Stylus compliance is what matters... mechanically the same as matching shocks on a car. Welcome Davide256...😆 As the first contributor to this Thread who does not agree with it....it would be beneficial if you could provide some mathematical or scientific arguments to counter those I have proposed...❓👀 Oh...and the analogy with "shocks on a car" is inaccurate unless you happen to run your cartridge's VTF at 14Gm....⁉️ But then again....a car does not have an 'Effective Mass'...😎 What it weighs is what it weighs....😜 |
Greetings Zavato...✋
I could not get your Link to work unfortunately.....😢
I think we did read different magazines....❓👀
In Australia we had access in the late '70s and early '80s to British magazines like Hi Fi Answers and Hi Fi Choice...and in the mid '80s onward, we could buy TAS and then later still...Stereophile...😍
I may be wrong...but I can't recall reading about this subject in those magazines during those early years...❓👀 |
Of greater concern and something that is not easy to measure are the secondary arm and cartridge resonances that are excited by the energy put back into the arm. An interesting point Viridian…and one that I’ve been wrestling with over five years or so….😖 Many people have mentioned both cartridge resonances and “energy transference” into tonearms over the years…..yet no-one (to my knowledge) has provided any scientific data or evidence to support such claims…? If cartridge resonances OUTSIDE of the cartridge body really exist (and if they did I can’t help but think this would indicate information loss?)….they would be easily measurable and the data should be available for all the cartridges in the market place…❓ I am unaware of any such data and until some is provided…it seems presumptuous to base an argument or philosophy on this…😵 Energy transference into the tonearm is more easily understood I believe, as it is a purely structural phenomenon….⏄ The tonearm is a counter-weighted propped cantilevered beam as a structural description…. In its neutral balanced state (before any tracking weight is applied)….it is a purely counterweighted cantilever with the total weight of the arm and counterweight transferred vertically through the pivot to the arm bearing. The stress (or force or reaction) at the headshell in this state is zero…..0️⃣ The bending-moment diagram from this point towards the pivot then increases in a curved catenary slope (because of the arm’s uniformly distributed self weight) until it reaches its maximum bending moment (and shear stress by the way)…at the pivot..😎 Every single stress, bending moment and deflection can be calculated knowing the length of the arm, the material and cross-sectional configuration. Incidentally….the Resonant Frequency of the tonearm in this ‘balanced’ condition is wayyy below that of the arm on its ‘sprung’ cantilever…😋 Once the VTF is dialed in…the reaction (or force) at the headshell is whatever the VTF is…1.5 Gm-2.0 Gm etc.. From here it becomes less clear cut….😢 There is a constant reaction 1.5 Gm at the headshell as it traverses the record (otherwise VTF would be changing)…but it is a dynamically changing propped cantilever now with the arm moving both sideways and also up and down…😱 If the bearings are truly frictionless…it should induce no extra stresses into the arm other than the ones previously in existence as a propped counterweighted cantilever as far as I can see…😴❓ But it would require a computer run simulation to analyse exactly what was occurring…and the only tonearm manufacturer that has done that to my knowledge is Continuum Audio Labs with their Cobra and Copperhead tonearms… Beginning with Finite Element Analysis using NASTRAN, PATRAN, and DYTRAN from www.mscsoftware.com finalising in the complex process of Gradient Shape Optimisation using Reshape from www.advea.com. The wand is eggshell thin with special contours and compound curves to “shape” the resonant behavior of the arm. These behaviours are only visible with specialized software tools but clearly audible to experienced listeners. As it so happens….my Copperhead tonearm is the very best performer with every single one of my cartridges be they high-compliance MMs or low-compliance LOMCs…😘 Very closely behind the Copperhead in matching with multiple cartridge types and designs….are the 35 year-old (high mass) Fidelity Research designed FR-64s/66s and (medium mass) SAEC WE-8000/ST...😍 On the other hand Viridian….I agree with Larryi’s advice to never tap on the arm when in the playing position….😰 Apart from possible damage to the cantilever as he points out….dynamic (or impact) loading on a material bears little relationship to the transfer of sound waves propagated through structure or air and thence into the material…👎 In architecture…when we test a wall for its sound-proofing properties or a theatre wall for its reverberant characteristics…we never ‘hit’ it with any implement..👀 In acoustic theory….sound is propagated through materials by Reflection, Transmission and Absorption and the amount of each of these is able to be calculated by the materials’ properties and thicknesses and the frequencies and SPL (volume) of the sound. When designing a parquet timber or tile or stone clad floor for minimizing the ‘impact’ sound of stiletto footsteps…..different design solutions are required…😕 What we all seem to agree on though…. Boofer included….is that the notorious arm/cartridge Resonant Frequency Calculator is no indication of a tonearm’s ‘matching’ ability to a cartridge….😎✋ |
I suppose another approach is to try to find out which arms the cartridge designers used while developing your cartridge. Then you would at least get closer to what those designers like. I'm not sure about this Peterayer.....❓ If I were designing a tonearm, I'd want to test it with as many different cartridges (and TYPES of cartridges) as I could..😎 However...I suspect that nowadays most designers of high-end arms test them predominantly with MC cartridges as they believe that most buyers will be using this type of cartridge....😢 A well-known and much-aclaimed tonearm I once owned....sounded fine with LOMCs yet performed poorly with every MM I tried...😩⁉️ In fact the interesting discovery with my many arms and cartridges......was that the poor arms were exposed...not with different LOMC cartridges...but with different MM cartridges...😵❓ So the common audiophile belief that LOMCs require better arms than MMs...is simply another myth IMO...👀😎❓ |
Sorry Peterayer...my bad...😴 |
Hi Kirkus,
Many thanks for your thoughtful Post (as usual).....and it has made me realise how wrong I am about the importance (or lack thereof) of the Arm/Cartridge Resonance…..😲❗️
I’m really kicking myself now because I’ve done a great deal of thought and study on the subject of Structure-Borne Feedback as it relates to Audio and yet…..because I fortunately don’t suffer from it myself…..I completely ignored its possible relationship to the Arm/Cartridge Resonance…😅❓
As I have written many times previously….EVERY suspended floor structure….be it timber, steel or concrete…..is under stress.
