friend send it his design and when I tested ( with out my material in there. ) I like what I heard and latter on I add the material to the base in the clamp and is how I'm using it till today and there is nothing that tell me to reject this clamp yet.
Anyway, IMHO we have to work in our each one system with mats and clamps to " discover " which approach and item works for the better: lowering distortions and killing colorations.
Regards and enjoy the music, R. |
Dear Raul, It does seem that in "the modern era", cartridge output is more often given at the stylus velocity of 5cm/sec, as opposed to 3.54cm/sec. Worse yet, many manufacturers do not tell the reference velocity at all. I think they want you to assume that they measured at 3.54, when actually it is now "kosher" to measure at 5.0. Makes the cartridge appear to have a higher output.
I have seen arguments about whether the Koetsu makes 4 or 6mV output. I think the argument is really about 3.54cm/sec vs 5cm/sec. |
Since the topic has been raised - 25 years ago I decided to experiment in the opposite direction of the Mat and Platter wars and try a next to nothing mat. I built a plate made of a flat record and 15 tiny foam 'dots'. After proper setup (of course) it was immediately apparent that what I had been listening to previously was essentially the 'sound' of the platter (or mat) buried beneath the reproduction. I still have and use that mat to this very day.
I do not use a weight, it's just the sound of vinyl coming through, and yes - it does have a 'sound'. Sorry, can't post a pic, but just pick your flattest giveaway record and make 3 rings of 5 tiny 1mm sq. foam (or whatever) supports.
It's well worth the effort, just remember who suggested it. |
Timeltel those youngens I'm sure he's going to take care of the gear. I've recently got my hands on a widow. Mounted a Stanton 881 and a acutex 315 long noise. Had a Ken Willis protractor delivered with original BW specs. In the end the micro 505 is back in I never was satisfied with what I was hearing.
Put the AKG p100le on the micro using Willis original setting and yes this cartridge is special in every way. Except my Fisher 400c has to be cranked up a little to much due to 2.7mv getting some low level hum. And that is what I was digging into yesterday. The hum is present at 90db in a slight way Mike
|
Harold, I got the idea from Dgarretson. He is light years ahead of me in knowledge regarding, well anything related to turntables and arms, and probably many other things not discussed.
I will try some different materials and see what happens. |
Raul, Spec. sheet sent. Let me know if it arrived. It seems to be a picture therefore I can't copy and paste to this site. Not really sure but I tried many times using different methods. If you did receive it Raul, and there are others that want it (Nandric), I would be more that happy to send it to them if they provide their e/mail. If you can figure out a way to post it here, that would be even better. Regards, Don |
Raul, the Precept 220 showed up today. The cartridge has a lot of promise, even with the 220xe stylus. Took a little while for the bass to show up. Only about 3 hours on it. Can get a little bright so far.
Regarding TT mats. I use the Acoustic Sig. platter bare or the Boston II if I can't get the cartridge to settle down. The AS has silencers, but don't know if that's a sales thing or something real. I tried a couple of others, but so far come back to these two. Always looking for a better mouse trap though. Would be interested in a weight. |
Like the girl next door which we overlooked for 10 years and then were to late. Heureka: keep the previous record on the platter and put onother one above. The best mat ever invented by a (tipsy)coincidence. |
Raul, Lew, I think 5 cm/sec is the standard now. If you go to Ortofon, AT, Grado, site, they're all rated at 5 cm/sec velocity. When I saw the sheet for the PC440, I didn't notice the velocity. I haven't looked at my 550 stylus yet. I don't have the Precept body, so I'm in no rush. It might be interesting to compare it to the 20SS stylus. I usually prefer the ML tip over a shibata. Shibata has a different facet on the front and back sides. That's supposed to give it a curved (rather than straight) contact area as the record spins. I'm not positive, but that could be the reason I hear the shibata sweeten the top end - not always a bad thing though.
I like Pierre Lurne' approach to platter w/no mat. He made a lead sandwich with methacrylate as the bread. The mass and resonant frequency of the lead prevented vibrations from being reflected back to the stylus. A few years ago somebody on VE was using tiny spikes, or rounded spikes points up, as a mat. A few people swore by it. Regards,
|
That's the thing with mats. There are schools of thought, just as for drive systems, etc. Some like to elevate the LP away from the platter, a la the old Transcriptors tt. Some like to use a mat that approximates the characteristics of a vinyl LP. Some like big heavy metal mats. And some like something that is none of those 3. But elevating the LP using multiple small contact points that hold the LP away from the platter must surely give a profoundly different sound compared to any of the other options. I used to own a Transcriptors, but I cannot recall its sonic character. |
Dear Acman3: MY AS TTs have not the " silencers " on the latest AS model.
I can't be sure but seems to me that the ruber O-rings in those silencers are the ones that are in touch with the LP: it is in this way?, maybe that's why you like or use it with out mat.
I listened LPs with out mat in the AS and did not like me.
regards and enjoy the music, R. |
Raul, The silencers are flat with the platter, so the vinyl is not in contact with any rubber. The theory, at least as I understand, is more in absorption and dissimilar metals not allowing resonance. It kind of sets off my BS meter, but the table has performed great, so maybe it works???
I ordered the Reso-mat, as it is quite reasonably priced. I like the idea of pigskin. I think there is an old football in my son's old room. :) |
Dear Griffithds: Yes, I received. Thank's.
Regards and enjoy the music, R. |
Just a quick comment on cartridge output specifications. They are commonly listed for either 5 cm/sec peak or 3.54 cm/sec RMS at 1 kHz, but the number should be the same, because a sine wave with an RMS value of 3.54 cm/sec has a peak value of 5 cm/ sec. In other words, even though 3.54 and 5 are two different numbers, they are just two ways to describe exactly the same thing. |
Acman3,
I agree on the Silencer platter. It does make a big difference to the resonances and lack of feedback from the platter (BS factor not withstanding). However, when I tried it naked with various clamps, it slightly raised the pitch while (possibly, 'consequently') increasing clarity/separation. It is the way that the manufacturers recommend its use though, so...
As always... |
Dear Fleib: Yes, appears that 5.0cm/sg is the today norm to measure cartridge output level.
I just bought a VdH Colibri wood and I was thinking a lot before pull the triger because the cartridge had a 0.5mv+ ( I prefer lower output in the Colibries. ) but the offer was very good and I bought it.
Arrived and I listening and found out that the output was lower than the specs and when I read it the in-box specs its output level is referenced to 5.0cm/sg when my other Colibri ( that I own from several years. ) is referenced to 3.54cm/sg.. So the manufacturers just changed.
Btw, I always liked the Colibri and recomend it and this Wood version is no exception: a great performer, better yet than my other Colibri. and that several other top cartridges.
Regrads and enjoy the music, R. |
Dear friends: I bought an Audio Technica AT150ANV. I think that I only read one post on an owner of that Anniversary cartridge version.
I don't know how good really is but in the past AT never dissapoint me, the latest Precept experience confirm about.
I don't receive yet but the cartridge has at least to good characteristics: sapphire cantilever and titatinum body. I understand that this is the first time AT used sapphire as cantilever build material in any of its cartridges. In the past they used ruby and diamond in the AT37, AT1000 and TK100.
In the other side the titanium body build material was used only in the ART1, at least is what I remember. I own all those cartridges that are very good performers.
If some of you already had the AT150ANV experience I invite you to share those experiences with us, certainly I will do it as soon I listen it.
Regards and enjoy the music, }R. |
Looks as a winner, we will see:
http://www.lpgear.com/product/ATC0150ANV.html
R. |