Lyra Atlas experiences

Thank you! I have heard advice from others also, in the direction that the Lyra Atlas might sound better with better tone arms than the SME V. Although this is a good "work horse" I think. Suggestions are welcome, and if Lyra can comment, I am grateful.
Regarding tubes - yes, I agree, maybe too much, but I like good tube sound. I have tried the Atlas with solid-state phone stages, and that is not my preference. I agree that the system has to "land". I am very happy having a system that lands, in the sense that it "grips" and "plays along" with my room.
Best regards, Oystein

Just to make my listening reference clear:

I bought a used a Lyra Clavis pickup in 1997. I heard a Lyra Helicon in the system of a friend, later. Then I moved up to a Lyra Titan in 2005, a Titan i in 2008, and the Atlas in 2013. 
 

Hi Sunnyboy1956 - thanks. For me, every step up the Lyra ladder has been worth it, although the cost level is now very high. I am mainly very satisfied with the Atlas, also compared to the Titan i that I used before. I have no reason to think it performs sub standard. My question is more about getting into the best optimal terrain. Thanks for the tonearm cable burn in advice, this is true, but mine is well used. How do you like the performance of your three Lyras all in all?
Where do I want improvements? I want the music to sound even better. I think it is possible. I have recently confirmed, this is very much a matter of signal to noise. A stereo is like a radar picking up interference, and we don't want anything to disturb the sound. Since my main phono stage is on repair, I use a small solid-state stage. Today I found that by turning the plug, the noise from the unit was considerably reduced. Dressing the tone arm cable (singled ended Kimber KCAG DIY) also helped lower the noise level.

Just a small update. My Atlas 2018 is still working well. No problems. I know I should wash my LPs but dry cleaning with the Mobile fidelity brush works ok for most of them, not much clicks or mistracking. Maybe it sounds a bit better with a bit of fluid in the SME V damping chamber - not  sure, testing. Platter mats - no. Extra damping on the  arm - no. Fozgometer azimuth adjustment, yes. 

A comment on setup: I have assumed that the anti-skating on my SME V arm was correct, and have dialed it in approximately like the weight (1.72 g), or a bit less. I think I have been wrong. I tried various methods: look at the cantilever deflection when it settles in a groove, use a blank record, use the HFN test record (side 2 track 1-4-8) - and even, my ears. Results are similar. A-skate needs to be set to 2.7 to avoid distortion in the right channel on the HFN tracks. I come roughly to the same conclusion using my ears. Music sounds fuller and both channels more in sync, at around 2.5 or so, or even higher. Although I have not found the exact spot, and my methods are limited. Since my arm is ca 15 years old, I wonder if the anti-skate spring has lost some tension over time. I have also found that the arm needs to be lifted a bit asymmetrically at the back, to get the best azimuth (cannot be directly adjusted on SME V).
One behaviour seems a bit odd. When the cartridge is lifted, not playing in the groove, the inner part of the cantilever is quite precisely centered in the hole on the green front (looking in a loupe). When it settles in a groove, however, it changes downwards and to the right. This seems to happen pretty much regardless of where I set the anti-skating. The inner part moves this way, even when I cannot see any deflection of the outer part (with the diamond). I wonder, is this normal behaviour?

Ninetynine, thanks, interesting photos, I never thought about placing the digital weight on the side. How do you measure?

My test record is the Hifi news analogue test LP, Producer's cut (HFN 002).

I will test more tonight, looking for good mono and quad records for tuning by ear.

Listening tests make me think, better go back to the SME tuning, or a bit below .

Testing, first, Lotta Lenya sings Kurt Weill (mono 1960ies heavy vinyl version), and next, Tangerine Dream: Alpha Centauri (1971). It has been argued that quadrophonic recordings are best, to set the anti-skating. I don’t have the quad version ot Alpha Centauri (twin virgin label), only a stereo version, but this works well also.

In both cases, turning off the light and just listening, I tended to go down on the antiskating scale - it can be adjusted while playing, on the SME V - and towards a setting more like the factory default (calibrated scale), to get the best sound. Listening for the holographics especially (Tangerine Dream very good at that point), I went towards a weight equivalent 1.7 (corresponding to the 1.72 g Atlas weight) or even a bit down, to 1.5 or 1.4 on the scale. Much lower than the HFN test record results (2.7 - 3). I have to recheck - this is my impression so far.