At points of maximum bending and deflection…this stress induces low subsonic frequencies which can be so severe in certain cases…that vibrations may even be felt....🔊
Contrary to popular belief…..a suspended reinforced concrete slab can often be worse than a suspended timber floor, especially in modern high-rise apartment buildings which commonly use thin prestressed, post-tensioned slabs with little standard steel reinforcing…😱
The subsonic frequencies in most suspended floor systems are commonly in the order of 2-5Hz and vary in location and intensity on an individual basis. In other words….no two audiophiles are experiencing exactly the same conditions….but ALL audiophiles with a turntable located on a suspended floor are living with a vibrating ‘singing’ demon under their feet….👿
Normal equipment racks are of little use against these types of subsonic frequencies and ‘cures’ like rubber, sorbothane and air-bladders may ameliorate some aspects to the detriment of others…😕
Only the expensive ‘active’ acoustic stands developed for electron microscopes (like Minus K) which utilise ‘tuned’ springs along with mass plates designed to handle exactly those frequencies 2-5Hz, will be effective on a suspended floor system…..😃
The best floor of all….❓
A reinforced concrete slab on the ground….which is what I have…👀😍
If you don’t have this luxury…mount your turntable on a shelf fixed to a wall which sits on its own footing. A masonry wall is preferable to a timber-framed wall, as a masonry wall will not support ‘tension’ whilst a framed wall will. Remember…’tension’ equals ‘stress’ equals ‘noise’.
If you can’t use a wall-mounted shelf…then try to locate your turntable as close to an external wall as possible. The middle of any floor span has the most stress and deflection….😖
As anyone with ‘feedback’ problems knows…..with the stylus stationary on the record, as you turn up the volume you will suddenly hear a deep and progressively louder continuous ‘drone’ emanating from your speakers…🔊
This (I suspect) is the Resonant Frequency of your tonearm/cartridge combination being excited by the harmonics of the structure-borne floor.
If your floor is producing 2Hz…then 4Hz, 8Hz and 16Hz are the harmonics.
If your floor is producing 3Hz…then 6Hz, 12Hz and 24Hz are the harmonics.
If your floor is producing 4Hz…then 8Hz and 16Hz are the harmonics….and so on..
The common silent woofer-pumping many complain of, seems again indicative of the Resonant Frequency activating the woofers...🔊
This is why I suspect, changing cartridges or headshells or adding mass or damping to the tonearm often ‘solve’ the problem….❓
You are simply shifting your resonant frequency ‘out’ of the feedback harmonics…..👀
You are not ELIMINATING the problem….😞
You are DODGING the problem….😜
If you have this problem.….you could never have 2 turntables, 6 tonearms and 40 headshells and cartridges (as I have) without experiencing a single feedback problem…❓
One thing puzzles me and perhaps Kirkus or Al can help here……😃
The ‘feedback’ on the stationary stylus increases when the volume is turned up….but I thought this is amplified AFTER the cartridge in the preamp stage….❓
|
Nice Post Tonywinsc....👍 Thank you..😘 The danger is that being outside the quiet zone (10Hz +/-) can result in excessive wear or even damage to your cartridge and records- even if it sounds fine. In the interests of science.....further elaboration and evidence would be appreciated...❓👀 |
That makes me think of something: Is it only me or do others try not to cue the needle in the middle of the record? I have this feeling that dropping the needle, even ever so slowly in the middle of the record will leave some minor damage in the groove. So I tend to cue at the beginning and let it play through to the track that I want to hear. Is that a pointless exercise? I've never thought about this before....and now you've got me thinking about this....❗️😱 STOP....⭕️🔙❌🚫 |
Thanks Al,
I knew that you would be able to explain this so that even a dummy (me) would get it....😬❓
And I got it.....😜❗️
Regards
Henry |
|
Thank you to all who have contributed here....😍
For a few years, I have bought and sold a variety of vintage MM and LOMC cartridges together with vintage Japanese tonearms of different masses and designs....and I have been astonished at the sound quality that is possible compared to the modern genus of LOMC cartridges and their currently lauded tonearms....👀❓
The most startling aspect of these experiences...has been the elevation in sound quality when using cartridges in arms that are decidedly a 'bad match' according to the theoretical Arm/Cartridge Resonant Frequency equation....😎❓
With the very high-mass FR-66s tonearms.....virtually ALL the high-compliance MM cartridges I mount on them, transcend their often humble status to become magical devices emitting radiance, tranquility and bliss unheard from them in lesser arms....😘
I'm not talking degrees of betterment here.....I'm talking paradigm shifts of exaltation...👋🎼🎵🎶
For five years...I have been trying to reconcile this fact against the apparent collision with scientific thought...😱
And I now think I have...😃
It really matters naught to me and my musical enjoyment that the majority of audiophiles accept the dictum that "heavy arms are better for low-compliance cartridges and light arms are better for high-compliance ones"...except that:-
1. They are depriving themselves of potentially mind-blowing experiences
2. Their constant recommendations to Newbies on the multiple audio Forums based on this dictum, are depriving others of possible wonderful experiences
Now I have sold many MM cartridges which I bought but which failed to excite me on any one of a dozen or so arms...😭
What's the big deal...❓😎
So what's the big deal if you try a cartridge and arm combination (which is NOT recommended)...and it doesn't work for you...❓
So sell one or the other...
