Would Like To Hear From Strain Gauge Owners

Slowhand, I've been running a Soundsmith Straingauge, Mk 2 version, with entry level SG-200 energiser.
What can I say? It's an amazing cart, easily besting all my prev incumbents (Roksan Shiraz, Lyra Skala and Parnassus, Transfiguration Temper and Orpheus, ESCCo modded Zu Denon 103).
It has a natural warmth thru the bass region, but not the euphonic colouration that makes other carts sound eartbound by comparison. Mids are clear and accurate. Treble esp really soars.
It deals brilliantly with surface noise, and it tracks like a bloodhound, nothing seems to shake it's resolve.
I'm running it on a direct rim drive tt w/ air bearing linear tracking arm, and the synergy is uncanny.
One major caveat - it really needs to be set up precisely esp wrt azimuth, or it can sound thin and bass light.
But get it right, and you're in for a treat. My keeper for life, after 20 yrs of struggling to find "the sound".

Dear Peter,

I have been following with some interest your discourse re your Strain Gauge cartridge. I find some of the comments made, on this thread, and others on the same subject, are out of line, and off-base.

For myself, I just want to thank you for the superb retip you've done on my Dynavector XX2MKII, which I just got back a couple of weeks ago.

It's hard for me to understand how a new Sapphire cantilever, and superior stylus shape, could make such a profound improvement in how this cartridge now sounds, which to my ears, is far better than I recall it sounding when new.

I did send an email stating my appreciation to Craig @soundsmith.com, but I wasn't sure you got it. I wanted to make sure you got the word.

Thanks again, and best regards,
Dan

I rest my case.

Dear Mosin: +++++ " found in the overall implementation of our work, not just in a single parameter of it. " +++++

I agree about and I not only understand but support that the quality audio performance on a unit is not only system dependent but a very complex one due to so many factors involved.

The RIAA subject on the SG theme comes because I heard that cartridge in a very good system and overall I don't like it ( I already posted the whys ) in the same way that other 2-3 persons in this thread does not like it either.

As a fact I really forgot the SG system ( in those times ) because for what I heard that product was/is not for me, suddenly I read the Agon review and the Slowhand thread and that's why I become interest on the subject again: learning about to grow-up!!!!

Then I made a " fast " search and I find that the SG system does not conform ( between other things ) according the RIAA eq. curve.
Then I read in the S-S site:
++++++ The Strain Gauge is a "displacement" device......which automatically compansates for the RIAA EQ. +++++
( how is that?, I was asking me: till today no one including the SG system designer can/could/want answer in a precise way that question. ) ( I have to say here that many months ago, I have the email, way before I heard the SG sytem I ask directly to MR. PL the same question with no answer yet. The claim that " something " automatically compensates for the RIAA eq. was something so exciting to read that I was really " moved " to learn in deep about. ) and finally Mr. PL posted a frequency SG system deviation of 2db from 50hz to 12khz, I have to say that I was a little disappoint with all these " findings ".

All these information and many other things told me that the differences/what I heard between a MC/MM cartridge performance against the SG system were/are mainly ( between other things ) to differences on frequency response due that the SG system does not conform according the standard RIAA eq. curve., that's all: very simple finding very simple facts.

Regards and enjoy the music.
Raul.

"and the only discussion on Audiogon would be the passion of music" (Mosin)

Wouldn't that be nice? Nothing wrong with obsessing about technical perfection, as long as we don't forget that it should not be at the expense of how it all relates to the things that really matter in the music. Which takes me back to the comment I made earlier, wich may have come across as overly critical of Raul's stance on this subject: Why no references to music?

I am always a bit perplexed when I hear (read) very strong opinions on the merits, or lack thereof, of this or that product, or the merits of a particular design approach that is not accompanied by at least SOME references to MUSIC. Without SOME comment along the lines of:

"Yes, I appreciate what this design tries to accomplish, but because of inaccuracies in it's RIAA eq, every time that I play a Joni Mitchell record, her voice sounds too full in her lower range. I have heard Joni Mitchell live many times, and that is not what I remember...", or:

"That's not the sound of an oboe in that register", or:

"The Strat has never sounded so thin on every other system that I have heard this recording on", or:

"Why does the bass player sound like he can't keep up with the drummer? Never sounded like that before", or:

Hello, I have been reading the thread on the Straingage cartridge with Rauls and other audiophile responses. Now generally I do agree with Rauls insistance of a flat freq response of equipment. That is also just about the only thing I agree with him.

It was Raul and more that a few others that had a tit-tat with me regarding freq. response and levels. These can be viewed in my threads, in the Analog forums.

