Dear Boofer: Pioneer builded very fine TT. I owned the PL-630 ( that today is still running in my brother place. ) that is really good and the 540 is way better thaat what any person could think.
My sample of the Telarc 1812 is main part ( for very good reasons. ) of my whole items evaluation test proccess.
It's a magnificent top recording " even " that was recorded so many years with " digital " technology.
There is no " black magic " for a cartridge can track it.
If a tonearm always is important the main actress is the cartridge and in specific: the cartridge self tracking abilities.
Vintage cartridges had and has extraordinary tracking abilities ( as your Audio technica one and other AT cartridges as the AT 20SS. ) either MM/MI and LOMC cartridges.
I tested several of those cartridges in different tonearms even with tonearms that supposed could not be a good match but when the cartridge has the " right " tracking abilities it runs the Telarc 1812 with out trouble.
Tracking cartridge abilities depends on its design: cantilever/stylus/suspension and the like.
Why many today cartridges has not those tracking abilities is something out of my understanding because the knowlege about is " there ". Maybe because some cartridge designers are thinking as many audiophiles that when you ask about, the Telarc 1812 challenge, they give an answer like this:
" I don't care if my cartridge can't track the 1812 that's the only LP with that kind of high velocity recorded grooves. What I care is that my cartridge can track my normal LPs. "
but IMHO these persons does not know that the main cartridge characteristic is: tracking abilities. Everything the same a cartridge with better tracking abilities always will performs/sounds better.
What we need is that the cartridge always stay with dead applomb in the LP grooves follow it with out minute/microscopic " jumps " that generate distortions that we can hear it and that degrade the audio signal.
So, it's not a surprise that your humble TT/cartridge performs in that way when some today samples can't do it.
Regards and enjoy the music,
R. |
Dear Boofer: There are some today cartridges that I experienced can track the 1812: Denon S1, Linn Akiva, Wilson Bensh all these LOMC and from the past: FR MCX-5 or the Satin M21 or the Ortofon MC 2000 ( LOMCs. ).
As I posted almost all belongs on the cartridge overall design.
Regards and enjoy the music,
R. |
Dear Boofer: ++++ " has been concentrating on sound and neglecting tracking ability. " ++++
what that magazine editor said makes no sense to me because tracking ability is a main parameter/characteristic for better or worse sound.
Maybe he does not understand the whole subject or I missed something here.
Regrads and enjoy the music,
R. |
Dear J.Carr: What's " out of my mind " is why the Akiva differences on tracking abilities not only against the Audioquest but especially against the Lyra's when you designed both cartridges?
Btw, my Telarc 1812 is the original SR one.
Regards and enjoy the music,
R. |
Dear friends: Some way or the other I think all ( but Stringreen, please read here: http://forum.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/fr.pl?eanlg&1381113244&openflup&3&4#3) are " right " and of course that I can be wrong.
I think that here could be a misunderstood because we are discussing two related subjects that are different with different meaning: cartridge tracking abilities and cartridge/tonearm resonance. Let me explain and try to give some answers on what you all posted:
there is no doubt on the cartridge/tonearm resonance match ( 10 hz. ) importance but as many subjects in audio on playback many theories can't be proved ( at least today there is no scientifict test that do it. ) and example of that is that the LOMC Ortofon MC 2000 ( that I own two samples. ) was reviewed by expert B.King in the Audio magazine in 1984 and this cartridge mounted in a Technics EPA 250 ( SP 10 TT ) had a measured resonance frequency of 5 hz ( way out of the desired 10 hz. ) and the cartridge track perfectly the Telarc 1812.
This experience is exactly mine with the MC 2000 ( from those times cam the Denon DL 1000A, Highphonic MC A6, FR MCX-5. I own all of them and all are tracking champs as the old Satin MP21 or today Denon DS1 or the Wilson Benesch that is builded by Benz Micro: yes Tony you are right about Benz Micro. ) ) in several tonearms. I post this because is not my bla-bla-bla- experience but something with scientific measurements.
That kind of experience repeated not one but many times with other cartridges, I remember ( posted in the MM/MI thread and other threads. ) what happened with two of the Astatic cartridges: it runs and track the 1812 even that the resonace frequency was 3.6 hz!!!!!!
I own tonearms with an effective mass ranging from 6 grs to over 35 grs. and I use removable headshells ranging from 4.5 grs to 22 grs.
I made every kind of test any one of you could imagine on the cartridge tracking abilities subject.
My Stanton 981 ( in theory a tracking champ. ) can't track three of the 16 cannon shots, things are that I own too a Pickering ( similar cartridge. ) XV 5000 that use the same stylus assembly well I put the XV 5000 stylus in the Stanton 981 cartridge body with out any other change and this stylus assembly tracks all cannon shots ( both stylus in pristine/mint condition but fully broken. ). I tested this cartridge on different tonearms with different effective mass and the result always the same: tracks with no trouble when the own 981 can't do it, in the other side the quality performance during normal LP playback is ssuperior with the 5000 stylus that with the 981.
When I want to change the tonearm effective mass I don't like to use blue-tack because other than the increment on TEM it works as a damper too and this sole characteristic change the sounds colorations. What I use is similar heaviest headshell ( I own no less than 70+ different headshells. Audio Technica and Technics are some headshells that permit to change the TEM with out add any other change or damp. ). We can't have a conclusion when we changed more than one parameter at the time.