It's not the end of the world...😃
And you may be in for a big and exultant surprise...😘❓🎶 |
Picture Ella Fitzgerald focusing her voice on a crystal goblet. She finds the resonance frequency of the goblet and then sings holding that frequency steady. The glass responds to that input. The goblet starts to ring and the amplitude builds until the glass shatters. All with the relatively small energy input of her voice. I don't believe Ella ever managed to do this...❓😎 In fact....there is only one scientifically recorded instance of the human voice ever being able to do this under controlled conditions....and the SPL needed to succeed was greater than 110 dB...😱🎵 Incidentally...it is not the glass itself that reaches its Resonant Frequency.....it is the VOLUME of the glass with water that allows the Resonant Frequency to be raised to a level where it is audible....remember playing tunes on the rims of differently filled glasses....❓😎 |
Hi Tony, The tonearm/stylus was cycling at 16 Hz while playing a record. It was interesting to see. Long term it would have worn out the stylus for sure. For this to occur...a 16Hz tone had to be created either on the record, by the warp or off-centre disc...or via structure-borne feedback..❓👀 If your arm is 'moving'....you have a problem...😱 If your arm is not moving up and down or from side to side....whatever your Resonant Frequency may be....you don't have a problem and there will be no excessive wear on the stylus...😃🎶 |
Ralph, The FR-66 is not a "very high-mass" tone arm- although its on the high side for sure, but not 'very' high. I think you are mistaken....👀❓ The FR-64s is listed on Vinyl Engine with an Effective Mass of 35Gm..so a figure of 40 Gm for the FR-66s is quite believable...❓😱 I've trawled through the Data Base on Vinyl Engine and can find no arm ever made that comes even close to these figures...😫❗️ Here are the highest masses of tonearms I could find on the Database:- SME Series V...Mass=10/11 SME 3012R=14 VPI JMW Memorial 9 Signature=9.5 Zeta=16 Technics EPA250=14 Roksan Artemiz/Tabriz=9 Linn Ittok LVII=13.5 Dynavector DV501=25 Here are the Compliance figures for some of the cartridges I have used on the FR-66s:- Shure V15 Type III Compliance...22.5 Signet TK7SU....30x 10-6cm/Dyne Acutex LPM 312 III STR....24 Acutex LPM 420 STR...42 Empire 4000D III....30 |
I would only place upper and lower limits on Halcro's proposition; it would not be a great idea to use a very high mass tonearm with a very high compliance cartridge, simply because of the resulting flexing of a very compliant cantilever which might cause physical damage, never mind resonance. Let say, an ADC XLM with an FR66S. That's interesting.....I've never heard of anyone destroying a cantilever with a high-mass arm...😱❓ I understand how confusing it must be for most audiophiles to understand esoteric structural principles....😴 In normal playing conditions....the cartridge has no idea about the tonearm's Effective Mass...😎 The only 'mass' it sees is the VTF of 1.5Gm...😛 When I balance my six arms to 'neutral' (before applying VTF)....they ALL pivot freely when pushed towards the spindle....despite their differing Effective Masses 👍 Imagine a huge tonearm weighing two tons on perfectly frictionless pivots..👀 You could easily push it with one finger to start it pivoting...👅 The problem comes when you try to STOP it once it is pivoting...😵 It is only THEN that the Effective Mass becomes an issue...😱 So it is only a change in RELATIVE movement which brings into play Effective Mass...hence its role in the UP and DOWN movement of tracking a warp...☺️ If you play a record with a seriously off-centre hole...you will notice the tonearm moving back and forth while it tracks the groove...😫 This again will bring into play the Effective Mass...👀 So the only times Effective Mass plays a role is when playing a warped or off-centre record...😏 At all other times....the 'mass' that the stylus and cantilever sees is the VTF...😘 |
Cancel my previous Post Davide256.... I've just read some of your other Postings... Turntables like the Linn and Sota when properly balanced have a suspension resonance point below the audible range of human hearing, vibration from the surface the TT rests on is damped by the suspension above the resonance point. As to importance, the tonearm is secondary to the turntable. A spring suspension turntable like Linn or Sota with an entry level tonearm will reveal much more than if you buy a better arm but compromise on a non spring suspension turntable. 1) speed accuracy to the point where its musically relevant has been pretty much solved in any TT costing over $300
2) the average stylus pressure is 1.5 gm. The drag of this on a rotating platter assembly of 2000 gms is negligible; the mass equivalent of a tricycle towed behind a truck
3) vibration isolation/damping is what counts...horizontal vibration in the plane of the stylus vibration will suck transients, detail and bass out of your playback
Direct drives are very difficult to isolate vs belt drives Faith-based 'opinion' will not 'cut' it here...👎 Science-based knowledge and educated thinking is welcome....👍 |
Thanks Professor (Timeltel)...😘
You more than anyone knows how long I have struggled with this apparent dichotomy....❓👀
It's good to see you back here after so long...✋👀
And thank you for those Links...👏 I haven't yet finished them...
There was a lot of intelligent thinking about vinyl way back then in the States....although most of the writers seem to have oodles of warped and off-centre records that they play with...😰❓The days before record clamps...😊❓
Regards
Henry |
Hi Ralph, Henry, Its more than being about warped records, if you read inbetween the lines of Kirkus's post above- if the effective mass is incorrect, you can actually have the stylus jump out of the groove of a perfectly flat, concentric LP.
An excellent example is a Grado on a Graham 2.2- does the well-known 'Grado dance' shortly before exiting stage left (IOW, jumps out of the groove).