In the thread "An Audiophile Goal" I was saying that two of the main parameters of reproducing music in your room is frequency response and amplitude. Well, it is also happens to be a goal in electronics as Raul states. And I agree with him! Yet as others have said it doesn't matter and I too agree with them! So, how can that be?

Now if I had told Raul and others that my subwoofer system I use is - 10db at 20 hz, which it is, and that it starts to drop off at 42hz, you would wonder if Bob is talking out of both sides of my mouth? And certainly who would buy a complicated (needs two stereo amps, and a sophisticated EQ system along with its attendendant cables etc). Indeed, who would buy Peters Soundgage cartridge, with a VERY similar problem of falling freq response?

I believe you want a fullrange system to 20hz. And actually believe that a rise of +6 to +8db at 20hz with a nice slow tapering to flat at 80-100hz. And yet my speakers are 10db down at twenty hertz! And not only are they down 6db from flat at 20hz, but they are 6 to 8db down from my goal of +6 to +8db at 20 hz! For a total of 16 to 18db down of my goal of +6-8db at 20hz.

Therefore 20hz is about 4 times less loud as the other freq being played back and my goal. But the problem is, I love the way the speakers sound! Tight bass, dynamic, great imaging everything you want in a sub, except for that pesky freq response.

And its the same for the Straingage, I have not heard one but if what everyone says that its a great listening experience due to its sonics, who am I to disagree?

And just like the Straingage, because of its failure to meet the freq response target, my subs are in the same boat, "bad" freq response.

See we are both on the same path.

So am I telling a fib when I say I have +6db at 20hz, when my speakers are not capable of that? NO, I use eq to bring it back up. My sub system consists of 32 eight inch drivers in a stereo pair of sealed dipole boxes. Being a sealed box I have to deal with the inherent rolloff from the sealed box. A classic case and well acknowledged. I use a Marchand Bassis (a type of a Linkwitz transform). This equalizes the falling freq response and can actually add boost so I can not only get to flat at 20 hz, but I can achieve my preferred +6 or +8db IN ROOM.

What does this have to do with the Straingage and Raul? Raul your insistance on flat freq response in equipment is a good one. But the only freq response we are worried about IS THE IN ROOM RESPONSE! See I still designed my sub system with a falling freq response just as Peter did the Straingage. Why, because he and I believe we have built great sounding equipment. All of the usual attributes that audiophiles love are there in spades. Except the freq response.

I knew I could eq the "poor"/falling freq response with EQ. Now someone who happens to like the sound of the Straingage cartridge can do the same thing. Peter is not adding the eq up front, but if you can eq it before it reaches YOUR EARS that is ALL WE ARE CONCERNED ABOUT!

Or do what many audiophiles do, go for great sounding equipment and ignore the lower freq response if it is not a critical issue to you.

I think that with my Marchand crossover and Marchand Bassis I have enough gain to do this with the Straingage, without clipping, and as long as I get back to my in room "flat freq response" I am golden (I hate that saying). I could potentially love the sonics of the Straingage, but my first concern would be, for me, do I have enough gain in my eq to get back to flat, plus some. If the answer to that (like my subs) is YES, then who cares what the freq response is of a piece of equipment.

I must say though that most equipment sounds best with a flat freq response, at least in the fact that if it were true, that my speakesr gave me +6db at 20hz then I could do away with the eq. Just as if Peter obtained flat respose with his cartridge could you do away with eq down the line. The same as Raul could do away with his phono eq if he chose to do the eq'ing somewhere else in the chain to obtain a flat response in room, as that is the only one that mattters. Or for that matter not even worry about freq response, most people seem not to care here.

And how you cooose or if you choose to get there is up to you.

Also on the subject then is how flat is flat? Raul says the Hagerman trumpet is not even close to his "Worlds Best Phonolinepreamp" in freq response flatness, I say who cares! All you have to do is get a nice smooth in room response, how you get there is your problem. Also how close you get is entirely up to you, but it has very little to do with the minute differences Raul talks about.

Because in the end we are looking for an in room response within +- 3db. With what is probably a practical/obtainable (for most audiophiles) one or two peaks /nulls up to 6db. Which is not terribly detrimental and perhaps becomes your house sound if you can tune it to an agreeable (to yourself) freq..

With that in mind. It is just that much easier to obtain a smooth response in room if you are not dealing with equipment abberations to begin with. But a known "problem like Peters (ok, I'll do it later), Rauls (nice phono preamp dude) and yes even mine RIAA EQ and speaker EQ is.... EQ SOMEWHERE.

Have a wonderful sounding Straingage or a pair of great sounding handmade subs that aren't flat? Eq em, Raul does this to all of his phono cartridges. And all speakers are Eq'ed somwhere (yea, I know electroststs and single drivers aren't)

You see, Rauls problem as a designer is that he has a goal and isnt sure why! Does he even know why he wants a flat response?

