Objective measurements of phono cartridges

[March Audio]

No, I am not arguing that. I thought my assertions have been really clear so far. That being there are actual vinyl records cut from very dynamic recordings without the use of limiters, compression, EQ or summing the bass to mono. It has been asserted that such records do not exist and can not be made. I am asserting they do exist and have been made. I have supported that assertion by citing examples such as the King Super Analogue LPs, and provided excellent documentation from the company itself in support of my assertions. That is all I have argued on this subject.

But the limiters, compression, EQ and mono bass are there for a reason; vinyl simply cant support unlimited, uncompressed, non eq'd and stereo bass. The whole premise of straight through cutting to vinyl is flawed.

 

[Wombat]

The sleeve information contained only one piece of information that may differentiate the SAD cutting process from others, i.e. the 'extra deep grooves' - 30 t0 280 vs 30 to 80 microns on typical recordings. The stylus cleaning and set-up advice may indicate possible marginal tracking issues.

Most of the cover notes is just 'blurb'. It is hard to believe the technical staff developed special vacuum tubes for a few amps.

 

[March Audio]

..and how well does your cartridge deal with 3.5 times the normal tip displacement?

 

[tomelex]

The sleeve information contained only one piece of information that may differentiate the SAD cutting process from others, i.e. the 'extra deep grooves' - 30 t0 280 vs 30 to 80 microns on typical recordings. The stylus cleaning and set-up advice may indicate possible marginal tracking issues.

Most of the cover notes is just 'blurb'. It is hard to believe the technical staff developed special vacuum tubes for a few amps.

You and I both do not believe a new tube was developed, I saw that as well but it just added to the "blurb" as you call it, sending more red flags up. Audiofool tactics for sure.

 

[Wombat]

Use red left, blue right 3D glasses.


I am wondering if extra cutting depth means a groove in the bottom of a steep 'canyon' or a wider groove? Either way, the cartridge tip profile may need consideration if the groove is beyond the accepted standards.

One of the audiophile myths is that thicker discs means deeper grooves. If wider grooves, the playing time may be reduced.

Vinyl to die for: http://www.synthgear.com/2010/music-misc/make-your-ashes-into-a-record

A few specs.: http://www7a.biglobe.ne.jp/~yosh/recspecs.htm

 

[Analog Scott]

When you say "dynamic" do you mean that it measures as very dynamic, or that it sounds subjectively "dynamic", or something else? I am quite sure that it is possible to put together a recording that sounds subjectively dynamic while keeping it within 'vinyl limits' by clever arrangements, riding the faders, and 'spotlighting', etc. No compressors or limiters involved.

I am talking about specific records of classical and jazz music.

Otherwise, are you claiming that vinyl doesn't suffer from relatively high levels of noise (and clicks and pops) and doesn't have idiosyncrasies regarding its ability to handle high levels of high frequencies and bass, particularly if the bass is stereo and out of phase? That the inner tracks are not inferior to the outer ones?

I am claiming there are actual vinyl records cut from very dynamic recordings without the use of limiters, compression, EQ or summing the bass to mono. It has been asserted that such records do not exist and can not be made. I am asserting they do exist and have been made. I have supported that assertion by citing examples such as the King Super Analogue LPs, and provided excellent documentation from the company itself in support of my assertions. I am claiming nothing more than that.

 

[Analog Scott]

Where on the jacket sleeve does it say the bass is in stereo?

Or is there some other documentation you're referring to?

Also, just to be clear, I'm not looking to disprove -- I'm looking for positive proof that such exists so I can buy such LPs.

The jacket does not specify that the bass is either in stereo or mono. What it does state explicitly is that "the head amplifier of the tape recorder is directly connected to the cutting amp with no extranious equipment such as pass filter or limiter. This enables a flat transmission of the master tape signal to the cutter head" It would not be a flat transfer if there was a device plugged inbetween the tape output and the cutting amp. It shows a diagram comparing and contrasting the signal path of their mastering chain to that of normal mastering chains. Look at the diagrams and you see there is nothing in the signal path that can sum the bass to mono in their mastering chain as opposed to the signal path diagrammed for the "normal" mastering chain. As they state it and as they diagram it there is no way the bass is being summed to mono. It's a detailed description and diagram.