The other issue is you won't be able to get the cartridge to track complex material correctly. So its a big deal and not just about warp. I'm sorry I didn't get that from Kirkus' Post....❓👀 Apart from the possibility of Structure-Borne Feedback exciting the exact arm/cartridge Resonant Frequency.....the only other ways I know of, are by warped or off-centre records..❓👀 If you have other science-based evidence...or if Kirkus could support your claims...I'd be interested...😲❓ In any case...over hundreds of combinations of arm/cartridge interactions....I've never experienced what you claim....😃 Fairly good odds in my book...😍 |
I would just like to emphasise Kirkus' point about 'calculated' Resonant Frequency...and 'measured' Resonant Frequency because they are rarely (if ever) the same...⁉️😫
Many arm manufacturers provide a dubious figure for their arm's Effective Mass whilst a large number provide no figures whatsoever....😷
The cartridge manufacturers simply provide a 'design target' for their compliance figures which can vary significantly from unit to unit....and also possibly changes over time...❓😱
The Fidelity Research FR-66s tonearm is renowned as one of the highest mass arms at 38 Gm Effective Mass...😲
I have measured the Resonant Frequency with a dozen high-compliance MM cartridges using the Shure V15 Type 5 Audio Obstacle Course test disc and have not recorded a figure lower than 8Hz or higher than 13Hz...👍
So either the Test Record is wrong❓.....or the recommended range is easily achieved in 'practice' as opposed to in 'theory'....❓👀 |
A while ago, I posted a Link to THE KORF BLOG which is a 4-Part technical quasi-scientific report on his testing for TONEARM AND CARTRIDGE MATCHING. In the first three Parts....Alex Korf was discovering results which contradicted the generally accepted wisdom of Arm/Cartridge Matching. In his 4TH PART (which makes interesting reading) he concludes:- 1 Carlson's formula of a low frequency resonance does not describe the measured low frequency behaviour of the cartridge/tonearm interaction
2 Modern cartridges (meaning all those built in the last 60 years or so) have too much suspension damping and non-linearity for the resonances to dominate
3 The frequency of the observed motion is determined largely by the frequency of the excitation
4 The cartridge/tonearm system acts as a lowpass filter for vibrations picked up by the stylus
5 Too low an effective mass for a given compliance (or too low a compliance for a given effective mass) results in low frequency attenuation and excessive tonearm motion.
6 Too high an effective mass for a given compliance (or too high a compliance for a given effective mass) results in "ringing"—a small resonant peak—that is largely benign and barely registers in the measurements As he states:- The accepted wisdom turned out to be completely wrong. I have been maintaining for over 10 years, that I've experienced hundreds of combinations with High-Compliance MM Cartridges/High Mass Arms which have sounded spectacularly... In fact the highest-mass tonearm ever commercially made (FR-66s) I have found to be the BEST sonic match for high-compliance MMs of every make. It also is a superb match for Low to Very-Low Compliance MC cartridges.....thus it can truly be called a 'Universal Tonearm'. As my listening experiences have never CONTRADICTED the 'Accepted Wisdom' of Low-Compliance/Low Mass Arm being sub-optimal....I have never actively advocated for this combination. I have always recommended.....the best match for ANY cartridge is simply the BEST tonearm you can afford. And unfortunately from my experiences....I don't think Low-Mass Tonearms are the best 🥴 |
As I've repeated numerous times......I was moved to begin this Thread, not to disparage the science behind the topic......but because after 40 years in Audio, and the last 12 years testing and listening to hundreds of arm/cartridge combinations.....my ACTUAL experiences could not match what the 'science' was predicting 🤔When I say this.....I don't mean that it was a 50:50 proposition so that the science worked in so FEW cases that I could live it 🤗I mean:-
- I NEVER had a cartridge 'jump' from the groove
- I NEVER had visible woofer pumping
- I NEVER had audible mistracking
- I NEVER had over-bloated bass
- I NEVER had 'missing' bass (unless the cartridge was deficient)
Good science requires 100% applicability and predictability.Bad science should still provide (at the very least) a majority applicability 🎯When the 'science' provides zero correlation to the listening experience of even one shmuck (like me)....it needs to be questioned. Propitiously......this LINK landed in my Emails last night and deserves a reading (complete with the graphs, and Test results which aren't included in the following quote.
This is the second post in the series on low frequency interaction between the tonearm and the cartridge.
In our previous post, we've formulated The Plan, and done the first bullet point: measured the Ortofon/Jelco combo from 5 Hz to 20 kHz, and put it all on two charts. What the measurements showed was a bit removed from what the calculations suggested.
Today, it's time for the second part of The Plan:✓Make sure our test rig is working fine and is picking up both high and low frequency resonances. We'll measure the low frequency set with it, and superimpose it over the usual 20Hz-20kHz sweep.2Change the cartridge to the one with different compliance, and see what the effect on the low frequency resonance would be.3See what the low frequency content of the usual LPs looks like. We'll use some nearly unplayable LPs from our collection to try and get the effects of warps and excentricity.4Do the analysis of the data and see if there are some recommendations to be made on matching tonearms and cartridges.The Setup
In addition to the Ortofon SL-15E that we've employed in the previous post, we will use our old acquaintance the Denon DL-103. Its compliance is specified at 5⋅10−65⋅10−6 cm/dyne (5 µm/mN). This fits well with the required downforce of 2.5 gram. Unlike many other cartridges, there's no doubt that Denon's suspension is actually quite stiff.And to give an opposite perspective, a Shure M97xE. While it is shown with its brush down, all our measurements were done with the brush up and the downforce correspondingly decreased.
Shure specifies the compliance at 25⋅10−625⋅10−6 cm/dyne, but it's probably much higher. Various moving magnet Audio Technicas are specified as having 40 (!), and Shure definitely has a much softer suspension. The lower required downforce (less than a gram for Shure versus 1.8-2.2 g for ATs) supports this.