J.Carr, you posted about the 70's-80's old times about the type of cartridges and tonearms and I differ with you because I own several those times tonearms that have high effective mass as the SAEC, FR, Micro Seiki and the like. IMHO were not the Japanese whom made that low mass tonearms growing up but USA and Europe designers: Black Widow, SME and others.
In those all times MM/MI cartridges were exceptional cartridge trackers where LOMC were poorer ones ( but with exceptions. ) and IMHO were the LOMC manufacturers and reviewers ( owners of LOMC cartridges. ) the ones that forbidden the Telarc 1812 telling us: " Hey! does not matters that your cartridge can't track the infamous 1812 LP what's important is that can track a " normal " LP ", this is the way I learned but today through several ( hundreds maybe thousands of tests. ) first hand experiences I know all of them were plain wrong because tracking cartridge abilities is way critical for a top quality performance level.
J.Carr I posted: everything the same the cartridge with better tracking abilities always will sounds better.
Other example of what I'm posting happened with the Audio Technica Precept line ( 440 ), things are that this cartridge came in three different versions: with elliptical, Shibata and line contact stylus.
All of them shares the same construction and specs on compliance, well no one but the line contact version can track the 1812 and obviously is the one that performs ( in normal LPs. ) at higher quality level even better than the 550 ML version.
I own several cartridges ( MM/MI/LOMC/HOMC ) and in many models two or three samples of the same cartridge. One of my latest experiences about was/is with the today top of the line Audio Tecnica ( MM ) AT 150ANV, if we check against other AT ( vintage ones ) cartridges the compliance spec is almost the same but when the AT 20SS can track the 1812 with out trouble the 150ANV just can't but because its design the sound has better quality.
Something that makes me think are my Lyra ( Clavis DC, Helikon and Titan i. , Audioquest ( Fe5 ) and Akiva latest ( Linn. ) experiences:
all these cartridges were builded by Scan-tech and no one but the Akiva can track the 1812 and not only that: the AKIVA is the only one of any other cartridge I tested that track the last cannon shot ( at the very inner LP grooves. ) in precise and clean way and I mean it. All the other cartridges that normally track the 1812 can track this last cannon shot but not at the Akiva level.
It was after my Akiva experience that I really know for the very first time the Glorious of that last cannon shot.
The best of all with the AKIVA is that its quality performance level surpass all the Lyra named as the Audioquest too and several totay top LOMC I experienced in my system.
In my whole evaluation proccess I use sevarl other LP tracks but on the tracking subject I use too the RR Dafos and a Shefield LP : Michael Ruff side 4 ( I will be there ), things happen that this track is a long version and higher recorded velocity that the side 1 version .
Well, I don't know if my LP sample had a pressed fault but there are at least three ( high frequencies as cymbals. ) passages that can be tracked only for the trackers champs: only the cartridges that can track " cleanly " the 1812 are succesful with this Shefield track.
Now and if we forget about cartridge tracking abilities the resonance frequency value differences even with the same cartridge ( different tonearms. ) always makes and put a different overall coloration in the cartridge quality performance.
This is: if a cartridge/tonearm combination resonates at 10 hz that same cartridge in the same tonearm ( added effective mass ) that could resonate at 8 hz or 11 hz has a diferent sound response colorations. So the importance of the cartridge/toneam matching is very important as I said.
I think that if any one ( today ) is dimished the critical importance of self cartridge abilities ( as I said ) is a misunderstood .
Any one of you can make the tests I already did it and if not own those cartridges then ask me about.
Till you experienced the tracking abilities subject you just can't understand what I posted.
Btw, all my tests are repeatable and I want to state and repeat:
it does not matters the tonearm effective mass when a cartridge has the right tracking abilities always performs in that way and when a cartridge has not " good " tracking abilities it does not matters that the tonearm combination resonate at 10 hz the cartridge stay with its self not so good tracking abilities and will performs in that way.
No one believe it?, easy come to my place: be my guest.
Regards and enjoy the music,
R. |
Dear Tonywinsc: It's not easy to have 15 hz resonance value, it needs a non-sense cartridge combination but could happen. Now, That I remember I experienced only two times that a cartridge/tonearm combination skipped in a normal LP but because the resonance frequency was in the low side that is where belongs warps ( as you said. Remember that all LPs comes with warps. ) but I never experienced a trackimg " trouble " because the resonance frequency was to high.
Now, a cartridge with intrinsic good tracking abilities will have a lot less " problems " on extreme situations and you can see it on demanding inner grooves on different tracks where the good trackers never fail and you can't be aware of any single sign of mistracking when in a non so good trackers almost always distort.
Regards and enjoy the music,
R. |
of course that that listening experiences has to do it with 4-5 different top cartridges where at least one can track in full the recording.
R. |
Dear friends: Maybe you can think that I'm in love with bass frequency range because some of the LP's that are in my overall evaluation process shows it.
The original Telarc 1812 is a great recording, and not because the cannon shots, by any standards. Yes, it's an old full digital recording ( Soundstream system. ) and way better than several full analog recordings.
Other than the cannon shots the recording has several bass passages with timpany and big drum along explosive cymbals with a dynamic power no other recording I heard ( elsewhere ) can even, it's the nearest sounds ( on that regards. ) to a live music experience.
Do you want to know how good is your system? do you want to know how higher or lower are the distortions generated by your audio system?