 

[Analog Scott]

Agreed, and the only thing that has been proved is an abysmal lack of understanding cutters and how they work, and some typical marketing fluff as "proof" with "block diagrams" that do not explain the whole story. Simply, a vinyl version and digital version from a master will never be comparable, they are apples and oranges, one with far more distortions of all kinds (and some good kinds for many) and one that sounds much more like the master.

Its almost like someone who says if two amps measure simple THD+N the same then they will sound the same. Lack of understanding of the science.

After all these days, if he could find proof he would have found it by now.....and if the post above that shows the back of the album is proof, well, for a non scientific person it might be, but not here it aint.

Exactly what I suspected. You aren't going to accept aything as proof.

 

[Cosmik]

I am talking about specific records of classical and jazz music.



I am claiming there are actual vinyl records cut from very dynamic recordings without the use of limiters, compression, EQ or summing the bass to mono. It has been asserted that such records do not exist and can not be made. I am asserting they do exist and have been made. I have supported that assertion by citing examples such as the King Super Analogue LPs, and provided excellent documentation from the company itself in support of my assertions. I am claiming nothing more than that.

You should be a politician! By stating something often enough, and not expanding on the caveats even when invited to, the casual onlooker is invited to walk away with the impression that LP is just a linear window onto any signal, like CD.

There are two key tactics being used:

1. Use of the catch-all word "dynamic" and refusal to clarify what is meant by it even when asked about it
2. Making the claim that the bass has "not been summed to mono", etc. in the full knowledge that it never was in stereo to start with. The reader is left with the impression that if a grown-up is actually bothering to imply it, it must be the case that LPs are fine with stereo bass.

 

[Blumlein 88]

The jacket does not specify that the bass is either in stereo or mono. What it does state explicitly is that "the head amplifier of the tape recorder is directly connected to the cutting amp with no extranious equipment such as pass filter or limiter. This enables a flat transmission of the master tape signal to the cutter head" It would not be a flat transfer if there was a device plugged inbetween the tape output and the cutting amp. It shows a diagram comparing and contrasting the signal path of their mastering chain to that of normal mastering chains. Look at the diagrams and you see there is nothing in the signal path that can sum the bass to mono in their mastering chain as opposed to the signal path diagrammed for the "normal" mastering chain. As they state it and as they diagram it there is no way the bass is being summed to mono. It's a detailed description and diagram.

It shows a dolby NR unit in use. As the original tapes were from a time before dolby, were they using a new master tape prepared from the originals, if so what was done to it? It doesn't say. Your evidence is flimsy. Can you make an LP with no processing other than RIAA EQ? Maybe It is so rare it doesn't matter too much other than your specious intent to say it can be done. Also your diagram was showing no RIAA curve, you can't do an LP others can play back without that.

If we grant you that one could make an LP with nothing other than the final mix tapes to one or two channels and RIAA EQ, then at that point, what have you shown us? Even this doesn't overcome the limitations of the medium of LP which are real. So? That analog is uniquely able to provide fortissimo music tensional power. One suspects some details may have been lost in translation.

 

[Don Hills]

https://imgur.com/gallery/VTBqq

That's not a signed (darn autocorrect, should have been sworn) affidavit.

 

[watchnerd]

Of course one of things is quite a few mastering people still mono the bass even with digital recordings.

When mixing small group jazz, I usually do for aesthetic reasons.

 

[watchnerd]

The jacket does not specify that the bass is either in stereo or mono. What it does state explicitly is that "the head amplifier of the tape recorder is directly connected to the cutting amp with no extranious equipment such as pass filter or limiter. This enables a flat transmission of the master tape signal to the cutter head" It would not be a flat transfer if there was a device plugged inbetween the tape output and the cutting amp. It shows a diagram comparing and contrasting the signal path of their mastering chain to that of normal mastering chains. Look at the diagrams and you see there is nothing in the signal path that can sum the bass to mono in their mastering chain as opposed to the signal path diagrammed for the "normal" mastering chain. As they state it and as they diagram it there is no way the bass is being summed to mono. It's a detailed description and diagram.