The MeasurementsThe accepted formula gives us 12 Hz resonant frequency for the Denon.
So if we take it at face value and plot Denon and Ortofon low frequency resonances together, we should get something like this.
Of course, the amplitudes might be different, and the curves would not be so neat and unbroken. But we definitely would see the frequency peaks, and we would see the frequency shift. The resonant peak must shift in frequency.
I've zoomed the charts on the 5-25 Hz area and made the X axis linear.
And what do we have in reality?That doesn't look like shift at all. Maybe the vertical resonance would?
We see the change in amplitude all right, but the frequency shift is missing. This does not look much like resonant behaviour.
Extraordinary findings require extraordinary evidence, right? So let's see if using the Shure would result in the shift in the frequency of the resonant peak. Remember, specified lateral compliance of Shure is the same as Ortofon's, but we expect it to be higher. So our peak should be similar with the blue trace's, or slightly to the left. Right?You can argue that the 6 Hz hump is the peak we're looking for, but this is splitting hairs. The main difference is in the lower overall motion, not in some particular frequency.
For completeness, here's the vertical comparison chart with Shure included.What did we discover today?Looks like the low frequency behaviour of the cartridge/tonearm combination is shaped more by Newton's third law than by the compliance resonance. Modern cartridges (meaning all those built in the last 60 years or so) have too much suspension damping and non-linearity for the resonances to dominate.
I would stop at this today, leaving conclusions proper until the last post in the series. This is heady stuff, and I fully expect some people to become very upset.
Besides, we are not done yet. So far, we're only studying the motion that is excited by the artificial test signals. What would happen when we expose our combinations to actual real life records? That's the topic for the next post.
I'm not claiming 'victory' as a result of this single publication.....but I AM claiming 'vindication' in QUESTIONING the premise contained in this Thread. |
If you get between 8 and 12 Hz you are done. Put the record away until you change cartridges. @mijostyn, so you are saying there is NO difference to the 'sound' within this 8-12Hz Band....? A 50% change is the Resonant Frequency has zero affect on the SOUND...? But when we get to 13Hz (a mere 8% increase over 12Hz).....you will suddenly hear it?! The conclusion from this (if it were true) is that it must be a logarithmic progression and the 'sound' will collapse spectacularly at 14Hz, 15Hz, 16Hz...... This is so easy to scientifically prove, there must be dozens of Phd Theses and 'Peer-Reviewed' White Papers on this very subject...? Unfortunately there is NONE 🧐 Not one....zilch....bupkis....nada. Oh there are plenty of 'Statements', 'Opinions posing as Fact', even 'unsubstantiated claims' by respected tonearm/turntable/cartridge designers....... But not one single Peer-Reviewed Scientific White Paper demonstrating the relationship between Resonant Frequency and SOUND...🤯 You claim to have personal experiences to substantiate your convictions, but so do I.... I have literally tested hundreds of different arm/cartridge combinations using the Shure Audio Obstacle Course Test Record to obtain the 'real' Resonant Frequencies of the Arm/Cartridge combinations (theoretical calculations will NEVER be correct as Compliance is a 'moving target' as is Effective Mass). Now I am NOT saying that there aren't 'differences' in the performances of various cartridges with various arms...🙃 I have spent the last ten years trying to find the 'happy' combinations (see my 'Hear My Cartridges' Thread)..... But the reasons for these differences are multifarious, complex and in many cases.....still unknown to us. The design and material of the Headshell will have significant effects on the sound in almost ALL cases 🤗 I don't aim to convince you (or anyone else) who holds this misunderstood view of the Cartridge/Arm resonant Frequency 'myth'.... Sleep warm and cuddly with your convictions.... A world of great sounds is forever closed to you 👎 For those who have an open mind....you have nothing to lose by just trying it 🙃 Why wrack your brains getting your knickers in a knot over theoretical calculations when it's just so easy to try it and LISTEN...just as Howardalex did with his FR-66S and Shure? Life is too short. Let the music begin.....🎹🎼 |
Despite the lack of scientific evidence available for those making the same claims as Mijostyn.....it rarely prevents them continuing with exactly the same claims.
Their usual segue is to postulate that many things in audio cannot be proven by science.......cable differences, similar amplifier specifications sounding differently, speakers with similar test results sounding differently etc.
Don't be fooled by this disingenuous argument because it is they...the ones making this claim, who are introducing 'science' (Arm/Cartridge Resonance Frequency) to arrive at a conclusion unsupported by that 'science'.
It provoked a 'thought exercise' which leads me to a 'theory' as yet unsupported by scientific evidence.
I predict that any cartridge will have the same Frequency Response Plot Graph regardless of the Arm/Cartridge Resonance it 'sees'.....
