Definitely report back!
-
WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required. There are many reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!
Modern Record Playback?
- Thread starter mppix
- Start date
- Thread Starter
- #162
First impression is very good. I'll stay with some measurements for now.
The Puffin has some (average) level meters
Also, the Puffin speed test shows 0.0% speed error but this is probably expected from a digitally controlled direct drive turntable
If anyone else has the Puffin, I'm curious what your measurements are.
Now, I need to use and listen to the system more
The Puffin has some (average) level meters
- Turntable on, spinning, stylus up hovering over record: -92db(L), -88db(R) (the RCA cable R channel touches the power cord and gets also to -92db if it is held by hand -> need to "route" the cables better)
- Turntable spinning, stylus in run-out groove: -58db to -62db with a 5 year old record, no cleaning
- Turntable playing: varies widely with records and tracks, typically between -20db to -32db with peaks to about -3db (!)
Also, the Puffin speed test shows 0.0% speed error but this is probably expected from a digitally controlled direct drive turntable
If anyone else has the Puffin, I'm curious what your measurements are.
Now, I need to use and listen to the system more
I just spot checked a couple of LPs, I get higher peak levels at the DAC (as high as 0 dB) with average levels around -35 to -20. At the ADC I get much lower peaks (about -10) with average levels around -50 to -30 dB. I'm not sure if the DAC measurement is relevant for me as I am using the Toslink output.
For the dead groove (between tracks) I get about -52 at the DAC, -72 at the ADC. As you found, about -90 or better with the turntable on.
I use +54 dB gain at the input stage and have the output at 100%.
Mppx and I are just reading off the peak and average levels from the Puffin. I don't know what curve it uses. I will inquire.
- Thread Starter
- #166
If I understand the Puffin setup correctly, one wants to adjust the "gain" to maximize the input (ADC) level. A good starting point is probably ParksAudio's gain calculator, parksaudiollc.com/gain.html
The goal is to maximize the level and therefore the ADC resolution but without ever getting clipping at the input. I actually have to drop the recommended gain from 41db to 40db for the AT740ML. Looking at the level meter, there is a clipping counter (number that appears instead of "av" or "pk").
Output (DAC) probably looks at digital levels and can be adjusted with the volume control. I'd think it applies to both digital and analog levels. DAC clipping seems aok can be useful to limit the propagation of loud pops and clicks. However, regular loud music should not clip the output (for obvious reasons).
What cartrige/turntable do you use?
I have a 1200GR/Grado Reference3 cartridge (low output MM). I don't worry that much about occasional clipping peaks. I had some correspondence with Shannon Parks on the subject (setting the ADC input levels) he told me that I shouldn't stress the occasional peak indication, they are managed internally by the Puffin, and I don't. I set mine at 54 dB gain partly using the guide, partly by ear, and partly to get a decent level for when I record an LP. I lower it or raise it slightly for LPs that have somewhat non-standard mastering, but that is almost never, maybe a couple of times.
Last edited:
I don't believe that it makes any difference as far as signal to noise is concerned, at least not with the Puffin. Richard Grado recommended the low output version vs. the high output, and that is why I bought that configuration. Best as I can recall, he said that the low output cartridges are slightly more detailed, and he told me why, but I don't recall the reason. I traded up (via Grado's quite generous trade in program) from a high output Sonata. I did not notice any difference in s/n between the two. In all other respects, the Reference3 is a somewhat better cartridge, and as Richard said, pulls a lot of detail out of the groove.
Low output cartridges have less mass attached to the cantilever (little coil against big coil or magnet). That gives more "freedom" to capture tiny vibrations from the groove -> more detail.
Theoretically higher amplification (low output) have worst SNR, but ... with good SUTs / Trafo ... The audible difference is close to nothing. Even less with digital amplification like the Puffin.
Theoretically higher amplification (low output) have worst SNR, but ... with good SUTs / Trafo ... The audible difference is close to nothing. Even less with digital amplification like the Puffin.
JP
Major Contributor
What constitutes a tiny vibration?
Check a groove photo with an electronic microscope ... the groove is thinner than a human hair. Then, think about a tiny diamond "running" inside that (horizontally/vertically) generating fast movements in the cantilever.
That movements creates the voltage in the cartridge motor (1 mv in the Grado cartridge).
Everything's tiny in what I told you
JP
Major Contributor
Check a groove photo with an electronic microscope ... the groove is thinner than a human hair. Then, think about a tiny diamond "running" inside that (horizontally/vertically) generating fast movements in the cantilever.
That movements creates the voltage in the cartridge motor (1 mv in the Grado cartridge).
Everything's tiny in what I told you
I know how it works. This doesn’t answer the question.
i don't entirely understand your question, but I'll give a try. I understand what Richard told me (more detail) and what mike70 said (tiny vibration) to refer to subtle micro dynamics that occur in music, such as dynamic variations in particular instruments of an ensemble (as opposed to the overall changes in dynamics), and the interplay between the harmonics of different instruments (or harmonics of notes on the same instrument played simultaneously) create subtle changes in timbre. A stylus constrained by a heavier coil won't track those movements as accurately (if at all) or as clearly as a cartridge with a lighter coil. The musical notes will be there, but the dynamics and variations in timbre will not be as perceptible or clear.
A somewhat obscure LP that has all of this is a jazz recording, "Naima" by Hannibal Marvin Peterson & quartet, a direct to disc recording released in Japan on East World, and generally available used, not very expensive (at least the last that I looked).
Is this what you meant?
JP
Major Contributor
You're claiming that 1) all LOMC cartridges have less moving mass than all HOMC cartridges and 2), being generous, that a cartridge that doesn't meet whatever this moving mass threshold is chronically miss-tracks.
At a minimum a considered justification would be appropriate.
1) yes ... that's why they have less output (lesser copper)
2) i don't talked about "mistrack" ... far from that ... i talked about "better detail".
a decent cartridge doesn´t mistrack ... a very good cartridge have more inner details and that goes to better vocal definition, instruments definition, soundstage definition .. if the rest of the system can show that (speakers / room interaction basically).
we're talking about "tiny differences", not night and day differences, for a basic audio system without too much work on acoustics or turntable adjustments .. is a silly stuff.
2) i don't talked about "mistrack" ... far from that ... i talked about "better detail".
a decent cartridge doesn´t mistrack ... a very good cartridge have more inner details and that goes to better vocal definition, instruments definition, soundstage definition .. if the rest of the system can show that (speakers / room interaction basically).
we're talking about "tiny differences", not night and day differences, for a basic audio system without too much work on acoustics or turntable adjustments .. is a silly stuff.
JP
Major Contributor
Point 1 is false. There are plenty of LOMC examples that have higher moving mass than HOMC examples, as there are plenty of MM examples that also have lower moving mass than many LOMC. Blanket statements don't work.
Point 2, how does higher moving mass cause this purported detail to disappear? "That gives more "freedom" to capture tiny vibrations from the groove -> more detail." If the stylus maintains contact with the groove wall it is reading everything that's there. If it's not reading something that's there than it would have to have lost contact with the groove wall.
You subjective descriptions are quite meaningless in any technical context and are things that are easily and more likely attributable to factors such as channel separation and frequency response.