Happy listening!

I mailed SME, and got a clear answer: do not use the HFN test record with the SME V arm. Instead, start from the equivalent of the weight, and fine tune by ear, from there. OK! I am glad that my listening tests the last evenings led to the same conclusion.

Ninetynine - thank you, I will try this some more, may make more sense now.

I notice, last evening, I ended up at 1.3

Stingreen, thanks, I agree, the Atlas is great, the best cartridge I've had in my system also. All the more reason to give it optimal conditions.
What you say about azimuth is interesting. I will check it out. Can you say a bit more, what you hear when it is right?

Heavier arm - perhaps - I think J Carr wrote that it is possible to tweak the mass of the arm. I thought the SME V would be an OK match. I’ve tried some more mass (damping material) on the headshell and the arm but it didn’t work for me (not even some ’magic dots’ I had).
I did some eyeballing tests now, using a loupe and then some 20x glasses. Stylus settles as before, a little to the right, in the hole in the front. Mirror test; it looks vertical. I had to turn down the AS to 1.1 to avoid the arm sliding to the right (the platter is level). I wanted to have a look at the stylus tip also, but the glasses are too weak. So I tried a little 100x microscope with light. I got nervous, however, it has to go extremely close the cantilever. Perhaps later I will try a small USB microscope that I also have. But well, so far, there is no visible sign that the azimuth is off. So it should be an OK starting point for listening tests.

Nandric - as related above, the test record method doesn't work in my case, I end up with far too much antiskate (2.7), and adjusting by ear I've gone down to 1.5 or so. And I recently got a clear message from SME saying don't use these tracks, instead start AS equal to the weight and fine tune by ear from there. These distortion tests are more for a rough first check perhaps - is the cartridge very off (or damaged). The Atlas sails through them without problems.

Well, I thank you both, Raul and Nandric.

Some more visual checking today - now with a USB microscope. Very interesting, although so far, I haven’t been able to stabilize the setup enough to get sharp close up images of the diamond. It seems to be OK, on my lower scale images.

Since, from visual testing, the azimuth seems good, I did more listening, trying to get the antiskating optimal. The flute in the first Alpha Centauri track works well, and also my Lotta Lenya mono. I listen for how well the voice or instrument is pictured at the front even with large background dynamics (the "guru method" of listening).

I find that the arm behaves very good with the anti-skating a bit relaxed from the weight, perhaps 1.4 ot 1.5. Listening to female vocal, going lower to 1.1 makes the sound more relaxed and open in a way, but also made the voice "crack up" a bit, as if she had smoked all her life. I tried to correct this with a bit more weight, but that did not help, so I went back to standard weight (1.72 g).

In my system, if the antiskating is set too high, the whole soundstage sounds more controlled, but also restricted, tensioned. So it is a good idea to relax it a bit, but not too far from the setting equal to the weight, since then the sound will crack up, become too loose; it can sound like using too little weight.

Perhaps the best way to set antiskate by ear - after listening to mono recordings for rough adjustments - could be to select the best-sounding stereo recordings. With this in mind we listened to Shelby Lynne, Just a little lovin. It sounded very good at ca 1.5.

Dear all, many thanks, for your viewpoints. Who could doubt that Audiogon discussions help progress? I am grateful to you all.
Please note, in my case, we are beyond the zone of obvious errors, bleed, mistrackings, and so on. The Atlas sails throught the test record, no problem, and sounds very good. I have compared with a good mid-level Ortofon, in my system - both are good, but the Atlas is clearly superior. So we are beyond the territory of obvious faults and into the one of refinements and optimalization. The Atlas has been a major upgrade from my Titan. But since it is clearly a better cartridge, I want to tune it as well as possible, and my ears tell me, I still have a way to go.
 