This is really sticking my neck out because any electronics technician or even audiophiles with an oscilloscope can very easily prove me wrong here 🤣
A kewpie doll to the first one who does.....👼 |
I always hesitate in responding to any Post by Raul as it invariably encourages him to continue what he imagines, is an actual dialogue. This almost always results in bitter and defamatory statements until he has the last word. So I will not respond to any further attempts on his part to interject himself. However...I'm actually grateful for his 'reminders' of what others have contributed to this discussion as it confirms what I have postulated from the start:- - The Tonearm/Cartridge Resonant Frequency has zero affect on the SOUND of a cartridge
Read very carefully the first quote from Ortofon where there is not a single mention of the affect on the SOUND from the cartridge. It is all about trackability of WARPED records. if you stick a high compliance cartridge on to a high mass arm..it will generally work...but tracking anything other than a perfectly flat record will cause undamped vibrations in the arm because the suspension is too soft to recover after a warp This is not in dispute..... My opening statement to this Thread states exactly that 🤗 Other quotes by respected individuals like Kirkus and Tonywin also confirm that the issue is purely TRACKABILITY.......no claims regarding the affects on SOUND. But even Kirkus is sometimes prone to include 'opinion' rather than 'fact'. Dlaloum and Fleib appear to me to be autodidacts with vast experience but insufficient scientific qualifications..... However even they make no valid claims about the SOUND of the cartridge...... The consensus is heavily in favour of:- - TRACKABILITY
- SUSCEPTABILITY TO FOOTFALLS
- SUSCEPTABILITY TO FEEDBACK
Again, no arguments from me 👍 If anyone does have an issue with 'footfalls', 'trackability', 'woofer-pumping' or 'feedback' it would be worth trying to damp the tonearm and/or lower/increase the Arm/Cartridge Resonant Frequency to see if it helps. My only caveat here is that this is a 'band-aid' solution to a far greater inherent problem. If your turntable is not perfectly isolated from Structure-Bourne Feedback between 2Hz-10Hz.....you are likely to experience many other audible problems than 'trackability' 🥴 |
Oh....ok.
As long as you say so.....
|
So now we have most scientists/physicists and importantly.....Ortofon agreeing with my fundamental opening statement This Resonant Frequency has ZERO affect on the sound quality of a particular tonearm/cartridge combination So what exactly is the punishment for those audiophiles who ignore the recommended Resonant Frequency Guidelines as I do....? IF you sometimes play a warped record and IF that record contains subsonic bass information and IF your turntable is mounted on a springy wooden floor and IF you happen to walk on this springy wooden floor when this warped record containing subsonic frequency information is playing.......the cartridge MAY mistrack!!!! 😱 It MAY mistrack.....it's a POSSIBILITY......it's not guaranteed to occur and no-one can tell you the 'likelihood' or 'percentages' because that science has never been studied. I can tell you it's happened to me ONCE in 40 years with a badly warped record (I only have three out of a thousand). And guess what......an OUTER PLATTER RING solved the warped record problem 😃 So if that's the 'worst' thing that can happen to me......is it really worth ignoring HALF the cartridges out there because I might have a high-mass tonearm? Especially when ALL my high-compliance MM cartridges sound their best in my EXTREMELY high-mass FR-66S tonearm? I can understand scientists getting excited about the Arm/Cartridge Resonant Frequency..... It is one of the only true scientific equations which can be tested and proven in the turntable/arm/cartridge assemblage and I think....because of that, they have over-estimated its importance. But here's the real trick....... The 8Hz-12Hz part of the story is NOT science..... Like a magician practicing legerdemain (don't look at my hands)......they slip in the 8Hz-12Hz bit as if it WERE part of the 'Resonant Frequency' science....✋🤚 The 8Hz-12Hz is merely an educated 'Rule-of-Thumb' (that's why Ortofon don't mention it). There is little SCIENCE behind it..... It hasn't been tested, studied, verified, quantified nor analysed. To emphasise the lack of 'real' science behind this subject, it is accepted that science and formulae work in two directions. If x=2y.....then 2y=x One must be able to 'reverse-engineer' REAL science. If an Arm/Cartridge Resonant Frequency of 6Hz or 16Hz is truly a disaster to be avoided.....then science dictates that one must 'recognise' when one HEARS either of these combinations playing. HERE is my Thread 'Hear My Cartridges 🎶'..... There are nearly 150 YouTube recordings of dozens of cartridges with 6 different tonearms on two different turntables. I would estimate there are perhaps 20%-30% recordings with the Arm/Cartridge Resonant Frequency outside the recommended range. If anyone can accurately pick the recordings and define how far 'above' or 'below' the recommended 8-12Hz Resonant Frequency they are.....I may revise my recommendation to completely ignore this malicious MYTH....🤔 |
Thank you Atmasphere for posting that Link to a paper presented 43 years ago. I presume you infer that nothing has changed in the intervening period? As I do with most Reports and Papers......I go firstly to the Conclusions 🙃 In this paper we have pointed out
that traditional specifications like
rumble, wow and flutter and required tracking force are both unreliable and inadequate. Furthermore,
they are strongly influenced by the
actual combination of motor, arm,
cartridge and record, all of which
are often left to random decisions
by the Hi-Fi consumer. By the use
of modern test equipment we have
tried to throw a little light on the
causes and influence of the interface problems between the elements in a turntable. Assisted by listening tests one can conclude that
the fundamental problem creating
parameter is the frequency response of the turntable below
20 Hz. Most modern turntables
ieave much to be desired, typically
they have resonance peaks of 5 —
10dB at 5 — 7 Hz. The first thing
to do is to raise the frequency to 1 5
— 1 8 Hz and then ideally damp the
system to a Q of 0,5, letting response roli off at preferably
1 2 dB/oct.
In pursuit of this goal one should
not make trade offs with respect to
rigidity of the tonearm tube and fixture. Flexing in the arm and other
spurious resonances could then be
the result and destroy the stability
of the stereo image.