Well, you need this recording to know it for sure. In the other side the Telarc 1812 is a very good tool to be sure about the VTA/SRA and LOMC load impedance set up, the recording can tell you how good is your set up on these and other regards.
the recording has 2-3 passages where you can hear at the rear of the stage the sound of a triangle and tambourine instruments. Well, the first time that appears is after the first timpany/big drum/cymbals grooves followed by a passage with chords, horns and wood instruments: here on the left side must be appears first the triangle sound where you need to identify ( clearly/precise ) the triangle full melody identifiying not only the fundamental notes but the triangle distinctive harmonics.
Depending on the VTA/SRA set up accuracy you will hear it complete or only the fundamental notes or can't listen the triangle melody or even you can't hear the triangle sounds.
When you can't hear it even with changes in VTA/SRA then you want to try a different load impedance and for sure it will appears. The quality level you achieve on this triangle tell you a lot of your system set up and kind of resolution and distortion levels.
In this same first triangle passage comes a short passage ( last recording soundstage layer too. ) with the tambourine in the same left side that you must heard if exist the right cartridge overall sxet up.
As I said the 1812 is not only a good digital recording but a useful set up tool.
+++++ " And that was no trick. " ++++
the Telarc 1812 is in no way a " trick ".
Btw, the bass " jump " ( as you said ) factor means more about system higher distortions than real low bass with full power dynamic.
If your system has a " pristine " bass management that " jump " doe's not exist ( I know because I had in my system when I thought that that were the right deep bass performancve but I learned to confirm I was wrong. ) not even " bass flor-shaking ". What makes that flor shacking performance in that low frequency range normally are more high distortions than an accurate and neutral quality performance to achieve this we always need a pair ( at least ) of powered subwoofers with a system integration in a true stereo fashion not using it as system bass reinforcement.
Regards and enjoy the music,
R. |
Dear Dover: +++++ " Most of your cartridges are very old, up to 30 yrs old, ...... your test results are irrelevant and cannot be used to provide conclusive evidence of a particular cartridges tracking ability. " +++++
you can't be more wrong with that.
The Akiva is not a 30 years old or the Dynavector XV-1s or the Denon DS1 or the Wilson Benesh or the Lyra Helikon or the Lyra Titan i or the Clearaudio Goldfinger or the Koetsu Coralstone or the AT Supreme or Allaerts F1 or Allaerts Gold or the Audioquest or the Colibri or or or or .... I own or heard in my system all those " modern " cartridges ( and many more ) along 30+ cartridges and with all I runned my evaluation process that include the Telarc 1812.
If you have no evidence today first hand evidence/facts with original Telarc 1812 then IMHO what's irrelevant is what you posted against any of my posts here.
I know that you are accustomed to higher distortions that I'm that's why you are in love with tube technology or FR64/66 or even the 13D ( I own two samples on this. ) that can't track the Telarc 1812.
Of course that I respect your opinion but you are talking of a " no-sense " subject.
Regards and enjoy the music,
R. |
Dear J.Carr: ++++ " However, the core design of the Akiva (including the cantilever and suspension sections) is not so different from other cartridges that I designed around that period, such as the Argo and Titan. " +++++
I don't have a second sample of the Akiva so I don't know for sure if my sample kind of performance is a Linn characteristic or my sample is a " faulty " one with that great characteristic and great quality level sound.
+++++ " The only major statement that I dispute is that extreme tracking ability is the key parameter that should be used in general to distinguish OK cartridges from not OK cartridges. " +++++
of course that I can't argue your opinion: you are the expert here you are a cartridge designer where I'm only an audiophile that likes to make tests and time to time think " out of the box ".
J.Carr, I'm " absolutely sure that the Titan i or the Atlas or the Ortofon Anna or any other today cartridge would/could ( ? ) performs at way better quality if the cartridge tracking abilities ( by design ) were better were improved.
Please forgeret about any other related cartridge subject ( are so many. ): IMHO a better intrinsic cartridge tracking abilities means lower distortions and if your goal is a better sound then try to lower distortions ( by design ) at all cartridge stages is a main target ( I think??? ).
As I said I'm not an expert but if today I want to start a cartridge design enterprise my first target is to design a cartridge with the lower distortions I can. A lower distortion audio item means: accuracy and neutral performance. Of course that there are several characteristics/parameters on the cartridge design that we have to acomplish for the cartridge sounds good and at the same time with the lower distortions we can.
The main audio system enemy are: distortions in all its forms.
Thank's for your patience and if you can: think about.
Regards and enjoy the music,
R. |
The triangle/tambourine passage I named start 7 minutes after the begin the first note on the 1812 LP.
Btw, is important that when you are evaluating the quality performance of an audio system t do it at different SPL's especially in the high level that can tell you more than at low levels.
When I make this kind of system distortion evaluations the acid test is at: 95-97 continuous SPL at seat position with peaks in the 105-107 SPL.
R. |
Dear friends: For those of you that has no idea about the historic Telarc Tchaikovsky 1812 recording I share with you some information:
Cincinnati Symphony Orchestra conducted by: Erich Kunzel.
Recording venues: Music Hall Cincinnati, Emery Memorial Carrillon tower in Mariemont, Ohio and the court-yard area ( for the live/true cannons ) on the campus of the Balswin-Wallace College in Berea, Ohio.
Producer: Robert Woods
Sound Enggineer: Jack Renner
Mastering engineering: Stan Ricker.
Recording date: September 6 and 8 in 1978.
