Dynavector XV-1s and JMW 10.5i question


I recently purchased a new Dyna XV-1s for my Aries 3 and JMW 10.5i. I had a buddy set it up and it initially sounded fantastic. Recently I have noticed less air and a slight shift of center image to the right. It's also a bit less involving.

I know he had set the tracking weight at 2.2 grams. The weird thing was he had to put a small dollop of blue tack on the end of the anti-skate rubber ring weights to give it more anti-skate based on test record distortion in the right channel. I'm a complete novice at this stuff so I am a bit lost, but from most threads I have heard that little to no anti-skate should be needed with JMW 10.5i. After discussion with my analogue buddy who et up the cart, he said maybe it needed more anti-skate and blue tack.

I have ordered an Analogue Productions test record for myself and the Fremer DVD. I can (and will) ask my turntable guru buddy to come back and look at things again, but I don't want to 'over-ask' for his help and I want to start to learn about this on my own. Can anyone offer suggestions to help me 'find the magic' again with more air and a better solid center image?
philb7777
Doug,

I hope you are right. I too thought it was a break-in issue, but, with the number of hours involved, the change in sound quality should not be that dramatic. I hope that the Dynavector is indeed a difficult to break in cartridge and that a suspension failure is not involved.

I somewhat disagree with you on test tracks. I use test records with musical tracks that are recorded at increasingly higher modulation levels (Shure obstacle course records) to set VTF and antiskating. The music is monophonic, making it easy to compare how the two channels are behaving when mistracking starts to occur. That is, essentially, the same approach you are advocating in setting VTF using difficult to track music. I really don't have any regular records that mistrack in such a usefully progressive manner as with test tracks.
Larryi,

It's possible the OP has only just noticed the change in sound quality. We all know how tricky these things are, and he is new to vinyl playback at this level.

Perhaps our minor difference in technique stems from how closely and often we tweak VTF? In our case we adjust constantly, usually by less than .01g, to optimize sonics for that session. We even adjust for different LP's, and it's a rare day that I don't make some VTF tweak. We recently had a visit from Braab8 and he could attest to the sonic differences from adjustments of just a few thousandths of a gram. No test record would help with that, it often varies from one LP to another.

Obviously this requires more familiarity with a cartridge (and our whole nutty scene) than the OP yet has. I agree a test record such as you described could help find a certain ballpark, like + or - .1g or so. Very useful. The method I described does too, but you're right that finding a useful LP could be tricky. We just adjust using whatever LP we're playing, since that's what we want to hear.

At any rate, do we agree he should try reducing VTF? It's an easy experiment and useful for building listening skills.
Doug,

I agree it can be a break-in issue. It can also be the listener changing his perspective. Sometimes one gets into a hypercritical mode of listening and will then hear all sorts of things going wrong.

I don't myself fiddle with VTF. My arm (Basis Vector) is extremely difficult to adjust when it comes to VTF. Your use of whatever LP you are playing for adjustment would mean you are listening to something other than mis-tracking, unless you run your cartridges very close to the edge. I don't come close to any kind of obvious mis-tracking on all but a handful of LPs. What you are talking about are very subtle cues being detected by highly trained listeners who must be familiar with all other aspects of the particular system. In short, it is not an approach for a basic setup by someone who is somewhat of a novice. I agree that fine tuning a system is ultimately done by listening to regular records.

Have you used test instruments, like an oscilloscope, or the computer-based systems, like that produced by Feickert? I once had a shop check out my table. They thought my azimuth, which I set by ear, looked a bit off and so they used a test record and an oscilloscope. To their surprise (not mine), I had it dead on the money. I am wondering if test gear can be a fast and reasonable approach to setting something as subtle as azimuth.
My arm (Basis Vector) is extremely difficult to adjust when it comes to VTF.
Easy fix (if you're inclined to bother): buy a few O-rings of a size to fit snugly on your end stub. Sliding them on behind the c/w reduces VTF 2-3 hundredths of a gram per O-ring. Nudging a ring slightly this way or that tweaks VTF by a few thousandths of a gram. Quick, cheap, repeatable and won't mess up your main c/w, which on your arm is indeed even fussier then on my TriPlanar.

Your use of whatever LP you are playing for adjustment would mean you are listening to something other than mis-tracking, unless you run your cartridges very close to the edge.
Good deduction, and right on both counts. We do run VERY close to the edge. Our top cartridge has always performed its best within .01g above the mistracking point on most LP's, one reason we're constantly adjusting.

I've posted before about what we listen for. In brief:
- if VTF is a hair too light, bass response, the weight at the center of each note and MACROdynamic strength fall off just before you reach the point of mistracking
- if VTF is a hair too heavy, HF extension, MICROdynamic "snap", delicate decays and air all suffer (pretty much what Philb7777 is experiencing)

The XV-1S is somewhat less fiddly than our cartridge and has a broader sweet zone, but IME it still likes to be within .02-.04g of mistracking on dynamic LP's.

I don't come close to any kind of obvious mis-tracking on all but a handful of LPs.
Likewise. That's why I advise choosing a "difficult-to-track" passage, especially for those who aren't practiced at fine tuning VTF by ear. Finding the actual mistracking point (and measuring it so you know) provides a cartridge-specific, LP-specific baseline.

Agree this is not for a total novice, but Philb7777 is now sensitized to HF extension and air, and adusting VTF is a skill he must acquire if he wants to advance in this sport. It's also quick and easy to return to the previous setting if he doesn't like the results (by using any decent scale).

We also used to adjust azimuth to minimize crosstalk with mono test tones and a Wally Analog Shop (notch filter + DMM). Like you, after spending hours recording measurements we found we can set azimuth by ear just as accurately, and far quicker. I'm not surprised you do the same. After roughing in by eye it's easy to fine tune when you know what to listen for. If minimizing crosstalk is the goal then what to listen for is self-evident. (That's a quiz, for any who don't know!). ;-)

Apologies to Philb7777 for the semi-threadjack. Hope some of this is useful.

Absolutely no apologies necessary Doug! This one of the many reasons I love Audiogon so much. A great website, but most of what makes it great is the community of audiophiles and enthusiasts. All of you are very insightful and helpful. I will start tweaking away this weekend and let you know of my results. I am definitely a novice, and certainly with the great gear I have and enjoy so much, its about time I start to learn how to manage my vinyl front end.

My buddy came over yesterday and put another dollop of blu-tak that took the distortion out of the right channel on the test record. Then we listened to music and although maybe slightly improved, it still lacked what it once had. Maybe after 150 hours the suspension has changed. I know on thing for sure, its a gob of blu-tak I've got on it for anti-skate.

This weekend I will experiment with anti-skate, damping fluid, and VTA and VTF. I'm going to get a good scale today.

Thanks a ton guys and I will keep everyone posted......