JC3+ Anyone?


Hey Folks,

Despite my current economic situation, I am seriouly considering replacing my GCPH with a JC3+. I am have a few intermittent issues that may be the GCPH. I have a DV P-75 mkII in the system for testing. And it is as I remember, somewhat lightweight but pretty good. Not nearly as refined as the GCPH and a weak bottom end. Does seem to have more large scale dynamics than the GCPH.

So back to the JC3+, anybody try one or have one? Fremer liked it but his taste leans more to detail than mine. I like detail but my idea of detail is hearing the leading edge as well as the body of the note/instrument.

I would be using a Kleos with the JC3+ and the JC3+ would be going via Cardas Nuetral XLR to a Classe CDP-500.

Hope y'all well and good,
Robert A. Ober
128x128Ag insider logo xs@2xrobob
On "setting azimuth with a voltmeter".
You need a high quality voltmeter and a test LP that has bands with signal in R channel, only, and in L channel, only, respectively. Preferably the frequency of the signal is 1kHz, but you will get slightly different results at different frequencies. For accuracy in reading the meter, you will probably need to measure voltage at the output of the phono section vs the output of the cartridge, which would be more ideal. Then you play, let's say, the R channel 1kHz signal and measure its amplitude in terms of signal AC voltage in the R channel. Take note. Play the R channel signal again and measure any AC voltage that appears in the L channel. Take note. Then do likewise with the L channel 1kHz test band; measure voltage in the L channel, and ideally at this point you need to set it to be equal to the voltage you saw for the R channel signal in the R channel, perhaps by use of a balance control. Once that is done, play the L channel signal again and measure VAC in the R channel. The voltage in the L channel when playing the R channel, and the voltage in the R channel when playing the L channel, represent "crosstalk". Some people like to adjust crosstalk so it is equal in both channels. Others like to adjust crosstalk to obtain the minimum values possible. (The two goals will not be arrived at at the same azimuth angle.) There are good arguments, either way. Also, keep in mind that azimuth has very very little effect on channel balance (a difference in output between R and L). Don't use azimuth to correct channel imbalance.
Great summary by Lewm.

Having done that many times with many cartridges, I eventually learned that I could adjust azimuth just as well, and far more quickly, by listening.

Choose LPs (ideally mono) that have a higher register instrument or voice (think soprano or upper register of the clarinet). Acoustic instruments or non-amplified vocals, please, not electronified hash. If the LP is stereo, the instrument or voice should be in the center, not off to one side.

Listen for the azimuth setting which makes this voice/instrument sound as tight/small/non-bloated as possible. A clarinet is not 4 feet wide, and shouldn't sound so. Some sopranos... oh, never mind! The point is, minimizing/equalizing crosstalk (as Lewm described) results in the most focused imaging.

It's essential that you're sitting in the sweet spot and that your speaker/room setup is well adjusted for pinpoint imaging. (If it isn't, you're wasting your time fussing with azimuth anyway.) Listen to a few CD's with the kind of music I described to give yourself a baseline. Crosstalk with any decent digital media is lower than with even the best vinyl rig, so it can provide a good baseline for comparison.

IMPORTANT: the adjustments to optimize azimuth, by any method, are incredibly tiny. Make the smallest adjustments that you possibly can. The window for optimum setting is very narrow. Get outside that window and you'll hear and/or measure little if any change. Start with the stylus visibly vertical when riding in the groove and tweak in tiny increments from there.
I had a high output Ruby, .7 output, and with the JC3. I had an overload problem. While I could use the MM input, I had to run the Ruby unloaded. The JC3 worked fine with a regular Ruby 3, .35 output. I believe the sensitivity of the line stage is also a factor.

The JC3 worked very well for me with MC's in the .2-.4 range. Dead quiet and great sound. Above that, and depending on your line stage, overload could come into play. I'm sure the reduced gain of the JC3+ was designed to make it more compatable with medium output MC's.
Alternately from the methods described by Lew and Doug, one can use software, which takes the rest of the system out of the equation, among other things. I have been using the Feickert software ever since it came out and am able to quickly converge upon the correct azimuth setting every time, but there's definitely a learning curve. Every cartridge is different, even the same model.
Bob: did you buy a JC3? I too have a GCPH and am thinking about a JC3. Would appreciate hearing from you.  Thanks. I'm using a Lyra Delos.