Do peaks obscure music and nulls remove music. Does a broad freq peak darken or brighten the music, hint, it probably depends on where the broad peak is.

Does a 20db 80hz peak produce one note bass? Does that then said 20db peak then limit the max volume you can play you sytem at? Does it explain why you have to turn your sytems volume levels up and down for different albums?

Does a falling freq response below 35hz negate the need for a subsonic filter?

All we are going for is a nice freq response. AND ALONG WITH THAT we need good sounding, quiet equipment that is revealing and is able to also play in room at a level that is appropriate for recorded music, we are all set.

And if Peter can just figure out how to have his cartridge extend out to 20hz. Everyone could do away with their phono preamp RIAA Eq. Then if he can have it roll off at 20hz I can do away with my subsonic filter!



Bob

"I came away loving the Voice & finding the Strain Gauge more analytical like CD."

Also Flying Red indicates the strain gauge design does transient response better than most others.

Transient response is one area where CD has a clear advantage in that there is no mass and inertia involved in the playback as there is with vinyl. Also, the strain gauge advertises extremely low mass as well, so this makes sense.

Is it possible that as mass becomes less of an issue with a cartridge/stylus, more like with digital, that the sound starts to approach that "analytical" sound associated with excellent transient reponse that many vinyl lovers do not like with CDs?

Most musical instruments including the human voice have excellent transient response, so this is an area that is important to good playback as well I believe.

Wouldn't be ironic if the state of the art in vinyl playback was really not that much different than the same with digital?

Raul,

I don't know about the speed of the table that Chris builds, but mine sends a signal that is accurate to around one part per billion, and the idler wheel tracks within its theoretical limits, but that isn't the point. The point is that there is a lot going on in a turntable, wires, tonearms, cartridges, preamps, etc. We can talk about RIAA till the cows come home, but that isn't what definitively makes the music anymore than the speed. It is a culmination of things, and those things differ a little bit with each design. Nonetheless, guys design things that sound great, even if they choose different paths to do it. There are workarounds for some obstacles, and there are also unforeseen pitfalls, yet to be pursued. Also, there are quantities that cannot be measured. Still, pleasing results are often delivered. If that were not so, anything that perfectly hits your implementation of RIAA would sound exactly the same as the next product that met that same criteria. I'm not saying that the RIAA topic is a moot one, but the overall picture is what counts at the end of the day. Chis and I can build speed accurate turntables, but the real mettle is to be found in the overall implementation of our work, not just in a single parameter of it. The same goes for Peter's Strain Gauge cartridge. It sounds good simply because it sounds good. He made sure of that by carefully voicing it every step of the way. You may find a $35 moving magnet out there someplace which meets the RIAA sniff test to your satisfaction, but do you really want one? I think not. The reason I don't think so is because of the other aspects, and those are the same attributes that puts such a product on the market for such a cheap price. There are few free rides, but there are even fewer 100% perfect products. I will go so far as to say there are none in existence. If there were, we'd be done here, right? Everyone would have a perfect system, and the only discussion on Audiogon would be the passion of music. Maybe one day.

I agree with all of you. For the record, Raul has given me very helpful advice on these forums, I simply got caught up in the passion of it all, and perhaps allowed my own dogma to colour my previous post... Consider this a retraction(?) and thank you again Raul for your advice on the Shure 97! I may remount it this weekend and try again ! Enjoy the weekend guys, I have to work:-( Harv.

Dear Hxt1: +++++ " There, I said it Raul!! " +++++

Now, you are done!!! and happy, good.

Btw, Lewm and Peter: thank you for your understanding and kindness words.

Regards and enjoy the music.
Raul.

I agree with Lewm. Raul has his opinions, but he is also very experienced. He has always answered my e-mails to him regarding specific cartridge/table/arm combinations and offered me good advice. Thanks Raul. I appreciate his contributions. Sorry to go off topic here.

Hxt1, So I take it that Raul alienates you because of his preference for solid state phono stages (i.e., his own) and his dislike of the Denon DL103, plus the fact that he is a bit dogmatic at least on the former subject. Notwithstanding these factors, I find him to be in general kind and courteous in his remarks, even though he is unwavering in his opinions. Also, he brings to this forum more experience with oddball turntables, tonearms, and cartridges than anyone else I know of, and I enjoy hearing from him on those products that I have never even seen. For example, lots of folks seem to have benefited from Raul's revival of interest in MM cartridges (at least in this tiny world). I feel free to disagree with him on the odd occasion; you should too. To refer to him as an "annoying pest" is a bit over the top, IMO.

