Introducing the Phono Cartridge Measurement Library

[aaaakkkk]

Amazing! Rushing to add this to the index.

Any chance you can record the track on side A? My CA TRS-1007 side Bs tend to droop similarly.

On this device, when digitizing, there are a lot of clicks, on side A there are more clicks, so I chose side B. But both sides were digitized, so it is possible to compare.
Side-A vs Side B

 

[aaaakkkk]

I wonder how azimuth and crosstalk works and also if the laser reads at 20 degree VTA.

 

[USER]

On this device, when digitizing, there are a lot of clicks, on side A there are more clicks, so I chose side B. But both sides were digitized, so it is possible to compare.
Side-A vs Side B

Thanks for this.

Distortion is amazing on this. In fact the test record may be limiting the results. Not sure I've seen -25 to -30dB at around 10kHz often if at all. (I do understand that above that low distortion is exaggerated given the sloping FR.)

May I ask why you don't like the sound of this? (Assuming that is what you meant.) Do you have any music recordings? I'd love to see what corrective EQ can do.

 

[Thomas_A]

I am just curious about why the drop 10-20 kHz. Any chance of sharing the files? Is it something with the digital processing? I know from other discussions that the ELP is very sensitive to dust and that there are many clicks/pops.

 

[eliash]

Was curious about laser record players and found this about ELP, great guy & nice film:
ELP

From the measured FR roll-off at higher frequencies one could reason that the laser beam spot is too wide to properly sense these excursions of the groove. Just like conical or elliptical styli in contrast to micro ridge or shibata styli?

 

[Bob from Florida]

I am just curious about why the drop 10-20 kHz. Any chance of sharing the files? Is it something with the digital processing? I know from other discussions that the ELP is very sensitive to dust and that there are many clicks/pops.

According to their website.

ELP Laser Turntable | No Needle. No Wear.

The world's only turntable that plays vinyl records using laser beams. Zero friction, 100% analog path. Preserving history, one record at a time.

www.elpj.com

There is a new model that improves playback. The site also claims the laser ignores dust and scratches. For that to be true, it would imply significant signal processing to differentiate between recorded music and anything else. I suspect you may be correct about the limits of harmonic distortion being in the recording itself. No prices in the site. Might be the old saying "if you have to ask the price, you cannot afford it".

 

[Thomas_A]

According to their website.

ELP Laser Turntable | No Needle. No Wear.

The world's only turntable that plays vinyl records using laser beams. Zero friction, 100% analog path. Preserving history, one record at a time.

www.elpj.com

There is a new model that improves playback. The site also claims the laser ignores dust and scratches. For that to be true, it would imply significant signal processing to differentiate between recorded music and anything else. I suspect you may be correct about the limits of harmonic distortion being in the recording itself. No prices in the site. Might be the old saying "if you have to ask the price, you cannot afford it".

I usually look at H2 at 5 kHz and the best cartridges have around -35 dB or even close to -40 dB. So that is actually better than the ELP measurements shown here. The ELP does not suffer from the typical resonances at HF so crosstalk remains quite low. Sadly there are no cartridges pushing resonances beyond 30 kHz available as new. But if the drop is due to the laser being to wide to fit, it is not better than a conical.

 

[Bob from Florida]

I usually look at H2 at 5 kHz and the best cartridges have around -35 dB or even close to -40 dB. So that is actually better than the ELP measurements shown here. The ELP does not suffer from the typical resonances at HF so crosstalk remains quite low. Sadly there are no cartridges pushing resonances beyond 30 kHz available as new. But if the drop is due to the laser being to wide to fit, it is not better than a conical.

Laser being "too wide" is difficult to swallow considering CD, DVD, and Bluray lasers. Has to be by design. Still, a neat "niche" product!

 

[aaaakkkk]

Thanks for this.

Distortion is amazing on this. In fact the test record may be limiting the results. Not sure I've seen -25 to -30dB at around 10kHz often if at all. (I do understand that above that low distortion is exaggerated given the sloping FR.)

May I ask why you don't like the sound of this? (Assuming that is what you meant.) Do you have any music recordings? I'd love to see what corrective EQ can do.

It seemed to me that this device could show as accurately as possible what was recorded on the record, yes, I knew that the laser would capture scratches and debris, but I needed to find out with what parameters (channel separation and distortion) these records were recorded. And what is the result? Almost 2 percent distortion at 1 kHz, this is terrible!!! and 27 dB separation on an Ortofon Test Record record.

 

[JP]

I haven't read through this, but the graphic is what I was looking for. 2.5-3um is the minor radius of an MR, so it should be able to do at least that good (if the spec is correct).

Winyl

płyty winylowe winyl ciepły dźwięk regulacja gramofonu wkładka przedwzmacniacz

zrozumiecaudio.blogspot.com

 

[USER]

And what is the result? Almost 2 percent distortion at 1 kHz, this is terrible!!!

Yeah, I think that I got a little too excited about the distortion figures. To me it looked like the figures rounded close to -40dB at 1kHz (since the channel discrepancy could be due to any number of factors and I tend to give the benefit of the doubt to be better channel), which I assumed were close to the test record limit, and I went straight to 10kHz.

Forgot that something like the Shure V15 V-MR can get to around -45dB there and that it is close to -25dB at 10kHz. So yeah, the results aren't spectacular overall.

 

[IlyaP]

Index updated. Phew.

Wanted to go back to my shure measurements, on the updated index. To read the messages again. But, only my measurements for the 95ML are there. Neither the nagaoka mp-500 nor the Shure with different styluses got there after the index update.

Should this be considered as my measurements not meeting any criteria?