Right -- so this is not proof that the bass is stereo.

The bass could have been mixed to mono on the final master before bringing to the cutting lathe for a direct transfer. In fact, that method was often the norm back in the early days of LPs.

It doesn't need to be summed at the lathe if it's summed in the master tape.

 

[Thomas savage]

Umm, all very ‘audiophile’ ...

 

[watchnerd]

Umm, all very ‘audiophile’ ...

And very technically obsolete, as well.

In contrast is the "Phoenix Mastering" process used by Fondamenta on their Lost Recordings LPs:

"Phoenix is a four-step process. You have to clean and prepare the sources, play them well, convert them into digital and then delete every flaw in that recording, “We have very good algorithms for every kind of flaw too,” said D’Oria Nicolas. “How we extract and how we restore the signal, before we even get to those algorithms, this is the secret bit. On the final step, we had to use our ears because the algorithms are only tools. If you don’t use your ears then you can ruin everything. The result? It might not sound very humble but Phoenix cannot be compared to anything else. Really. Treated music sounds like it was recorded yesterday.”

But what about the audiophile who may complain and say that Phoenix moves you out of the analogue domain, into digital and back to analogue. Surely that is a cheat? It’s no longer analogue is it? “I can tell you that if you are losing something, it’s not really measurable. But look, even if you do lose something, the gain, on the other side, is so huge, it doesn’t matter. The ‘win’ is so large,” said D’Oria Nicolas.



As for the choice of Devialet kit in the process? “We didn’t use the Devialet convertor because they were a partner and we felt obliged to use their hardware. It was completely the opposite. We chose to use their convertor and then we approached the company. We tried may convertors before we talked to them. The best was the Devialet. It is absolutely amazing. Its also light and mobile so that we can process source material in the host country because most people will not ship precious tapes via the post.”



So just how exacting has this process been? How in depth has Fondamenta been in creating The Lost Recordings LPs? Here’s one insight, the company actually tested different lacquer and cutting stylus types. It actually heard differences between different types.

“We travelled the world and tried different lacquer recipes to see which one was the best. Why? Because creating a lacquer is a hand-made process. This included lacquers from France, Germany, UK and Japan. I then asked a French engineer to create a lacquer using a Japanese and then an American cutting stylus on American and then Japanese lacquers. Four were created from the same recordings. There were huge differences! Two were not great, two were very interesting.”

The final choice was a Japanese cutting stylus on an American lacquer. That was seen as the best sounding combination for the project..



“When we created the lacquers for the limited edition releases,” said D’Oria Nicolas. “That is, when we made available for sale with Devialet the 30 listed lacquer box sets, we had to use every American lacquer and Japanese stylus in stock at that time. There was actually a European shortage of both for a short time and it was our fault! The industry was complaining about the shortage and no-one could understand why the shortage had occurred. We knew though!”

So how good is the lacquer’s sound quality? Compared to the original master tapes? “It’s much better,” said D’Oria Nicolas. “ Don’t forget that the Phoenix system has restored the tapes too. With no doubt is the sound quality better.”

BUY THE LACQUER?
Created from aluminium, coated with nitrocellulose lacquer and spanning 14” with a blue edge, there have been a limited number of lacquers of each album produced for sale. Limited to 30 sets for each title release with multiple lacquers forming the entire album, the Vaughan, Peterson and Brubeck sets (of four discs in each) will cost you £6,300 per set. The Evans (of just two discs) will cost £4,500. This is a lacquer, though, which means that the sound quality will be far superior even to the released limited edition vinyl but – and here’s the kick – the surface is very soft. Play it once, just once, and the stylus will distort the medium. It will never sound that good ever again yet, because it is the lacquer, this is the best way to hear this LP. You’re looking at a one hit play experience, though. Keep it for a special occasion.



For the money, you get the discs themselves presented in a numbered calf leather case with suedettee inside. Additionally, you will receive a story of the concert and The Lost Recordings collection, a user guide for the lacquers, the vinyl album and download card to obtain the digital files, hi-res Studio Masters at 176.4 kHz available on demand.