wow! Being a person who thoroughly enjoys the Denon dl 103 and TUBES, I learned long ago not to even post if Mr. Raul was around! In fact when I see his name on a post, I quickly skip past it. I am a humble enthusiast, but I must say the amount of stubborn arrogance put forth by some of these designers really takes the appeal out of the hobby itself. Let us not forget the fact that if a product is really exceptional, it will find success through forums like this one, reviews be damned! I don't listen to my records with an ossiloscope, and nine times out of ten I buy products upon the reccomendations of fellow enthusiasts who have experience with several types of products and have developed their systems over time, piece by piece..... I care not what a manufacturer has to say about product a vs product b, Raul I have witnessed your hijacking of several threads on this site, and I find you a rude, annoying pest. Seek therapy, or at the very least learn how to make your point and move on! No one wants to read 20 posts by you, trust me. Tubes..... Denon mc cartridges! There, I said it Raul!!
Ps. Mr Lederman, thAnks for the retips on my denons, they sound wonderful!

Here in Europe we have Allaerts , in US you have Soundsmith. Both have made their experience in cartridge repair and rebuilding over the years, until time to have own cartridge lineup from previus experiences.I have the most reliable thoughts about those people who had so much experience about all the cartidges they had in their hands that we must give them an favourable advice how to build cartridge of the future.

It was a rhetorical question, Bob, but your opinion is certainly valid.

Daned said "In the end it all comes down to how does one wish to select a product. By arguing numbers? Or by listening?"

I think you need both!

Bob

Hi Lewm,

Again, I don't build phonostage or preamps so I don't claim to be an expert on RIAA. There are many others who have posted on this issue on this thread and other threads, like the one I linked before, that are far more qualified to speak on the subject than I am.

As I understand it, the issue is not if RIAA correction should be done because it should. The question is during reproduction how faithful to the curve does this correction need to be to sound good? Some phonostage and preamp designers argue for strict adherence. Many more argue that the extra components need to conform to strict adherence add more bad things than they help. I think anyone who has experienced changes do to cap and resistor swapping can appreciate this concept.

IMO, Raul has always argued for strict adherence to the mathematical models that define the RIAA curve. Ok, that's his opinion and he's entitled to it. But I have never heard any other phonostage/preamp designer insist on this rigorous interpretation. Raul and Jose have built a very fine product. However, there are other products out there that do compete very well against their box. So why doesn't one sound clearly superior to another? I don't know, but this .1 dB adherence does/did not translate into any sonic revelations when I heard it. Unless something else in the implementation is holding it back.

As to the Soundsmith SG, it seems to me that Peter has posted that the SG does do RIAA correction. Perhaps, and this is my interpretation of what I'm reading here, not in the more conventional way because of the natural response of the cartridge used which is also not your conventional cartridge.

In the end it all comes down to how does one wish to select a product. By arguing numbers? Or by listening?

The Ortofon range of cartridges give distortion specs for their 20Hz-20Khz response (in addition to a frequency range spec).Some of them far greater distortion i.e 0-2.5dB than the relative distortion might be for the Strain Gauge limited to just this spec and not 12Hz-50Khz given.The cartridge distortion is what is important and even a fine phono stage will not hide this.Please correct me if this doesn't make sense.

Dan-ed, As an engineer, you know far better than I what's going on, but as I understand it, the job of the RIAA equalization network is to UN-"squash" that which was squashed during the conversion of the musical signal into grooves on an LP. So, the squashing has been done a priori. Then, if the RIAA equalization is not up to snuff, there may remain some squashed frequencies and/or artificially enhanced frequencies during playback. That's not a good thing, either. I hear the negative effects when I play some early 50s mono LPs that were not cut to the RIAA curve. (Try listening to the original recordings of Ella and Louis, for example.) I say this as someone who is not as anal as Raul about RIAA but who is trying to see his point. I am completely open-minded as regards the SG cartridge, however. Sorry to add one more post, Frogman.

Dear MrjstarK: I'm not saying that sounds bad or not to buy it I'm only point out one of its characteristics, that's all.

Regards and enjoy the music.
Raul.

This is the one time that I hope that my response is deleted by the Agon censors. Simply because I think Mrjstark's post is an absolutely perfect way to end this thread.

Well.......with all those standards , they still do mess things up - don't they?
And no two components sound alike.......why????

Give me SG which is or isn't up to RIAA standards and I WILL enjoy the music without overanalyzing the principals behind it.

Give me the most distorted amp in the World that sound like live music and I will keep it until I die.

Give me advice that is misleading and makes no sense and that is how I will remember you.

