Fun with vinyl measurements

[Thomas_A]

Don’t recall I’ve seen both tracks compared using the JVC and Clearaudio TRS1007. @JP ? @Balle Clorin ?

 

[Balle Clorin]

I have JVC 1007 but did not buy 1005 due to the drop I, saw somewhere . Possibly in the Frequency test record thread, or something JP wrote..

 

[Balle Clorin]

View attachment 480695


I was quite surprised to see response change with the new sorbothane mat. I thought first it was RIAA difference but even with the same RIAA I get er a lower amplitude on the high frequency resonance with the new thinner( 3mm vs 5mm) Sorbothane mat form Isolate IT. Plot below without clamp(weight)

Is it the Sorbothane or the 2mm height difference, hard to tell, I cannot go back the sticky mat is stuck. It woul be nice if somebody could repeat and verify the observation

View attachment 480698

some more data on the effect of changing mat.... never seen so much effect before, is it the VTA change or the extreme sticky properties of Sorbothane that effect the vinyl resonance? But the sticky mat is against the platter, the record and mat have a plastfilm in between.. so that leaves 2mm VTA difference as explanation

 

[Thomas_A]

some more data on the effect of changing mat.... never seen so much effect before, is it the VTA change or the extreme sticky properties of Sorbothane that effect the vinyl resonance? But the sticky mat is against the platter, the record and mat have a plastfilm in between.. so that leaves 2mm VTA difference as explanation
View attachment 482109

My experince with VTA change by cartridge tilt is no change whatsoever. A bit suprising result you have. I use double mats, rubber+felt. I have never tested the response using either of them or double. Have you tested more mats? Red curve is a bit more wavy as well.

 

[Balle Clorin]

What could have happened is something when I removed the stylus while I worked on the platter…

 

[Thomas_A]

What could have happened is something when I removed the stylus while I worked on the platter…

Try remove and insert again. I’ve occasionally had some issues with channel imbalance that was fixed by refitting the stylus.

 

[JP]

Am I correct in understanding that there are only two test records (JVC TRS-1007 & JVC TRS-1005) on which there is no drop in high frequencies on the internal tracks?

No. Almost without fail test records that weren't intended to measure RIAA response are cut CV. Being down ~20dB at 20kHz compared to a RIAA cut isn't that difficult a hurdle in playback, and we shouldn't forget that signals can be cut that no current stylus could ever manage to trace. For any practical consideration the problem isn't one of cutting, it's one of playback. Frequency, amplitude, and groove diameter together are the parameters that matter on the record.

Below is a plot of the outer (~132mm) and inner (~68m) left channel sweep tracks of TRS-1005 taken with styli of r 2.5μm, 6μm, and 10μm. The first being an MM has a steep HF roll off - at some point I should do these again with an MC MR, or an MM MR of very low inductance. Also keep in mind that there's a "cutting" tolerance here and we don't know the actual cut levels for a given frequency. IOW, the variations of the MR response are more likely to be of record tolerance than having to with diameter influence.

 

[JP]

What could have happened is something when I removed the stylus while I worked on the platter…

I'd expect influence from the mat to present with far less q - not a second order effect that spans octaves. This looks more akin to the suspension elastomer temperature changing a handful of my degrees, or a few of yours. For the things you've been measuring of late, you're in to the territory where ~5 repetitions, error bars, means, etc. are warranted. Check out the scatter plot in this post.

 

[Balle Clorin]

I did not plan the test nor expect this change so runs are some weeks apart temperature may be 2C different . Not in the mood to rip off the Sorbothane and start over .. in a more systematic way. I may pick it up again when I get the Stanton 680s I just bought.

What the Sorbothane did NOT do is a bit interesting, break through of motor cogging (67hz) was not dampedned at all not even with Sorbothane between cartridge and headshell .

 

[JP]

Temp, and humidity.

 

[Balle Clorin]

@JP , you are right. Temperature effect on cartridge frequency response. AT 95E headshell temperature. I think It is safe to conclude that the variation I saw in 95E response was due to the older recordings I compared with was at a higher temperature. 3C does actually make a difference

here with measured room temerature..

Found on Josh pages..

 

[morillon]

smart test vinyl – clearaudio analogshop

This single vinyl test record optimizes your turntable’s performance by precisely checking rotation speed, channel balance, crosstalk, antiskating setting …

www.analogshop.de

New for me...
Small lp
Some essential things
(just the big mistake for the use of tracking tests, not at all suitable for anti-skating, not even in 50um, already a high value)

Has anyone tried...? if the pressing is truly high quality... ?
(In my opinion, a reasonable price for something "new", if well pressed)
;-)

 

[Balle Clorin]

Looks good I think. Anti-skate 50-80um is OK I think, every non-defective cartridge can track 50um even without AS , so no use in getting lower, setting Anti-Skate for 90-100 will be overkill/overcompensating. Only thing missing is a frequency response , could have been sweep, or pink noise for normal folks

 

[morillon]

Looks good I think. Anti-skate 50-80um is OK I think, every non-defective cartridge can track 50um even without AS , so no use in getting lower, setting Anti-Skate for 90-100 will be overkill/overcompensating. Only thing missing is a frequency response , could have been sweep, or pink noise for normal folks

I don't quite agree with you about anti-skating... 50um... 12dB... that's already pretty high... not to be exceeded in my opinion... ;-) 80um..is big...!