Stingreen - what arm do you use, the vpi? what is wrong with it?
Folkfreak - azimuth important, yes I know, and thanks for link. Trying to set up my microscope to get it good enough. I went to a shop in Oslo with my older Clavis and Lyra cartridges, and asked for a microscope analysis. However they could not do left-right. All they could tell me was that that the styli were worn, from a side view, and I knew that already.

Drastic - breakup in left channel - can you give some examples, I’d like to test this in my system also. I have heard that kind of thing before. Is it mainly on the inner part of the record? Can you check, it is associated with mistracking, inwards or outwards? In my system, I can’t recall my Lyras have mistracked much inwards, mainly outwards (groove is repeated). And the Atlas seldom mistracks anyway.

Stingreen - nice to hear about the arm - I have a VPI HW-19, upgraded over the years, although now I mainly use another player (Hanss T-30). I had a Souther / Clearaudio parallel arm for some years, but could never get it to work well with the VPI.

A little reality check today. I played my three versions of Credence Clearwater Revival: Heard it through the grapewine. If my cartridge is poorly adjusted, I will be confused which one sounds best. I wasn’t. Instead I could hear, not only, that all in all I prefer my latest (Acoustic sound RTI) version, next the Mofi version, and then the original - but I could hear the different plusses and minuses with each version. My gratitude to Lyra.

This experiment does not prove anything, except that it indicates that if the cartridge is fairly well aligned, other matters tend to take over - like the quality of the mastering and pressing. The guitar went from good to great, on the best recording.

Happy listening!

Drastic and Stingreen, thanks.
Drastic, thanks for the info. I don't have the albums you mention. Is it a case of high dynamics or bass on the inner grooves?
Raul, considering your comment earlier " I know very well your 3 tube items and the I/O is the one that makes more " damage " to the critical phono cartridge signal. " - this is not in line with my experience. For now I am running the system with a small phono preamp, the Fanfare 3, with zero tubes! It seems like you have an idea of tube overkill, which is not what I have experienced. Indeed, I have compared the Aesthetix Io with other phono preamps in my system, including the PH-6, and listened to them in friends systems, like the Manley Steelhead, all very good performers, but in all, I prefer the Io. Opinions differ of course, but the idea that the Io would "damage" the signal is foreign to me. Instead, I find that it mates well with the hybrid Einstein The tube and the OTL MA-1s. This is, listening over time. I wonder what your claim is based on. I agree, however, that the Io with all its tubes needs to be running optimal, if not, problems quickly appear. It is a very "purist" approach.

Larryi - Lyra's track well, at least from the Titan onwards - yes, this is my experience also. Even the Clavis was quite good. Generally, my Titan i experience was very good, though it is worn out (just got it confirmed by microscope at a shop). So I have never been able to test the Atlas versus the Titan with both in mint condition, just a mint Atlas against a somewhat retiring Titan. What I know is, the Titan had great sound and a lot of potential. 

I remember when we tried to tweak a Lyra cartridge to the Souther / Clearaudio parallel arm, my audio expert friend and I, back in the early 2000s. Whatever we did, tweaking the arm, weight, azimuth and so on - even tilting the player to help it move along - we heard (and partly, saw) the arm "bumping down the track" in a loose ragtag fashion, like a sledge in the snow. We became quite sure, after testing, that the design did not work out, even if it avoided inwards skating. It was worse on a spring-loaded player like the VPI HW-19 but persisted even removing the springs. When I upgraded to the SME V arm, there was no looking back.

I discussed it with a main tube engineer,  here in Norway, a year ago, at Gran Canaria. He told me of his "apprentice" time, at an English tube factory in the 60ies and 70ies, and how he later became a tube specialist. It is about the distortion, he emphasised. Tube distortion is less bad for the human ear than transistor distortion. Judging from my own ears, I believe him.

Raul
Great, a solid-state howl in the pack!
I am investigating your option right now. A solid state Riaa - Graham Slee Fanfare 3. I have also used a Musical innovations solid state preamp. I replaced it with Einstein the Tube, and have not looked back. I have used Lyras in a solid state system, upgrading from basic to advanced. I doubt if the Atlas sounds best in a pure solid state system, if so, it has to be much better than what I have heard.