Recording: fully DIGITAL using Sounstream system.
Microphones ( Orchestra ): three Shoeps/Studer SKM-50U .
Microphones ( Cannons. ): Brüel&Kjaer.
Console: Studer model 169.
Monitoring sessions: bi-amp ADS speakers driven by Threshold amplifier.
Distributed by: Audio-Technica.
The Orchestra was augmented by 12-piece brass band.
The electronic and mechanical keyboards were manned by four players ( normally needs only one. )
It were used three autentic and different 19th century cannons, owned and manned by the Fifth Virgina Regiment. The lower recorded frequency coming from the cannons is: 6 hz.
Regrads and enjoy the music,
R. |
Dear Jcarr: I think that the trouble ( in this regards. ) with measurements that can relate cartridge tracking abilities with distortion levels is to aisle that relationship ( for sure. ) to make specific measurements down there. Right now I can't " imagine " how to do it and not only to aisle it but how to measure and where ( example: inner grooves, different recording velocities, choosed tonearm, choosed LP tracks and the like. ).
I told you that the main subject here is to learn and not who is right or not.
I want to think that tracking cartridge abilities is important for you ( not your main target as you said it. ) and you posted some advanatages about:
++++ "
to improve the tracking performance, for example by designing a wire suspension with a longer-than-normal free length. This has the side-effect of lessening the intensity of the loads on the tonearm, which can seem to be a benefit if the tonearm has a resonance-prone mechanical structure, and can improve the tracking of a tonearm .. " +++++
so that tell me that cartridge tracking abilities is something to take care ( maybe a little with more deep interest. ) on cartridge design: going to extremes?, well that is a designer privilege.
This is my answer to that information you posted:
http://forum.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/fr.pl?eanlg&1381113244&openflup&44&4#44
I hope you really take a self challenge on the cartridge tracking abilities through your Delos design. I could think that Scan-Tech can build those 3 cartridge samples where you " can't now " which cartridge comes with wich ( 60um, 80um and 100um. ) tracking abilities.
Of course that always been there how to aisle the tracking(distortion relationship but even if that can't do it for sure the exercise I'm proposing you could give you ( and for all of us. ) some important information on cartridge design that today is not very " clear " and where could be land to explore and land to improve by design the enjoyment of MUSIC reproduction at home.
We audiophiles can't do it, we can´t tweak our cartridges to improve its tracking abilities, only the designers as you can do it.
Regards and enjoy the music,
R. |
Dear J.Carr: +++++ " But doing so means that the suspension's fulcrum point will shift position, depending on what the frequency being reproduced is. This won't necessarily sound bad, and some cartridges are designed like this. But it certainly isn't accurate. " +++++
you are the " boss " here. In all the cartridges I name here ( that can track the 1812 ), including the Akiva, I just not been aware of any sign of unaccuracy during the different playback sessions.
Which kind of unaccuracies could I find out down there?
++++ " For the Telarc 1812, yes.... " ++++
well, if we are extremely strict I agree with you: nothing is diffrent with the Telarc that with any other LP on the VTA/SRA set up but my meaning was not for that strict criterium but about that triangle/tambourine passage that when is really " right " you can easy confirm it trhough other LP's ( in the whole evaluation system process. ).
Certainly you don't need that I teach about loading a cartridge that's well know for any audiophile. What maybe you need is to read again my post on reference to that and then test in your system because you own the Telarc recording.
++++ " Trading one form of distortion for another " +++
yes, and almost always exist trade offs in audio ( as Dougdeacon posted. ) that's why I always say that is in your own overall knowledge level and skills to choose the trade-offs that makes the less harm to the audio signal and to do this we need carfully training to identify each kind of distortion sounds, with out this self training no one can do it.
Regards and enjoy the music,
R. |
++++ " The electronic and mechanical keyboards...... " ++++
this is refred to the Carrillon play.
Btw, the 1812 Carrillon passages is another way to know about not only the cartridge set up quality level but the audio system resolution levels.
Regards and enjoy the music,
R. |
I forgot:
++++ " It is quite easy to improve the tracking performance, for example by designing a wire suspension with a longer-than-normal free length. This has the side-effect of lessening the intensity of the loads on the tonearm, which can seem to be a benefit if the tonearm has a resonance-prone mechanical structure, and can improve the tracking of a tonearm with lower-grade bearings or imperfectly adjusted/unevenly worn bearings. " ++++++
and IMHO not only an advantage for the tonearm but for the cartridge it self and for us listeners. With a cartridge with high tracking abilities, especially with classic music,
the normal higher distortions in the last thrid part of an LP goes lower and lower distortions on this regards means more music information.
I was thinking that there were no negative trade offs ( only advantages. ) improving the cartridge tracking abilities by design till your post but you don't really explain what we have to look for during playback so it's not clear for me especially with so many different experiences with cartridges with top tracking abilities where its quality level performance is really good.
Denon, Ortofon, Benz Micro, Highphonic, Technics, Satin, Linn, Sumiko and many more choosed ( at least is what their cartridges shows during playback and with specs. Example Today Ortofon specs on tracking abilities in the A-90 or Winfeld is 100um. ) as one main cartridge characteristic high tracking abilities and their cartridges performs ( overall ) really good where Lyra choosed a different " road ": nothing wrong with that ( is your privilege. ) only makes me think more that if we want top quality sounds IMHO we need high cartridge habilities. I have no test/proved fact against my take on that critical regards.