Dear friends: There is something " curious " and very interesting, whereas al the audio industry are working on better audio items: better amplifiers/preamps/CDP/SACD/DVDA/phono stages/MM-MC cartridges/speakers/room treatment/cables/racks/footers/recording manufacturers/electronic parts(passive and active ones )etc/etc with designs with lower distortions/flat frequency/lower colorations to improve the quality sound music reproduction and to be near/true of what is is the recording the SG Soundsmith device is the only audio item that in porpose alter/corrupt the frequency response that comes in the recording " telling " to the whole audio industry chain that all of them are wrong!!!!! including you.

Regards and enjoy the music.
Raul.

The interesting and innovative part of the SG is for me the synergy concept. For once a complete package includes the cartridge AND the matching phono preamp, totaly voiced for it. It is so difficult to find a phonopreamp that has the ideal load that it is a great thing that the cartridge designer voices the whole chain for better synergy at high level. Kondo has done that but a very high price.

Raul, I think they are trying to say is "so what, it sounds just as good or maybe better with the deviation".

I do feel qualified to speak on this point. I am both an engineer and audiophool. Being in 100% agreement with a mathematical model does not necessarily translate into better sound. I know you don't believe that, but everyone is entitled to form their own opinions on what sounds good to them. And no matter which way go with speakers, cables, tubes, whatever. There is ALWAYS a trade-off and we will ALWAYS find people who do not ALWAYS agree with what any of us think sounds correct.

So, yes, I agree. Your marketing bullet is still intact. Your credibility has perhaps taken a hit, but I'll bet that happens to you every now and then.

Dear Dave: Things are that I'm only try to understand why I heard what I heard on the SG ( different quality performance against a MC/MM cartridge ) and what other people report about. Dave, for me is not enough: it sounds good or I don't like it, if I can I want to know why. Sure I know that some people are more " easy " about, nothing wrong with that.

The subject is not exactly accuracy ( that when I'm talking on accuracy I talk on tiny values: 0.1db or the like ), after my research I report what I find and the whole thing is not exactly/extrictly accuracy ( the deviaion is at least 2 db. ) but a totally different equalization curve, that's all. Why so many people in this tread does not like to know about does not likes that I report about: it is something that I can't understand yet.

Anyway all those people can't change the facts on the SG subject.
Dear friends: things are like they are.

Regards and enjoy the music.
Raul.

Dear Intactaudio: I was talking about the MC/MM cartridges not the SG because at that time I do nt know that does not conforms with the RIAA standard.

Regards and enjoy the music.
Raul.

According to Raul there is only one right way to do anything in this hobby. We are all either too stupid, not intelligent, have tin ears, not enough common sense, etc, to get how correct Raul. Ok, I think I have that part memorized now.

But forget this "bench racing" type argument here in the forums. How does this stuff sound?

Some of us have heard what Raul's implementation sounds like in side-by-side comparison to some of his competitor's products. This is where Raul's on paper arguments have trouble in the real world. They just don't live up to the hype Raul is constantly spreading. Yes, his work sounds pretty good. There are some good and some not so good sounds coming from Raul's implementation of his ideas. Some sounds coming from Raul's Essential could be cleaned up and made better with some cable swaps.

Umm, that pretty much sums up every phonostage/preamp combination around. So it doesn't appear that Raul's work has started any audio revolution. The Essential is just another product out there for us to choose from.

The concept Raul cannot get, and probably never will, through his pointy little head is that all of the theory and math doesn't mean crap when you hook things up and turn it on. It is just talk points. How does it sound?!? That is all that matters in the end.

As Peter, Teres, and others have pointed out, each additional component that is added to implement that perfect curve is adding coloration to the sound, or it is squashing something else. Either dynamics or detail. Anyone who has played around with crossovers to any extent knows this very well. Sometimes you can get a very pretty curve from the simulations and even in actual implementation but it still doesn't sound right.

Raul can never allow this kind of thinking to go unchallenged because it flies in the face of almost every argument he makes in his marketing campaign.

Slowhand/Mosin: when I posted my first post in this thread I had no idea that the SG device does not conforms according the RIAA standard, it was after a research when I take in count ( fortunately ) and share my findings: it was not exist a previous agenda like you think.

in your first post you said this

I always said that the RIAA eq deviation makes a great differences in a MC or MM quality performance and only when you hear cartridges in a phono stage with a RIAA eq deviation lower than 0.1db can you understand how important is that subject.

If you didn't understand the situation, why did you profess accuracy?

dave

Dear Frogman: How is that?, are you telling me that a recording being played through two different equalization curves have no different quality performance?, I'm not talking or posted anything about " accurate frequeny response " I speak and posted about different frequency response that's different of what you states.

IMHO two different frequency response curves give you at least two different tonal balance spectrum to the same recording and two different " all " music presentation.