Thanks, I agree - on some points. Raul, my s-state comparison - the stuff I lived with for a long time, learning to know its potential - included the Krell FPB600, which went far beyond my earlier s-state amps (Tandberg, Revox, Yamaha, plus lower Krell models). Possibly, some other phono stage could outperform my Aesthetix Io in my system, but this is not the point in this debate, even less so, since I find that I am well able to hear adjustement effects also on "lowly" phono stages like the Graham Slee Fanfare 3 that I am using now (since the Io is on repair), a PH-6 that.I borrowed for some time, plus some other s-state units.

Clearly, phono stages differ, how clearly do they show optimal cartridge adjustment, but they mainly point the same way, and even from a minimal box using op amps, like the Fanfare, I can get good enough feedback, to work further.

Mmakshak - listen for overall sound, sleeping on it - your comments match my experience. It is not techical (although indeed very technical, small adjustments, nerdy measurements). It is mainly emotional. What is the impact of the music. This is what I go for, also. If a song I played the evening before breaks into my daily routine the day after, making me want to hum or sing, I smile and think: "got it"!

Raul - thanks, I appreciate your points in this debate, the Atlas maybe deserves better. Although my system is fairly good.
Larryi - would be great to try - but if this Lyra-constructed stage is so
grand, why did it go out of production?
Atmasphere - thanks, this is what I hear with other good new tube components also, like my Einstein The tube mk 2 preamp. There is very little noise and the component behaves nicely, it does not introduce shocks etc. Regarding the phono stage especially, I have had similar behaviour when all is tuned right, with the Aesthetix Io, not much more background noise in the phono input compared to the AUX input. Personally I am willing to sacrifice a few db in the noise floor to get superior tube performance.

Raul, my experience is different. I went from solid state to tubes, and have not looked back. It wasn't experts who told me this, it was my ears.

Thank you, Astro58go. My meaning starting this thread was to be informative for others also, not just Atlas owners.
Regarding solid state or tube amplification of the Atlas, opinions differ. I suggest we focus more on what can actually help, tweaks that can be done, whatever the gear used. Setup is often even more important. This is a great cartridge that deserves the best.

Halcro - like in "silence is golden"? If the music is bad, no cartridge will save you...
Downunder - yes, the Thales arm looks very interesting. I had a parallel arm (Souther/Clearaudio) ten years ago but could never make it work. The Thales design seems in another class. Does it track ok? What was the arm you had before?
Yesterday I pulled out my Aesthetix Benz MC demagnetizer, and reconnected the batteries (they tend to go flat, if connected). I used it two times, both phono leads connected. Its been eight months since the last time. Did I hear a difference? Yes. Clearer sound. I find it interesting that the difference is easy to hear even with the small Fanfare 3 stage I use now (my main phono stage is on repair). 

Downunder - nice to hear. A friend of mine has a Phantom, I found it a bit better than the SME V but not a revolution. Generally, going far up in price means that the performance improvement diminishes. But perhaps the Simplicity belongs to the exceptions. My Hanss T30 player can take an additional arm (Rega 300 type armboard) besides the SME V, and I am considering an investment, although I have been sceptical of the concept of two (or more) arms.

Downunder - I remember, trying to tweak the Souther arm, we got the feeling, although it looked nice in theory, it was hard to achieve in practice, whatever we did, the cart scated around in the groove (and as you can imagine my rather over-controlled SME V cured that). Happy for you, if the new Thales design works well.
Oystein

Dctom - Thanks for interesting information. I also enjoy the Atlas. For me, each step up in the Lyra line over the last twenty years - Clavis, Clavis DC, Titan, Titan i, Atlas - has been worth it. The Atlas shines through even when some components aren't optimal.

I used the SME V on a (modded) VPI-HW19 player for several years, and although it worked ok, the arm matches better with the Hanss T30 player I use now. It gives the arm a more rigid platform, more in line with the philosophy behind the SME V. I can compare since I have DSD recordings from vinyl using the two players with the same arm and Lyra cart. There is no doubt that the Hanss benefits the music (although the tonality is good in the HW19, pitch and stability is better in the Hanss, music seems to get a higher resolution with a greater level of detail). So, getting the Hanss player in a sense was the biggest "tweak" I did to the Atlas (and is much recommended if one can get it for a reasonable price). The T30 has two motors, six thin drive belts, heavy sandwich construction, magnetic bearing, 10 kg aluminium platter - and I think all of these contribute to the result.