Regards and enjoy the music,
R. |
Nowhere evidence at all.
R. |
Well I just bought on ebay my third original Telarc 1812 LP sample.
IMHO and even if your cartridge can't track the cannon shots with aplomb or even if you don't like this kind of score the recording is a must to have.
I own all the Telarc LP catalog ( thank's that the Audio Technica CEO ( in those old times. ) in México was a very close friend of mine. ) and by a wide marging the 1812 is the best recording down there.
There are other Telarc scores very well recorded and some others not so good but in general are ok and some excelent.
Regrads and enjoy the music,
R. |
Dear friends: There is no doubt that the Akiva tracking abilities was unexpected for me but the " bigger " surprise was and is ( a welcomed surprise. ) the top tracking abilities of the Fidelity Research FR MCX-5 because no other FR cartridge I tested and own or owned ( including Ikeda's. ) can track the 1812 not even mounted in FR or Ikeda tonearms.
Not only that the FR MCX-5 outperform any other FR/Ikeda cartridge I heard including the ones coming from the 7 series.Btw, I read somewhere that the favorit of Mr. Ikeda cartridge was the FR 1MK3 and because of that I tested this vintage item and is just " terrible ", poor performer.
I was wondedring what happened down there because the MCX-5 has top quality performance level ( I'm not talking here of tracking abilities but soun. ) til I find out that that cartridge was the design of some one that wroks in FR and that latter started My Sonic Lab that today has top fame because its cartridge designs as the Emminent model and others.
So, this discovery makes me to go for a sample of a My Sonic Lab cartridge.
I know that a well regarded Agon's friend Dgdad own it ( between other top tiers. ) and like it.
Regards and enjoy the music,
R. |
It's easy to find out on sale the original Telarc 1812. I think people do not know how useful can be.
R. |
Dear Peterayer: I did not know about AT that I already listened.
Thank's for the info. I will look for a cartridge model My Sonic Lab.
I think that there are several " gems " out there ready to discover it and we just don't know because we are " followers " of the audio marketing and reviews and this is a " mistake ".
Regards and enjoy the music,
R. |
Dear Peterayer: Take a look what A:J Conti and customers comment on the My Sonic Lab cartridges:
http://basisaudio.com/basis_audio_sonic_labs/index.html
quite remarkable. I have to listen it.
Regrads and enjoy the music,
R. |
Dear Dougdeacon: Well, could be that audiophiles does not cares yet on the critical importance of cartridge tracking abilities to achieve top quality performance levels, improved levels on what they are already experienced.
Cartridge tracking abilities is an almost " new " cartridge subject for us audiophiles. Well, I care about and trhough several first hand experiences with vintage and today cartridges I understand its main importance on a cartriudge design.
In the other side, the Telarc 1812 recording ( as I posted ) was and is forbidden by the audio analog community mainly by ignorance, I was part of that but when you go deeper in the Telarc 1812 subject and listen and learn about then you know that was a mistake not take that recording in count.
The recording is not about ( but it is. ) the cannon shots, the recording tell us many other things that helps not only as a cartridge set up or audio system evaluation but a good recording too.
I remember when I started my first posts in Agon: there were several audio subjects that no one " touched " and when one of us touched no one posted about and the ones that did it were against those audio subjects that today all are in agreement.
Dougdeacon, here in México people say: " everything fall down through the time by its own weight ".
Today a gentleman that was a digital hard enemy already accept the today top quality. I told him several times that digital is a top alternative and he said no: he even started a thread where he already learned about.
This is the way is the audio life: a continuous learning road.
Regards and enjoy the music,
R. |
Dear Dougdeacon: This is what " finally " JC posted here:
++++ " This ( better cartridge tracking abilities ) has the side-effect of lessening the intensity of the loads on the tonearm, which can seem to be a benefit if the tonearm has a resonance-prone mechanical structure, and can improve the tracking of a tonearm with lower-grade bearings or imperfectly adjusted/unevenly worn bearings. " ++++
he named as " side-effect " when I name that: advantages ( what is inside the brackets is mine to understand the quote. ).
he said: " if the tonearm has a resonance-prone mechanical structure... ", well all tonearms some way or the other has it.
++++ " a tonearm with lower-grade bearings " ++++
it does not matters if has low or high grade bearings because bearings always vibrate/resonate causing distortions at the cartridge trhough the tonearm wand feedback.
But there are oter important advantages at the cartridge/LP level:
the cartridge rides the grooves, staying in contact " always ", easily following the grooves modulation adding almost no other vibrations ( generated because not so good cartridge trackin abilities ) transmited by the cantilever and from here to the overall suspension/motor/cartridge body.
All those additional vibrations/resonances at the cartridge/grooves/tonearm means higher distortions and less and non-accurate musical information.
I insist that there is no precise evidence that cartridge tracking abilities is not a welcomed characteristic for the MUSIC and we listeners.
Dougdeacon, I can't find out any single trade-off but only advantages. So for me today the high cartridge tracking abilities is a must to have by design and a parameter that always ( today ) makes a differencefor the better.
That's my take: which's yours?. Yes, I can be wrong but some one must prove it with facts.
Regards and enjoy the music,
R. |
Doug, I made me several times questions about all those old white papers by Shure, Stanton, Empire, ADC, Ortofon and many others where they were very emphatic of the critical importance of self cartridge tracking abilities in a cartridge design to achieve the best cartridge quality performance.