Frogman, those facts have nothing to see with accuracy but differences on the equalization curves, example: one curve with + 1-2db on 60hz, 900hz, 3khz ( these deviations affects almost three octaves each one ) and the second curve with deviations at + 2-3db on 45hz, 360hz, 780hz, 1.8khz,5.5khz and - 2db at 3.5khz, please tell me: do you think that the quality performance that you hear through your system are not different on each one? because that's what I'm saying all the time: different quality performance.

I don't think that I'm missing the " boat ", some of you try to move it but the " boat " is still firm.

About the MUSIC contribution I have a lot lot to share but I don't have enough time to a second forum.

Slowhand/Mosin: when I posted my first post in this thread I had no idea that the SG device does not conforms according the RIAA standard, it was after a research when I take in count ( fortunately ) and share my findings: it was not exist a previous agenda like you think.

Now, I already receive several emails ( in the last 36 hours ) where the people give me " thank you " to put some light on the subject, I know that like me many of you read for the very first time on those findings about and this fact for the good or the bad IMHO is a learning " episode ".

Regards and enjoy the music.
Raul.

Slowhand, I bought The Voice Ebony after hearing it at this year's RMAF. It's really a wonderful sounding cartridge. A local friend also bought one at this year's RMAF and he's a huge vinyl-phile re-discovering his large collection. Anyway, it stands up to long-term, repeat listening.

It works great with 40dB of gain, 47kOhms and 400pF capacitive loading. I tweaked the azimuth tonight and got rid of a little stray sibilance.

Peter's great to work with. He even called me from his hospital bed to make sure that I got my setup right, particularly stressing loading and azimuth. Peter loves his music and makes great products.

Who knows, maybe I'll buy a SG one day, but The Voice is making me very happy right now.

Dave

Thanks for the advice on hearing the cartridge for myself. I actually have heard it at the RMAF in 2007 and 2008. I admit it was very limited exposure, but I was very impressed with what I heard. I was also very impressed with Peter's "The Voice" cartridge. I was just trying to get opinions of those who have the SG in their systems at home and have had long term exposure to it.

I have been following this thread with a bit of reluctant curiosity. I was, at one point, going to chime in and encourage responders to cut Raul a little slack; but only a little. Reason being that as a person for whom the English language is a second language, I understand all too well how sometimes one's statements, particularly those made in writing, can sound more severe and austere than what was really meant; due to a certain linguistic aukwardness. I can't recount how many times I have had to mediate misunderstandings between my Anglo wife and Latino mother; all due to the in-law's less than perfect command of the English language. But alas, after upwards of twenty posts, I think Raul has made his point perfectly clear; language aukwardnesses and all. While I admire anyone who is so passionate about audio as he is, I just happen to think he misses the boat. One comment he makes I think says a great deal:

"...when you play a recording that was recorded with ( before ) a non RIAA eq. standard then you heard a totally different performance of what is in the recording that comes with a different equalization curve."

Absolutely not true. It will be different as far as frequency response goes, but as we all know there is far more, and arguably far more important, to the proper (I deliberately did not use the word "accurate") reproduction of a recorded performance besides absolutely accurate frequency response. In fact, as I understand Peter's comments (and I confess to limited technical knowledge), a deliberate choice was made to make some sacrifices in absolutely accurate frequency response, in order to gain the potentially more musically significant advantages of fewer phase problems. Makes sense to me.

What doesn't make sense to me is how it is possible that one of the most prolific writers on this forum, one with such strong opinions about audio, and the reproduction of sound, one with over seven hundred responses in various threads, has not made one single contribution on the subject of MUSIC.

Agree
Hear it for yourself if possible.
IMHO - it is an awesome product which I would love to have in my collection if budget permit that.
Take my words with grain of salt seen my limited expousure to SG.
However, on both occasions my thoughts were the same - some of the best analog reproductions I've heard.
Trust your ears

Hi Slowhand,

First, I have heard the Soundsmith Strain Gauge in a show setting, and also in the private residencies of a couple of people. In all cases, I found it to be very engaging. Would you like it? I believe so, but somehow you are going to have to find a way to hear it for yourself. Online opinion is like face-to face opinion, but you know that.

Second, it brings up a larger point. There will always be people with agendas of some sort or another, and there are always those who are experienced enough in a given area to voice a valid opinion. Sometimes the two traits go hand in hand, but sometimes not. Even those who know a great deal about one area of our hobby may know nothing about some other area, even if they purport that they do. For example, I know a little about turntables, but what I know about solid state amplifiers could be poured into a teacup. There are those, however, who would have us believe they know everything. It just isn't true simply because we all tend to know most about the specific area of our interests, and less about passings fancies on the periphery. The moral here is that you need to take most opinions with a grain of salt.

You need to actually hear the cartridge, even if it requires some travel to do it. I believe it will be worth the time and effort.