Some people don't like the sound in this type of heavy platter, including Paul Seydor in the Absolute sound (2012), reviewing the T-60, a bigger version of the T-30. Seydor had a lot of nice things to say, and only one critique - he heard a certain metallic coloration or glare, and preferred using the player with a platter mat on top. He used a Graham Phantom II arm with an Ortofon Windfield. (Review here: http://www.theabsolutesound.com/articles/hanss-t-60-turntable-and-graham-phantom-ii-supreme-tonearm/ )

I understand what Seymour was writing about. I can hear a bit of this glare too. Yet I mainly prefer the T-30 (with the SME V and Atlas) without a mat.

Since this may of be interest to others, and to be sure, I did a new test, over a week, trying out the best platter mats I have tried so far, the Japanese fo.Q rs-912 (recommended by Seymour - a set of two mats, thin and thick).

However, my conclusion is: I like the sound better without a mat - even with some "glare". This goes for most of my records. Sometimes, however, the LP is so hard-sounding (and engaging platter resonances, I imagine) that the music sounds better with one of the rs-912 mats.

Like Seymour, I find that the thin mat (with holes) works best; the thick (or the two combined) is too much.  So for example, when I want to play my worn mono copy of Dave Clark 5 In Session, the mat makes it more bearable. It functions a bit like a filter, and also goes some way into refining the sound. However, listening more closely, I find that I lose information. This is a no-no for me. So - even with a bit of glare, I prefer the "full" sound from the record directly on the platter.

I use a heavy (1kg) TT brass record weight rather than the light-weight clamp that came with the Hanss. This, also, is a bit of plus and minus (I miss the screw-down clamp design on the VPI), but mainly, it gives the music more body, it sounds fuller, and also reduces the glare a bit.

For a period, I tried damping the platter on the bottom, using Gladen Aero-Butyl, but the Hanss distributor warned me against this, since even if I applied the damping material evenly, it would still interfere with optimal balancing of the platter. So I took it off, again (quite some work). It did help the metallic resonance, but not so much - I don't hear a big difference without it. Maybe a sandwhich or composite construction would cure it better. With the VPI, I had the heavy (HW-19 version 3 or so) lead platter, but even if it was stable and gave deeper bass than the ones before it, I liked the sound better in the (hw-19 v 4) Black Knight platter.

It seems typical for the Atlas that kind of problem is less prominent than with earlier Lyra's like the Titan. At least, this is my experience. The Clavis was much "harder" than the Titan, and the Titan was harder than the Atlas. Hard in both senses - sounding hard, and hard to get right, to adjust to optimal sound. It feels like the Atlas is more "forgiving" of resonances, sibilances, etc. along with almost no mistracking - even as it is extracting more information from the groove. This is impressive. Even when using a "lowly" phono stage like I do now, the cartridge gives me clear informattion, what sounds best.

 

Platter mats - well, maybe too off topic....no reaction so far.

So, back to a main issue raised earlier in the debate. The Atlas needs a solid state Riaa to sound its best. Or at least, not too many tubes (Rauliregas). He may be right. I hope to be able to audition some s-state riaas in the near future, and will report back.

Rereading the thread:

Thanks Stingreen - I very much appreciate your contributions, and will do a new check. So far, however, the azimuth seems ok. Like Mmakshak commented above, it can be hard to judge, what is the cartridge, what is the speaker positioning, and so on - you need to sleep on it, and use your subconscious to get the whole system fully tuned to the room. This is an endless task. Happily it is also filled with joy - just listen to the music!
 
Ninetynine - the SME arm should be heavier, to be optimal for the Atlas. I am not sure. I tried some damping/heavier stuff but went back to the original. As often happens when I try to tweak the SME V.

Nandric - stylus shape is important - I did not get how this would translate to anti-skate and weight.