Could been wrong?, I don't think so: to many facts and experiences around that tell me all were right.
then: why vintage and today LOMC cartridge designers almost " does not cares " about?
whom told almost all LOMC manufacturers that 60um to 80um on track abilities value is enough?
why almost all LOMC designs came and comes with low to " medium " compliance?
any one of them tested their designs with high compliance against the low one or even intented to improve ( " severely " ) their cartridge design trackin abilities ? what they found out?
Years ago I was thinking and almost convinced that exist a serious impediment ( by design ) to manufacture a high compliance ( high tracking abilities. I know that there are other parameters to take in count through the cartridge design to achieve it. ) LOMC cartridge that can performs at top new quality level: to set new standards.
I was wrong because there is no cartridge design impediment to achieve it and the several vintage and today LOMC cartridge with high tracking abilities and top quality performance level: prove it.
Denon, Ortofon, Highphonic, Entré/My Sonic Labs, Linn, Satin, Sumiko, Benz Micro, Wilson Benesh and many more are proved facts on the whole subject.
For me is important to continue insisting in the subject because for whatever reasons we don't have the quality cartridge performance that can be achieved: in favor of MUSIC and in favor of we audiophiles that at the end are the ones that mantain ( through our each one money ) the lovely audio industry.
Where are the professional reviewers that many people ( certainly not me ) think are the " gurus " that is supposed are the ones that must help ( IMHO is their main responsability. ) all of us audiophiles in MUSIC benefit?
Why in October 2013 after so many many years of analog audio are we discussing ( almost starting!!! ) the cartridge tracking abilities that must be a solved issue?
R. |
Yes, maybe some manufacturers/audiophiles/reviewers think is a solved one when ( IMHO ) certainly it's not, a mistake or a wrong way to think about: but why? because no one ask it? or because ignorance?
R. |
Dear Mapman: I own two samples ( I bought it second hand. ) of that recording, very nice whole recording.
Regards and enjoy the music,
R. |
Dear Dougdeacon: Well there are at least two gentlemans that really cares about: J.Carr and T.wynsc. and you can read their posts.
Now, I would like and appreciated that more than put in evidence that " vain soliloquoy " ( that IMHO does not apport nothing to the whole subject ( as the Dover posts. ) ) and due to your recognized knowledge level try to post something that could be useful about, you are way better than all that.
In the other side you are following the thread, well try to follow it in a more positive sense.
Waiting for your contribution.
Regards and enjoy the music,
R. |
Dear Mapman: ++++ " to track records designed to be an obstacle course does not mean better performance in genera.... " ++++
I posted three times here and in other threads this sentece that you certainly did not read, here again:
" EVERYTHING THE SAME "
Regards and enhjoy the music,
R. |
Dear Jcarr: +++++ " This is an erroneous assumption.... " ++++
could be and could be not.
Stereoplay measurements can be " perfect" ones or not to " perfect " and in the other side we have several kind of " distortions " that wee normally don't see it through measure tests, what I mean: we are not measuring the right kind of distortions or the tools to emasure can't do it.
I posted at least an example where two similar stylus assembly in the same cartridge performs with different tracking abilities and sounds " different " too: tiny differences.
I don't have gold ears, I'm a " normal " listener but I'm traines by my self to be aware of some kind of distortions at different links in the system audio chain and I can detect some kind of " sound " that you can't because you don't know what to look for when I know because my self training. That's why I asked you : what to look for when you posted:
+++++
the suspension's fulcrum point will shift position, depending on what the frequency being reproduced is. This won't necessarily sound bad, and some cartridges are designed like this. But it certainly isn't accurate. " ++++
non-accuarte, the question is: what have I to hear to know that exist that unaccuracy in the cartridge design?. I receive no answer about.
JC, you have and live in a highly desired position been a cartridge designer because you can make easyly some tests to confirm or not what we are discussing here ( remember that this discussion is not if you or me are right. I don't know you but what I'm looking is to improve my knowledge level. ):
you can take a Delos sample with that 80 um on traking hability and modified two other Delos samples to have one with 60um and other with 100um an make different kind of tests that can corelate traking ability with distortions and of course through listening tests try to be aware to find out if it at normal recording velocities you can hear tiny differences or no one at all.
I think that you not only are in that privileged position to do it but you have the right knowledge level, skills and tools to do it along the " ideal " LP's tracks to do it.
This cartridge tracking habilities audio subject seems to me similar as what could be happen in a car in specific to its suspension/tires and different suspension quality designs and how different cars performs on the road. You can be sure that exist differences because that car tracking habilities on demanding roads as in not so demanding ones.
As with a car what we want in a cartridge stylus tip is that always stay in touch with the grooves/road even at microscopic level, if not common sense tell me ( certainly not to you. ) distortions are generated.
I think that you have the right " light " to really put a real light down this audio subject through first hand tests. If you decided to do it not only me but the audio community will appreciated.
Stereoplay tests put some uncertainly " light " but IMHO not a definitive and absolute answer.
Regards and enjoy the music,
R. |
Dear Jcarr: +++ " backed up my position with measurements supplied by neutral, independent organizations ++++ " ++++
unfortunatelly not direct related measures: that in precise way showed the direct relationship between tracking abilities and distoriton levels.
you posted somewhere:
+++++ " distortion in a cartridge is caused by physical issues (such as tracking resolution) as well as magnetic, and the better the physical aspects (styli with longer and narrower contact patch, more linear dampers, less body resonances, more complete energy evacuation from the cartridge structure),........ for lower moving mass and reduced tracking distortion. " ++++++
your today position already changed because a few months ago tracking distortion was something more important to you.