You have to observe the average levels of what you're listening to ;-)

(Retippers have long observed the excessive use of anti-skating due to the trend of observing tests ultra-trackability, especially in the 80s...with the forgetting to go back down to values corresponding to the "useful" values of everyday recordings...)

torture tracks cannot be used to adjust this precise point for everyday use at much lower levels of engraving....since it is proportional to this one
(In the 70s, a cartdfige capable of passing 15dB was already considered to be of good quality, capable of passing most recordings without any problem, except in rare cases.)

 

[Balle Clorin]

My experience is that a cartridge that has problems with 60um on the Ortofon record had problems reproducing music peaks without mistracking.
Setting antiskate or VTF to not doing 50um well caused continuous mistracking on music

 

[aaaakkkk]

No. Almost without fail test records that weren't intended to measure RIAA response are cut CV. Being down ~20dB at 20kHz compared to a RIAA cut isn't that difficult a hurdle in playback, and we shouldn't forget that signals can be cut that no current stylus could ever manage to trace. For any practical consideration the problem isn't one of cutting, it's one of playback. Frequency, amplitude, and groove diameter together are the parameters that matter on the record.

Below is a plot of the outer (~132mm) and inner (~68m) left channel sweep tracks of TRS-1005 taken with styli of r 2.5μm, 6μm, and 10μm. The first being an MM has a steep HF roll off - at some point I should do these again with an MC MR, or an MM MR of very low inductance. Also keep in mind that there's a "cutting" tolerance here and we don't know the actual cut levels for a given frequency. IOW, the variations of the MR response are more likely to be of record tolerance than having to with diameter influence.

View attachment 482166
View attachment 482167

Unfortunately, I see this picture only on a very small percentage of releases (when comparing LP vs. CD), and even on the test disc CA-TRS-1007 we see a drop in the high-frequency region on the inner track, and it is very difficult to believe that this can be explained by mastering or an error.

 

[JP]

Unfortunately, I see this picture only on a very small percentage of releases (when comparing LP vs. CD), and even on the test disc CA-TRS-1007 we see a drop in the high-frequency region on the inner track, and it is very difficult to believe that this can be explained by mastering or an error.

Cutting a music record and a test record are two completely different things; confounding them doesn't help.

 

[JP]

@JP , you are right.

Once a year, on average. Thankfully the clock resets Jan 1, so I've something to look forward to.

Thanks for taking the time to figure it out. Measuring this stuff can be a bitch.

 

[Thomas_A]

No. Almost without fail test records that weren't intended to measure RIAA response are cut CV. Being down ~20dB at 20kHz compared to a RIAA cut isn't that difficult a hurdle in playback, and we shouldn't forget that signals can be cut that no current stylus could ever manage to trace. For any practical consideration the problem isn't one of cutting, it's one of playback. Frequency, amplitude, and groove diameter together are the parameters that matter on the record.

Below is a plot of the outer (~132mm) and inner (~68m) left channel sweep tracks of TRS-1005 taken with styli of r 2.5μm, 6μm, and 10μm. The first being an MM has a steep HF roll off - at some point I should do these again with an MC MR, or an MM MR of very low inductance. Also keep in mind that there's a "cutting" tolerance here and we don't know the actual cut levels for a given frequency. IOW, the variations of the MR response are more likely to be of record tolerance than having to with diameter influence.

View attachment 482166
View attachment 482167

≈0.5 dB 10-20 kHz drop for the MR is a bit less vs. the CA-TRS1007 tracks(1-2 dB). Which is not outer vs. inner track but closer to outer vs. middle track. Using my previous CD track as reference track I get around 1 dB less @10-20 kHz in track 4&5 vs track 2. I would say they are in the ballpark but the CA-TRS1007 shows highest drop. Again a bit curious if the JVC TRS1007 is the same or if this is a Clearaudio specific issue.

 

[JP]

≈0.5 dB 10-20 kHz drop for the MR is a bit less vs. the CA-TRS1007 tracks(1-2 dB). Which is not outer vs. inner track but closer to outer vs. middle track. Using my previous CD track as reference track I get around 1 dB less @10-20 kHz in track 4&5 vs track 2. I would say they are in the ballpark but the CA-TRS1007 shows highest drop. Again a bit curious if the JVC TRS1007 is the same or if this is a Clearaudio specific issue.

My 2A1 track is damaged.