Some of the debate turned to mistracking - although not the main issue in my case. It seems that most users, including me, thinks the Atlas sounds great and seldom mistracks. As stated before, this thread is about getting optimal sound.

Raul has argued that the Atlas needs a solid state (or hybrid) phono preamp / riaa solution to sound its best. Too many tubes will not do. The debate - here as elsewhere - has turned to solid state vs. tubes. I agree that phono preamps are not the main subject of this thread, but a little discussion will not hurt. After all, the phono is a main part of making the cartridge sound good. But we should restrict this to phono stages actually listened to using the Atlas. Raul, have you heard solid state phono stages that serve the Atlas in a superior way?

All in all, with 3851 views on Audiogon and 98 posts so far (one of them calling our discussion "erudite"), I think the thread has been succesful. The group of Atlas owners / users is fairly small, but our discoveries and debates have a more general interest. Each of us are likely to be sometimes wrong, but together, we may be right.  So I look forward to more comments.

My Atlas plays very well. Recently I have bought a Spin clean washer, because I want to listen to music when I clean my records (my noisy vacuum record cleaner is in the basement, for now). Not surprisingly, the record washing results in better-sounding records. Also, for Atlas best sound and maintenance, I use the Zerodust, a light carbon brush now and then, each week, and the Lyra stylus treatment once a month or so. Demag ca every second month.

Stingreen - sorry, did not see your post before - i use the Aesthetix Benz MC Demagnetizer. The Lyra Atlas manual says periodic fluxbusting is ok provided one follows the instructions (I do). 

ferrari250, agree, my experience is the same. Working with loading and adjustment is very important. Although the Atlas is so good that it is in a sense also a problem - it still sounds good, even with suboptimal adjustments (to an extent) and loading.

I am sure there are golden ears out there who would dispute this, but this is what I have found, with my average ears, living with Lyra cartridges for many years. I can get them into a very good setup. With each new generation of Lyra (for me: Clavis  - Titan - Atlas), this zone has been widened. If you cannot setup this cartridge to sound good, something is seriously wrong.

This is all very fine. But the challenge starts from there - how to make the cartridge play not just very good, but optimal.

Tracking - I had some early versions of the Clavis with tracking problems. I moved up to the Titan, with less, and then the Titan i, with even less problems. After I got the Atlas, there is even less mistracking. Tracking problems are mainly non-present, appearing very seldom.

Hi there - an update on my Atlas experience.
It has now run - maybe - 1500 hours. My model was made in 2013. I try to use it sparingly.
I have no clear signs of cartridge wear, so far. It has changed tone, seems a bit more mellow now, not sure, cannot A-B-test
Michael Fremer noted "sibilance" as sign of wear, after some years of heavy duty use of the Atlas. So far, no problem for me. Also, mistracking is very rare.  
In sum - the Atlas continues to do a marvellous job.

mmakshak gave a good comment, above:
"Reading all this, you can see how intellectual arguments can lead anywhere(especially if you get one thing wrong).  I use parameters as an outside guiding force-not the be all and end all of all things.  You need to get in the ballpark(with these), and then use your ears to actually hear what anti-skate does.  I think, once again, focusing on one aspect of the sound, is a mistake.  You can make a minute adjustment-let's say one where the channels seem correctly balanced-but find, after sleeping on it, that your desire to listen has diminished.  This method introduces your subconscious, which holds many more parameters than your conscious, or intellectual mind. "

Thanks!
Karl - happy you enjoy the Atlas, I do too, it is in a very high league. My cantilever is maybe not quite optimal but I have never sent it in for a check.
Whatthe - I would probably think so too, with the Atlas SL. But my phono stage needs a stronger output from the cart, to do its magic.
Raul - yes the Atlas has run maybe 1500 hours, but according to the reputation of Lyra carts, it should be good for more, maybe 2500. Wear of the cart suspension is a possible cause of pumping - not sure. I think it has behaved this way more or less since I got it.

I am running my Lyra Atlas - it is maybe a total of 14 - 1500 hours by now.

No major problems. The bad spots in my vinyl collection are like before (mistracking, sibilance).