My two cents, for whatever that's worth.

Dear Slowhand: Thank you for your kindness words, appreciate it.

Regards and enjoy the music.
Raul.

I would like to thank all of those who actually read the title of my thread and contributed their opinions on the sound of the SG cartridge, be them favorable or not. I do not however appreciate Raul trying to hijack the thread to fulfill his own agenda. If I had wanted to know the technical side of the SG I would have asked. I wanted to hear from owners as to how it sounded in their systems. Please do no talk down to me Raul. I have been in this hobby for 30 years. I have learned to trust my ears. If I heard 2 cartridges and I like the sound of cartridge A, but dislike the sound of cartridge B, then find out from some obnoxious person like you, that cartridge A does not strictly follow the RIAA curve, but cartridge B does am I now going to force myself to like cartridge B? No No No. If, in the future I ask for friends opinions (and I do consider those on Audiogon my friends) I do not mean you Raul.

I would like to apologize to Peter Ledermann for the rude way Raul kept his endless rantings going on this thread. Peter, it is obvious that many of us feel you are building a great sounding cartridge. Please keep up the good work, and feel better soon.

Dear Perrew: Answering your first question and IMHO when you play a recording that was recorded with ( before ) a non RIAA eq. standard then you heard a totally different performance of what is in the recording that comes with a different equalization curve.

That's why some Phono stages comes with one or two eq. curves other than the RIAA standard, normally those recordings that are with a non RIAA standard were very old ones and that were recorded before the RIAA standard universal agreement.

Regards and enjoy the music.
Raul.

Dear Teres: Of course that when the cartridge signal pass through the phono stage what you want and the RIAA permit is a flat frquency response, but that's not exactly of what I'm refering to: sorry.

++++ " The SG transducer (unlike traditional cartridges) inherently produces a frequency response curve that closely follows the RIAA curve " +++++

this is eaxctly what the web-site states but IMHO is not true: could you explain how closely the SG follows the RIAA curve when Peter it self posted that between 50hz-12khz the deviation is a very high: 2 db, when every phono stage out there ( even the ones that measures " worst " on the RIAA deviation ) that conform according to the RIAA standard eq. measures as low as only 0.5db over the whole RIAA curve not only a part of that curve like the SG? do you know if between 20hz-50hz and 12khz-20khz is higher the SG deviation?.

Chris, I'm speaking of facts and IMHO till now you don't have any about like any one of my detractors.

I wonder why an intelligent person like you can posted what you post about.

Chris: how closely performs your TTs against the 33.33rpm or 45rpm standard TT speed? do you think that tiny ( very tiny ) speed TT deviations affects the quality performance on the recording that we/you are hearing? , because those TT speeds: 33.33/45rpm are the " Standards " and the ones to follow in exactly the same way the RIAA eq. curve. why does not exist TT with 36/49rpm? , you can play an LP on these weird speeds but the performance will be totally different right?

Well, IMHO the 2db SG deviation in that incomplete frequency range it is not only not close to the RIAA curve but far far away and totally different than the RIAA curve and that's why we hear a totally different performance through the SG.

So IMHO it is totally unfair to compare any MC/MM cartridge against the SG because the MC/MM ones cartridge signal that we hear/heard through the phono stages have a totally different equalization curve than the SG and due to that fact its performance is totally different.
Why is so difficult to some of you to understand that simple facts?.

Regards and enjoy the music.
Raul.

.

Great job, Raul! You've turned the discussion to all about you!

Raul, You still don't get it. I suggest that you read this and other responses carefully before responding.
1) The RIAA curve is about flat frequency response. The record is recorded with the inverse of the RIAA curve and applying RIAA equalization produces flat frequency response.
Deviation from the RIAA curve produces frequency response deviations. You are a preamp designer?
2) The SG transducer (unlike traditional cartridges) inherently produces a frequency response curve that closely follows the RIAA curve so there is no need to do equalization in the preamp. I believe that this is one of the strengths of the SG. There is a significant sonic cost from any sort of equalization. That cost is eliminated with the SG. The down side is that the inherent equalization may not be as precise as well implemented RIAA equalization so the resulting frequency response may be less than perfect. I say "may" because I don't know the details about how closely the SG mimics RIAA.

As Flyingred aptly pointed out this thread is about how the SG sounds. I think it sounds great. Apologies for my part in the diversion.

Dear Flyingred: +++++ " I cannot understand why anyone would obsess about flat frequency response when ... " +++++

I'm sorry but I'm talking about RIAA standar curve eq and how the SG device does not conform according it. What I'm tellng is not precise about " flat frequency " but about RIAA eq curve, could you uderstand that?, thank you in advance.

Regards and enjoy the music.
Raul.