THE LATEST
Next in the series within The Lost Recordings collection is one of the very last concerts of the Dave Brubeck Quartet, in the Grand Hotel Kurhaus, famous for its concert hall. From October 1967 in Scheveningen, the concert has been restored and remastered by Fondamenta. Released by Devialet on its online store, this limited edition vinyl will include a download card to receive the digital files (MP3 and AIFF 16bit) for free. A CD and hi-res 24bit version will be available separately.

REVIEW – SARAH VAUGHAN
Title: Live at Laren Jaxx Festival 1975: The Lost Recordings

Label: Fondamenta

This previously lost jazz recording is presented here as a limited-edition, 900 copies, two-disc packaged. It’s expensive at £110: principally because of the time-consuming and expensive Phoenix system. Is it worth it?

Well, you’ve got to take the occasion into consideration here. No matter how good the audiophile process, this was a live recording which means sonic compromises before we even get to the question of ‘hi-fi’. Hence, vocal clarity is excellent but not top notch, the upright bass is slightly masked while the hall itself is a touch smeary, adding a slight bite to the midrange. That’s the location and the venue. And that’s history.



From that point onwards, though, Fondamenta has done a splendid job. The pressing is beautifully quiet, the percussion is delicate in terms of cymbal taps, bass is rhythmic and can easily be tracked by the ear while the piano is melodious but its Vaughan’s vocal delivery, sitting in a 3D space, which is the star here. The vinyl tracks every detail available from the compression of her vocal chords, the effort and amount of air she expels, you can even hear how wide her mouth is and how she quickly manipulates that ‘instrument’ to vary pitch and to shape notes.

I’m absolutely not convinced by the price tag for a ‘mere’ live recording that can only ever give you 70% or less of all musical information which means you begin with a crippled situation from the off but, nevertheless, this LP remains a terrific release of a rare and precious archival tape document.

As for Fondamenta’s ‘unique’ Phoenix system? I’d like to see it applied to a quality studio recording."

 

[Fitzcaraldo215]

Awesome. How cool is this? Outrageously expensive lacquer LPs that are self destructive after a single playback, even more so than vinyl. Why, it is the absolute ultimate analog lover's dream of exclusivity. And, the really cool thing is that buyers can then rave about how awesome the sound was, while simultaneously destroying any objective evidence of it in playback. Too bad if you were not there, because it was the greatest reproduced sound ever.

But, just think of the snobbery. It is like burning $1oo bills or smoking $100 cigars or smashing your Ferrari into a telephone pole for fun. The super ultimate status symbol.

 

[watchnerd]

Awesome. How cool is this? Outrageously expensive lacquer LPs that are self destructive after a single playback, even more so than vinyl. Why, it is the absolute ultimate analog lover's dream of exclusivity. And, the really cool thing is that buyers can then rave about how awesome the sound was, while simultaneously destroying any objective evidence of it in playback. Too bad if you were not there, because it was the greatest reproduced sound ever.

But, just think of the snobbery. It is like burning $1oo bills or smoking $100 cigars or smashing your Ferrari into a telephone pole for fun. The super ultimate status symbol.

Alas, I didn't buy the lacquers, only the vinyl, so can't engage in such conspicuous consumption.

What's cool about the LPs is that they also include the high resolution digital download so you can compare the two mediums.

 

[Fitzcaraldo215]

Alas, I didn't buy the lacquers, only the vinyl, so can't engage in such conspicuous consumption.

What's cool about the LPs is that they also include the high resolution digital download so you can compare the two mediums.

OH, yeah. Really cool. So, what does the vinyl - digital comparison tell you?

 

[watchnerd]

OH, yeah. Really cool. So, what does the vinyl - digital comparison tell you?

The vinyl sounds like a very, very good LP. The recording doesn't really stress the limits of LP very much. But it's still obviously different from the digital version in the ways you would expect.

 

[tomelex]

That is so simply and beautifully put, to those skilled in the art of listening to vinyl and digital and science backs it up.