Now, you posted this too ( I'm still surprised when I read it due that you are a cartridge designer. ):
++++++ " Lyra's markets has been that to go below 0.5mV (5cm/sec) means that many phono stages will be less than happy. The user may hear problems like noise, grain, insufficient bass response, or in less problematic situations, they may simply not hear the improvement in resolution that the lower-output cartridge should be giving them.................
As far as the cartridge is concerned, lower output is more ideal. Lower output means less metal in the coil windings (copper has a specific gravity of 8-9, which is greater than iron!) for lower moving mass and reduced tracking distortion. Lower output also means fewer coil winding layers, which enables the coils to be of cleaner shape and will improve crosstalk, phase response, and channel matching (cleaner-made coils also look much better).
As a cartridge manufacturer, our problem is that the user may not be happy with the sound, but in most cases they will blame it on the cartridge rather than the phono stage or that they have excessive electrical contact points in the signal cabling system (which seems to work OK with MMs, MIs and high-output MCs), but will impair the sound of low-output MCs. Since no manufacturer likes to hear that users are unhappy, we've shifted our cartridges away from where they were some years ago (0.22-25mV, single-layer coils) to our present level (0.5mV, double-layer coils,..... "+++++
I'm surprised that you knowing that the best quality sound can comes from lower output MC cartridges you shift to higher output even against that knowledge. Seems to me that marketing is more important.
Anyway, sooner or latter we will see more and more better LOMC cartridges with higher tracking abilities and I think you will not be an exception. Time is the best judge.
++++ " any worthwhile rebuttals so far... " +++++
well I think " both sides " because you prove nothing, at least not yet.
Anyway, for me this " discussion " was a learning one in several audio and non-audio subjects.
Stay with your today success and be prepared for the future.
Regards and enjoy the music,
R. |
JC, I just bought a Lyra Kleos and along my Helicon/Clavis DC , a Titan i ( from a friend ) and the Akiva one the comparison/evaluation could be " full ".
All those are part of your cartridge designs and you already know that the Akiva is the champion on tracking abilities ( at least my sample. ) even that that is not your main target ( and that comes in a plastic body. ) but it's not only a top tracker but a top quality sound reproducer/performer over other top Lyras. I will see how the Kleos compares against.
R. |
Dear Dougdeacon: I don't want to deviate the attention on the main subject but I do this time only to be clear and for there been there no wrong misunderstood:
++++ " .I can detect some kind of " sound " that you can't because you don't know what to look for
False modesty and a forked tongue, all in one sentence ROFL. " ++++++
to know what to look for ( in any audio subject and especially on hard one. ) you have to be trained by your self. If Jcarr has that training good. What's the problem down there?
For all of us audio is a daily learning proccess. Do you think that an audio item designer put on the market a new and improved item just for money?. A serious designer ( as Jcarr who cares about MUSIC. ) put new products on the market ( as the Atlas cartridge ) because he learned " something " that helps to improve the MUSIC sound reproduction.
Do you think that any single designer knows everything on what they are doing? do you think that they have nothing to learn by it self? yes?: please introduce us that audio item designer?
No one, including you and me, knows everything about everything in audio, period.
Btw, do you read it somewhere that some car tires give you not only better tracking abilities under any condition but at the same time helps to reduce your gasoline consume?, think about, think at micro stage and not macro stage. ( You too Peterayer.)
Regards and enjoy the music,
R. |
Dear Bpolletti: Iw onder what are yeally you talking about?
Please enlight me why the Telarc 1812 can't tell you about high frequency tracking?
Btw,, the Telarc recording, as I posted, is more that only a bass tracking/torture test. Maybe your system can't honor it.
Regards and enjoy the music,
R. |
As a fact Telarc don't made the 1812 recording as a test one Lp.
R. |
Doug/Peter: Better yet, don't think nothing: to know and to contribute on the subject you have to listen to that recording several times and understand first what is happening down there and then you can have first had experience to make a serious contribution to the tracking cartridge abilities/distortion relationship.
With out those experiences you are only guessing??? with out any help and we need help to learn.
R. |
Dear Peterayer: Here I come again because seems to me that both of you still don't understand why my analogy against the audio subject we are discussing. I posted:
++++++" did you read it somewhere that some car tires give you not only better tracking abilities ( on plane and winding road. ) under any condition but at the same time helps to reduce your gasoline consume?, think about. " +++++
well, think about and when you understand why the gasoline consume is reduced you will understand the audio subject I'm talking about.
The Stereoplay measures means and proves almost nothing in the whole audio subject and seems to me that for the posts here and elsewhere the cartridge tracking abilities and its direct relationship with distortion levels were almost never analized even by JC.
Peter: remember Columbus when said: " the Earth is round ", everybody laughing for say the least. Why everybody laugh?
Years ago here on Agon at audiophile level I remember what happened in each ocasion when I " introduce " the DD turntable as a serious alternative or the MM/MI alternative or the active high gain phonolinepreamp ( instead SUTs ) or the naked alternative on DD turntables or subwoofers or tonearm/cartridge relationship or, or, or,...etc, etc:
everybody laugh of me ( including Dougdeacon that in those times was the " oficial " defender of SUTs ( he was using one. ) and todauy all those very well regarded audiophiles speaks the same language I was talking in those times.