Raul you could not be more wrong. The subject is exactly about how the SG sounds - please refer to the OP at the top of this thread where he wrote:

"I would like to hear from owners of Strain Gauge cartridges (particularly Soundsmith owners)as to how you like the strain gauge system compared to previous cartridges you have owned. Is there any drawbacks to the Soundsmith Strain Gauge system?"

If we take the OP at his word then your participation is not welcome, as you do not own the cartridge that is under discussion. I cannot imagine how much arrogance it takes to re-state the same point of view 18 times (and counting) in the same thread. For some unexplicable reason the words "idiot savant" and "troll" come to mind.

I cannot understand why anyone would obsess about flat frequency response when, for example, most people here know that changing the brand of resistor used to load a moving coil will change how it sounds, yet all measurable parameters of the circuit remain the same.

Back in the seventies, when people didn't know any better, they bought audio equipment on the published specification - the Japanese amps would seduce buyers with crazy low distortion figures and flat frequency responses. Since then subjective reviews have proven to be way more useful. Catch up Raul.

Dear Peterayer: here you can read about RIAA eq curve and you can observe on the diagram that the frequency range is: 20-20khz, I think that any one can confirm this RIAA information:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RIAA_equalization

Regards and enjoy the music.
Raul.

What happens when a phono stage that is highly optimized to adhere to a RIAA curve meets a record that is cut from a non-RIAA standard?
Some stages have the ability to switch between different RIAA standards so I guess not all records are cut the same?

Dear Flyingred: Only to clarify, the subject is not if the SG sounds good or bad because this is each person/system dependent, the subject is different and IMHO more " deep " and important than a simple: like me or don't like me opinion. Even you can read my posts and I never say it is a bad device/product/manufacturer because that's is not the issue.

I wish you could understand my point of view on the subject.

Regards and enjoy the music.
Raul.

Dear Teres: With all respect, yes the debate is about the RIAA curve not a simple " flt frequency " subject like you states. This is not a debate about trade-offs that I never ignore like you say.

I hope you can uderstand that: RIAA curve subject, a very delicate and " deep " important/critical issue.

Regards and enjoy the music.
Raul.

Dear vetterone: +++++ " Your ignorance on the subject is so played " +++++

that's why I want to learn about and that's why I made an still do a research on the subject and share my findings and opinion, What's wrong with that? why are so angry? it is because you buy the SG with out knowing about?.
I think that I have the right to do it in the same manner that you have the right to post any thing you want.

Steve I can don't agree with you on some subject but I respect your right to say it, could you make the same for me?

Vetterone, read again what Sounsmith states in their web-site: +++++ " The Strain Gauge is a "displacement" device......which automatically compansates for the RIAA EQ, " ++++++

I don't know you but IMHO this is not true ( far from there ) and this has a name: deceit.
Every time that I go in deep in the research on the subject I find more things that are " wrong ": why do you push me to follow an in deep research on the SG?

Here what an open mnd person like Peterayer posted:

+++++ " . I see validity to both Raul and Peter's points. The debate about how much the SG is off the RIAA curve seems to be in dispute and the range of the measurement (20-20khz or 50-12khz)is not consistent. " +++++, this is all about, simple.

Steve, not only blame me, please let me know why and where I'm wrong: do you think that the SG device conforms in a precise way according to the RIAA standard eq? if you did/do please let us know how is that and why?

Regards and enjoy the music.
Raul.

Peterayer, No, I don't think the debate is about the RIAA curve. It's an old, tired argument that Raul brings up at every opportunity. Raul has seems to have an obsession with flat frequency response. Anything that does not have ruler flat response is fatally flawed in his mind. While flat response is certainly a good thing, it is only one of many characteristics that make for good sound. Focusing exclusively one measure is misleading and is sure to result in poor sound. Peter made this point very well, "Amplitude flatness can easily be done at the sacrifice of other MORE IMPORTANT parameters". Raul consistently ignores this concept and just launches into the flat response argument again and again...

Back to the topic of this thread, I have heard the SG on a number of occasions and have been able to compare it to a variety of other high end carts. The SG is one of the finest cartridges I have heard.

Raul's first defense is to try make himself the victim.

Raul's second defense is denial.

That's why I have to repeat and repeat: I'm not a competitor, the SG can't compete with MC/MM cartridges: can you understand it after " repetitive " 15 posts?.

I think anyone reading this thread can see how truly self-serving and arrogant many of Raul's actions on Audiogon are. And he doesn't even have the courage to identify himself properly. He CANNOT get away with that on any other audio forum but here on Audiogon because the moderators of those forums would force him to register and identify himself as a manufacturer or leave.

Raul, stick to the threads where people love the kool aid you are serving.