Finally in Part 2 we have focused
on a type of distortion that is most
clearly seen in the time domain:
Early reflections. Our investigation
tells us that here is an area which,
at present, has rather poor correlation between the measurement
methods available and the impact
on the sound quality. POOR CORRELATION BETWEEN THE MEASUREMENT METHODS AVAILABLE AND THE IMPACT ON SOUND QUALITY This Resonant Frequency has ZERO affect on the sound quality of a particular tonearm/cartridge combination That's what I said in my opening to this Thread 🧐 But this Link is not primarily concerned with the Arm/Cartridge Resonant Frequency (despite Atmasphere's attempt to suggest it is). It is....as its Title suggests....a Paper on Audible Effects of Mechanical Resonances in Turntables Turntables.....turntables.....TURNTABLES.....?? 🤣 Now to the nitty but not so gritty..... This Paper....although prepared by respected engineers and scientists in good faith in 1957....is NOT a Peer-Reviewed White Paper accepted as SCIENCE. For that to occur......the Testing Procedures and Results need to be independently replicated and consistently duplicated. None of these Tests and Results has been replicated.....nor can they be for the results are entirely dependent on the turntable used, the isolation employed, the tonearms used and the cartridges and headshells selected. This Paper is NOT SCIENCE and I would have expected a qualified Electrical Engineer to recognise this 🤔 The perception of wow and flutter, as well as rumble all affect the 'SOUND'. Rumble goobles up amplifier power and you can bet that increases IMD, which affects the 'SOUND' "and you can BET that increases IMD which affects the SOUND" Hmmm.....sounds like a real scientific argument to me 🤣 So now we have Atmasphere introducing 'Wow and Flutter', 'Rumble' and 'IMD' all of which are mentioned in the Paper he introduced on TURNTABLES.....and none of which has been mentioned before by REAL scientists (like Kirkus and Tonywin) in relation to Tonearm Resonant Frequency. Why don't you point out the audible effects of all these artefacts in my YouTube Videos so that people actually have some 'baseline' for the horrors that you continue to warn us about.....? The whole premise of this thread is patently ridiculous! knock it off. Nothing to see here Atmasphere says.... Don't listen for yourselves (which will cost you nothing)..... Believe me and what I say because I know what you should listen to 🤥 |
And now that you've re-entered the 'fray' Atmasphere......
Being an amplifier designer and manufacturer.....you would have all the electronic gear available to show us exactly how a cartridge's Frequency Response Plot changes with Arm/Cartridge Resonant Frequency?
Here's your chance to put me out of my misery and prove me WRONG!!!!
Not scientific enough for you......?🤗 |
Ahhh...how things change yet remain the same 🤣 Here's just a sample of the multitude of exchanges between the new 'best' friends on another Thread.... 01-15-2020 3:11amDear atmasphere : You already had all the time and opportunities to show the evidence I asked about on that specific: " limit trace....".
Today I'm totally convinced that you has no evidence about evidence that we can duplicate in a system or at least evidence.
So Palmer was rigth ( years ago. ) when he proved that your " limit trace..." statement is FALSE.
For my part end of the issue due that now I can confirm that the ones that like me that think that " limit trace.."" does not exist we all are rigth and that's what we need to know thank's to your " answer ".
So never mind about, subject solved.
Regards and enjoy the MUSIC NOT DISTORTIONS,
R.
01-15-2020 3:55amYour post is not an answer to what I asked to you: Simply put, I've answered your question directly several times in this thread alone. I've been avoiding saying this, but at this point its apparent that you don't understand the answer; you respond with literally:
Bla, bla, bla, bla, bla, Again, electrical damping of an electro-mechanical transducer results in less high frequency output of that transducer. I suggest you study the topic with the same sort of energy that you've used in your attacks.
Most of the real entertaining Posts from Raul have been deleted by the Moderators....😂 |
This is what a Cartridge's Frequency Response Plot looks like (for those like Atmasphere who do not know). So let's cut to the Chase.....What can we deduce from Atmasphere's contributions to this Thread? - A cartridge's Frequency response is unaltered by the Arm/Cartridge Resonant Frequency just as I predicted
- There is not ONE Peer-Reviewed accepted Scientific White Paper proving the existence, extent or affects on the audible experience due to a mismatched Arm/Cartridge Resonant Frequency
- When trying to find one.....Atmasphere produces a quaint, anachronistic 63 year-old UNSCIENTIFIC paper on TURNTABLES hoping you won't read it.....because it concludes exactly what I have been saying.
- Atmasphere claims it was easy to find this 'evidence' (I'll bet it was) and that there are many more out there.....Please please show us.....🤥
- When forced to admit the article he had posted proved my case....he then retreated to his usual vague unrelated parables
There are several threads on how to reduce woofers from flopping about when playing LPs on this site. and with a lot of loudspeakers if you play material that is too low, the woofers will not sound right as they flop about. Note the scientific language..... Yes...."woofers will not sound right as they flop about" because the SET-UP of the particular system is poorly isolated from Structure-Bourne Feedback. Fix the problem.....don't look for an innocent victim. I'm convinced that Atmasphere and Mijostyn have both experienced this woofer-pumping and mistracking due to their poorly set-up systems....and we all know about RAUL'S DISASTROUS SET-UP 😱 Is it any wonder he prefers digital....?! 😝 - None of these ardent adherents can actually SHOW you what mistracking and woofer-pumping (due to resonant Frequency) actually looks and sounds like.
- None of them has the guts to demonstrate these artefacts on my dozens of YOUTUBE VIDEOS with mismatched Resonant Frequencies where you can hear and SEE the woofers (note to Mijostyn)
- They will all claim that I may not be able to hear any problems but they are there nevertheless
- But THEY are totally unable to hear or see the problems on my actual videos
- They will then claim that the Videos are not of sufficient quality to hear any of the artefacts despite the fact than delicate, nuanced differences between ALL my cartridges are easily able to be discerned by many Posters on my Hear My Cartridges Thread
So here is the crux of what the defenders of this Myth are able to say.... You might not be able to actually HEAR all the damage, distortions mistracking and other artefacts (because we can't either).....but TRUST us.....they are there nevertheless. I'd rather trust a band of Caribbean Pirates trying to sell me a parrot 🦜 |
Before I address the interesting comments and Links posted by Dover and The Professor (Timeltel)......I need to ask a serious question that has been bothering me 🤔 Why is it so important for a few Posters to continually, repetitively and monotonously gnaw and harp, howl and vent, rail and condemn against a personal honest viewpoint that is contradictory to theirs? I get it when they make crystal clear their viewpoints the first time they do it? I'm not trying to convince THEM to change their viewpoints..... Why do they insist on trying to change mine? 🧐 They will probably claim they are doing it to 'protect all you newbies out there from destroying your audio lives' by actually CONSIDERING my viewpoint. Atmasphere even wants to have my opinions 'struck out'.....'banned' 🤯 If my Thread were a book.....he would have it burned in a public square and on this 75th anniversary of the liberation of Auschwitz Concentration Camp.....it is wise to reflect on where this ideology leads.....