So, I know for sure that in the future times and in favor of the MUSIC enjoyment we will see better LOMC cartridges with higher/top tracking ailities including the ones coming from JC.
Regards and enjoy the music,
R. |
Dear Toniwinsc: I agree with you. There is no single doubt that digital for we audiophiles ( music lovers. ) is here to stay and with a lot of " land " to improve in the near future.
Even, exist several " old " CD's that are great to listen it and where its analog counterpart ( original or today reissues. ) can't compete with.
For example, take Foreigner 4 ( in both formats. ) or The Wall or Gladiator: in all these sampels and several other ones digital outperforms the analog LPs ( I just bought the today " audiophile " Foreigner 4 just to compare it. ).
I have a modest today/latest digital universal Denon player ( 32/192 DAVCs ) and if you paly a DVDA on it you just can't beleive you are hearing digital, you missed nothing about analog recordings and win sveral improvements on different areas.
Even old digital recorded LPs ( like the Telarc ones. ) outperform the best analog samples.
Of course that not all the Telarc LPs are first rate some are " so so " but the ones that shines are a glorious experience through LP format. Same I can say for the old digital recordings made it by Denon ( first rate. ) but there are other digital labels really bad as: Teldec, some Deutshe Gramaphone or Philips ( I own hundreds of digital recordings on LP. ).
The best analog recording that can compete against the best digital LPs are the D2D and not all these, by-passing the R2R normal tape recording is a huge improvement on the music sound reproduction ( digital permit this. ) of course that LP manufacturers always disagree with those statements and IMHO they do because they are biased through: $$$$$$ and not because really have facts.
There are several areas where digital outperform analog and one of them is in the bass frequency range where lives the music home reproduction foundation.
I think that one of my firsts posts where I said that digital outperforms analog was 4-5 years ago ( maybe more ) and as always when people don't understand the why's just laughed of those posts and I need not to listen trough a dSc digital combo ( 150 K ) but trough a simple units as my today Denon.
+++++ " After hearing HD Audio last year on a top end hifi system, I imagine one day going that route. To my ears that had all the advantages of vinyl with none of the noise and set-up work. It made CDs sound flat and lifeless in comparison- on the same system! +++++ "
I don't have experience with the HD but I know exactly what you mean and agree.
Regards and enjoy the music,
R. |
Dear Dougdeacon: Oh that " short " memory!!!
Yes I think is the best you can do.
Regards and enjoy the music,
R. |
Dear friendsds: The Kleos arrived and is mounted in my system.
Yes, is better than the Skala or Helikon and even Titan but can't compete with the Akiva ( JC design for Linn. ).
The Kleos has clear and transparent highs where the Akiva is close but not at the same level and it's only in this characteristic where the Kleos is above the Akiva.
The Akiva has a tremendous natural rhythm where the Kleos is just lifeless. Everything on sound characteristics are there ( in the Kleos ) but can't transmit the MUSIC emotions, it does not has the glorious easy MUSIC flow reproduction of the Akiva, the Kleos feels as the music has no " continuity " as if it's " fighting " to reproduce the grooves information. I can't explain in other way.
About its tracking abilities the Kleos is the worst one of the " bunch " and maybe that's why I said: " fighting to reproduce grooves... ", instead to feel happy as the Akiva one.
I know ( because JC posted is not his priority. ) that the Akiva JC design is a " faulty " builded cartridge because its truly great ( today unbeatable. ) tracking abilities that was not in the " program ", welcomed " fault " that made this cartridge so good quality performer.
Regards and enjoy the music,
R. |
Seems as it time decay in the low part of the high frequencies and midrange is to fast, this I don't detected in the other part of the high frequencies where is very good and extended.
I tested in 3 tonearms and with different impedance loads direct through my active PS and through SUT but the behavior is almost the same.
I have to say that as all Lyras its build quality shines ( beautiful made. ), first rate.
R. |
Dear Peter Ayer: My Kleos is already broken, take almost " nothing " for the cartridge been brock.
In the other side, start a thread on Kleos vs Akiva could be interesting but I see a " trouble " , please ask you how many of your audio friends own the Akiva cartridge? and how many Agon threads did you read it about Akiva owners and how many?
Linn Akiva is designed mainly for Linn analog rigs: especially the Ekos tonearm. The cartridge comes with three mounted holes that's a characteristic of Linn tonearm headshell.
Other characteristic is that the Akiva comes with dedicated
wires to be connected directly to the tonearm headsell male connectors and not all tonearms accept it.
To connect my Akiva in my system I have to make a modification changing the Akiva wires female connectors/pins for male ones.
Today the owners of cartridges as Atlas, Ana, LP-S, XV 1t, Goldfinger Statement ad the like I can tell you that even they do not know of the Akiva existence and less heard it.
That's a pity issue because IMHO the Akiva can compete at that so high level quality performance for " penauts " in comparison wiht all those really high cartridge prices$$$$$.
Btw, I don't finish yet with the Kleos, I will try harder trying to achieve better quality performance, I need that the Kleos be more " human ".
Regards and enjoy the music,
R. |
Dear friends: Finally my Kleos started to shines and even that is not the best tracker out there is a great quality performer design.
JC made it a splendid job with, congratulations!
Regards and enjoy the music,
R. |