 

[USER]

Wanted to go back to my shure measurements, on the updated index. To read the messages again. But, only my measurements for the 95ML are there. Neither the nagaoka mp-500 nor the Shure with different styluses got there after the index update.

Should this be considered as my measurements not meeting any criteria?

Oh, I think I was waiting to see if we could figure out if there was an issue with the loading figures or not. *I* personally still think they are off. I'll add them, but perhaps you can make a note that the loading may be a bit higher. Didn't mean to ignore them.

 

[acd]

Nagaoka MP-300 with MP-500 stylus. Tracks 100mu on the Ortofon test record.

MP-300
VTF: 1.7g (digital VTF showed 1.68 pm 0.02), Antiskating 1.0-1.1 (Technics scale).
VTA: The lower headshell line is parallel to the turntable platter surface (the line orthogonal to the azimuth correction plane).
SRA: With the above VTA and VTF (within manufacturer limits), I assume that SRA is according to specifications.
LTA: Adjustment not necessary.

MP-300 & MP-500 stylus
VTF: 1.7g (digital VTF showed 1.67 pm 0.02), Antiskating 1.0-1.1 (Technics scale).
VTA, SRA & LTA as above.

MP-500 added for reference.
VTF: 1.7g (digital VTF showed 1.66 pm 0.02), Antiskating 1.0-1.1 (Technics scale).
VTA, SRA & LTA as above.

Measurements:
MP-300

MP-300 & MP-500

MP-500

Notes / comments:
I measured the MP-300H sitting in its original headshell.
The MP-500 sits in a Korf headshell. Except for the cartridge bodies, this is the only difference.

 

[acd]

What is the capacitance load sensitivity of Nagaoka MP-500? Below, I use a constant 47kOhm impedance load for all capacitance settings.


~50pF (0 pF in phono stage)

~100pF (50 pF in phono stage)

~150pF (100 pF in phono stage)

~200pF (150 pF in phono stage)

~270pF (220 pF in phono stage)

 

[mwj]

Grado Sonata 3, well-broken-in.

Playback chain:

• CA-TRS-1007 (fresh, minimal playback time)
• Technics 1500c
• Grado Sonata 3
• Funk Tonstudiotechnik BS-2V2 phono cable @ 42pF/m
• Michael Fidler Spartan 20 @ 120pF, 50kΩ
• UAD Arrow Interface, recorded at -18 dBFS.

 

[USER]

Comparison of two well-broken-in cartridges after preamp switch. First is Grado Sonata 3, second is AT VM95SH.

Playback chain:

• CA-TRS-1007 (fresh, minimal playback time)
• Technics 1500c
• Grado Sonata 3 vs. AT VM95SH
• Funk Tonstudiotechnik BS-2V2 phono cable @ 42pF/m
• Michael Fiedler Spartan 20 @ 120pF, 50kΩ
• UAD Arrow Interface, recorded at -18 dBFS.

View attachment 466196
View attachment 466199

Thanks for this. The Grado seems like a cartridge that hasn't been thought about since the early 1970s, lol.

I do have to ask that if you want the AT VM95SH included in the index to please make a separate post for it following the usual protocol. Cheers.

 

[mwj]

Audio-Technica VM95SH, well-broken-in.

Playback chain:

• CA-TRS-1007 (fresh, minimal playback time)
• Technics 1500c
• AT VM95SH
• Funk Tonstudiotechnik BS-2V2 phono cable @ 42pF/m
• Michael Fidler Spartan 20 @ 120pF, 50kΩ
• UAD Arrow Interface, recorded at -18 dBFS.

 

[mwj]

About my Grado Sonata 3 measurements above. They seem match to my current feelings about them quite well. The voicing and body might be appealing at times but there is something that just doesn't sit well - to my ears at least. Looking at the measurements it could be related to the combination of dialed back presence followed by the hyped treble or the high 3rd harmonics distortions becoming apparent when tracks get dense. The VM95SH in comparison not only measures better in frequency and distortion but also feels more relaxed to my ears. Something that I wouldn't have been guessed when I bought the Sonata 3 but well ... I recorded several regular tracks in parallel to compare and verify. Yes, the VM95SH is more clean and relaxed on my ears and it tracks noticeably better.

 

[USER]

About my Grado Sonata 3 measurements above. They seem match to my current feelings about them quite well. The voicing and body might be appealing at times but there is something that just doesn't sit well - to my ears at least. Looking at the measurements it could be related to the combination of dialed back presence followed by the hyped treble or the high 3rd harmonics distortions becoming apparent when tracks get dense. The VM95SH in comparison not only measures better in frequency and distortion but also feels more relaxed to my ears. Something that I wouldn't have been guessed when I bought the Sonata 3 but well ... I recorded several regular tracks in parallel to compare and verify. Yes, the VM95SH is more clean and relaxed on my ears and it tracks noticeably better.

The "dialed back presence" on the Grado makes a lot of sense given the dip in that very important treble area around 5kHz. There's generally not that much audio information above 10kHz on LPs so I am not sure that its resonance is making *that* much of a difference but, obviously, YMMV. I do think that a lot of the difference comes down to the Shibata stylus in comparison to the low-quality elliptical one on the Grado. The latter would definitely have increased distortion as the record plays. The FR would also droop much more in comparison. Remember that these sweeps are from the start of the record, so they are pretty much best case scenario. The difference should only increase as they play. Yikes! The cartridges are simply not anywhere near in class. (They sort of tell us the history of cartridge quality advancement from 1970-1980, roughly speaking, which was pretty astonishing.)

If you have the means of sharing the recordings with us, please do so!

Addendum: I highly recommend you compare sweeps from the middle of the record FR tracks on CA TRS-1007. That can help clarify my comments. It could be a wild ride!