It has become more "slack" than in the beginning, as is to be expected. Mainly it works to the best, sonically (a bit more more rounded, mellow, ambience-tuned, dimensional).

Michael Fremer got problems with the Atlas after four years - his copy was bought in 2013, like mine. But he described "heavy usage". I suspect this means 2500 - 3000 hours or even more. At that point he heard clear signs of wear, especially, more sibilance. So far, this is not a problem on my cartridge.

Generally, yes, the Atlas is a big investment. But I have never looked back.

The Atlas goes so deep that the woofers can pump (subsonic movement), at least in some arm combinations with low resonance, like my SME V. Yet this usually means good sound, it is not very serious, in my judgement so far. See
https://forum.audiogon.com/discussions/why-are-my-woofers-pumping

Have others experienced subsonic woofer pumping with the Atlas or other Lyra carts? If the answer is no, just a little, or yes - what tonearm do you use? Symptom: you see the woofer cone move in and out, even if you don’t hear anything, playing vinyl records - especially in-between tracks, and in the intro and outro grooves. You need to turn up the volume to do the test. You can also use your fingers to feel the cone movement. Example of test LP: Pink Floyd Meddle.

Thank you bpoletti, very interesting. I still have my Clavis DC on the loft, and should probably take it down to test it for woofer pumping. I dont remember much pumping in the years when I used this now well worn cart, but that was with a different tonearm, the very difficult Souther / Triquarts parallel arm, skating around rather than giving a precise image of the groove (in my system at least), though the arm was so light that there was no resonance problem. The compliance of the Clavis, Titan and Atlas are the same I believe - as given from Lyra - 12 at 100hz.

I am no longer using the HW-19, but instead a Hanss T30 which I find superior in most (not all) respects.

Maybe we share an experience - with Lyra cartridges - even the Clavis, and even more, with the Titan, and the Atlas - changing the player and arm makes a difference.

Bpoletti, from what I read, the Jelco 750D has more effective mass than my SME V - 13.48g vs ca 10.5g. So if there is rumble or subsonic pumping you should notice more.

Raul, where did you hear the "Lyra Evolve", as you claim in a post above? This is not a Lyra model I know of. Your idea that good cartridges will sound sub-optimal with tube electronics does not work out, according to my ears. Using the Lyra Atlas with the Aesthetix Io Eclipse dual power. Have you actually heard this combination? If not, please restrict your overall general judgements.

OK, thanks folkfreak, sorry Raul! I remember it now. The Evolve model had a restriced run or small edition I believe? I upgraded my Clavis at the time. A friend had the Helicon but never got it quite optimal, he felt. For me, things really started to take off with Lyra when I bought a Titan, later upgraded to Titan i.

Varyat - is it sonically relevant - this is the core issue - very good question. Does the visual (subsonic) pumping cause damage? Not as far as I know. It may strain the woofers but they seem to tackle it. Does it have a negative impact on the music? I am not sure. I think that, yes, maybe, it imparts some more unruliness and listening fatigue in the long run, dynamic parts become more strained. On the other hand, LPs with subsonic pumping (in my system, with the cart-arm resonance down to 7hz or so) are also often very good-sounding albums.

Could we get this thread back on line please? The battery comment by lewm is off topic.

Recently I have been able to compare DSD recordings of the Lyra Atlas, to direct vinyl playback, using the Lyra Titan i (since the Atlas is broken). The Atlas recordings show that it is clearly a superior cart, although some of the difference may also reflect larger use of the Titan i - it is more worn. The Titan is certainly a very good cartridge, even if surpassed by the Atlas. The Atlas in more rounded, less "etched" and "hifi", compared to the Titan i, with a considerably greater "being there" effect. Lower noise from vinyl issues - less crack and pop - and more deep bass, giving a more realistic deeper embodied sound of vocals - are parts of the picture.

I have not heard the Lambda versions of the Atlas (or other Lambda versions of the Lyra models). What I know, is that the standard Atlas that I got from Lyra in 2018, after an accident with the 2013 model I had before, sounds great, and works perfect, with zero problems so far. Just keep the stylus and records clean. Expensive? Yes, but for a daily joy for many years, it becomes worth it.