No....their outrage is not altruistic.
It is all about ego and 'power'....
They NEED you to believe that THEY know more than you....
If I read someone's opinion on a Forum that claims that valve amplifiers are inherently better than solid-state....do I really need to harangue that Thread to attempt to prove him wrong?
I say 'fine'.....as long as you're happy.
If that same Poster produces charts and technical reports to 'prove' his case.....do I then think to myself "I'm never going to listen to another solid-state amplifier again"?
There seems to me, to be something inherently 'twisted' about people like this 🙃
I even provide over a hundred YOUTUBE VIDEOS of my System playing dozens of varying, revealing and demanding tracks (not the bland 'close-miked' female and one guitar Audiophile-Approved track favoured by Hi-Fi Shows) so that you can listen for yourself to see if you can hear the problems the industry is warning you about.
Do these three individuals take the opportunity to reveal their 'superiority' by actually pointing out the problems they can HEAR on my videos?
It's much easier to 'poo-poo' the videos than reveal their hearing deficiencies or admitting their fallibility.
Do they take the opportunity to post their OWN videos to show what a 'REAL' system (like theirs') sounds like?
Don't hold your breath because that would be the ultimate revelation of the 'Emperor's Clothes'.
Now I'm off for our regular Thursday 'Lunch With The Boys' where we sit around for three hours devouring bowls of Laksas and an entire bottle of the finest blended Scotch between the three of us 🥃
Dover and the Professor will have to wait....😉
Oh...and @mijostyn.....I think I've discovered the Parrot the Pirates are trying to sell me. |
Thanks for your response Thom which is in line with Dover’s advice.
I will certainly address this suggestion in detail tomorrow.
Right now....Federer and Djokovic start their Semi-Final in the Aust Open.....
Thanks for the kind words Professor....I always take your advice seriously 🤔 |
Thanks again Professor.....but a lot of time has passed since I responded to Kirkus’ Post and I would like to clarify my thoughts since that time.
I also really want to address the points brought up by Dover, Thom and Chris as they are important.....however this will still have to wait as I need to prepare for this evening’s dinner party which will include the attendances of my Luncheon Buddies (and their spouses) 🍽
Conversation will of course be appropriate for the female company....although after even more whisky......it can become quite loud and raunchy 🤪
|
I missed the Post Chris.......Perhaps the Parrot was the rare NORWEGIAN BLUE and has "joined the Choir Invisible".....? |
I understand the suggestion of experimenting with differing weights and their respective positions in order to ’alter’ the Arm/Cartridge Resonant Frequency. I do have various different Fidelity Research weights to use on all my FR-64S and FR-66S tonearms......and have done so 🤗 Please note one important fact which I think everyone has ignored in my particular case....... - I have heard EVERY cartridge I have owned (70-80) in a recommended Arm/Cartridge Resonant Frequency range in MY SYSTEM
Now let me explain some logistics related to MY situation compared to most others.... - I have 6 tonearms on two different turntables allowing for 6 different cartridges to be heard in rapid succession
- I have another 30-40 cartridges, 10 of which I regularly listen to
- With each change of cartridge (other than the 6 already mounted) I need to firstly adjust VTF followed by VTA followed by Antiskate followed by Resistance and Capacitance (for all MM/MI) followed by listening to my ’Test Tracks’ to ensure maximised performance
- Every cartridge I own has been tested in at least two different headshells and two different arms to find the ’best’ combination in MY SYSTEM
Do I think there is potential for ’tweaking’ and ’futzing’ to MAXIMISE the performance of ALL my combinations....? Of course I accept this 🤗 I simply do not have the desire to add ANOTHER ’variable’ to this constantly performed ritual 🤪 Now ’riddle’ me this Batman........Ignoring all your personal individual experiences.....what would YOU do if... - You heard better SOUND in your Systems in many cases where the Arm/Cartridge RF was OUTSIDE the recommended range?
Would you... - Listen to the combination which sounded the ’best’
- Listen to the combination which sounded ’worse’ but complied with the recommended Arm/Cartridge RF
In a future Post.....I will attempt to let you hear for yourselves (via my Videos) the results of ’Compliance’ and ’Non-Compliance’ in MY SYSTEM....some of which Dover was involved with. I predict that within the next 5 years, there will be less and less tolerance for subjective Statements on Audio which are unsupported by science or by the ’audible’ evidence of YouTube Videos. The days of ’Raul’ are over....🎉🤥😝 |
Here are two Videos of the same cartridge in the same arm on the same turntable with all the same cables, electronics and speakers. Because of the simple change to the Headshell employed and the corresponding position of Counterweight....the Resonant Frequency of both these Arm/Cartridge combinations is DIFFERENT. One complies with the recommended 8Hz-12Hz Resonant Frequency whilst the other is OUTSIDE the recommended. RESONANT FREQUENCY -A RESONANT FREQUENCY -BI specially chose a track with high dynamics and very deep bass cuts. If the cartridge was going to jump out of the track.....it would do it here 😝 |
