Objective measurements of phono cartridges

[Arnold Krueger]

One more pretty well known LP playback technical test: http://www.hi-fiworld.co.uk/vinyl-lp/70-tests/103-cartridge-tests.html?showall=1

 

[dallasjustice]

Good looking graphs. The mistake is that many will think these measurements are representative of what a record player sounds like in the real world. It isn’t. There’s a big difference using a custom test disc EQ to make the FR look flat and real world standardized RIAA applied to a variety of off the shelf discs.

One more pretty well known LP playback technical test: http://www.hi-fiworld.co.uk/vinyl-lp/70-tests/103-cartridge-tests.html?showall=1

 

[Arnold Krueger]

Good looking graphs. The mistake is that many will think these measurements are representative of what a record player sounds like in the real world. It isn’t. There’s a big difference using a custom test disc EQ to make the FR look flat and real world standardized RIAA applied to a variety of off the shelf discs.

Please explain. I know that it is possible to faiely easily check the FR of a cut disk by optical means, and people who cut disks frequently in the day tell me they did it often to QC their setups.

 

[Frank Dernie]

Please explain. I know that it is possible to faiely easily check the FR of a cut disk by optical means, and people who cut disks frequently in the day tell me they did it often to QC their setups.

Well it is not only the cartridges that are all over the place, particularly at high frequencies.
Unlike digital where the maximum recordable level is a hard point the maximum level recordable on an LP depends on the cutter, and the maximum level playable by a record player are both variable depending on hardware and different engineers choose different maximum levels and different levels of HF roll-off depending on their opinions.
It is a question of balancing maximum level and the possible distortions in some setups of it getting too high against audible hiss and noise in the quiet bits if the level is set to avoid high level distortion.
There is no such thing as right and wrong in analogue frequency response near the limits.

 

[Cosmik]

Good looking graphs. The mistake is that many will think these measurements are representative of what a record player sounds like in the real world. It isn’t. There’s a big difference using a custom test disc EQ to make the FR look flat and real world standardized RIAA applied to a variety of off the shelf discs.

Yes, good point. Seeing those beautiful flat lines it would be tempting to think that the system is almost as good as digital, but the operative word is "system". The cartridge if driven by the correct vibrations on both channels at the same time works OK, but real records have to be cut with de-essing, bass limiting, frequency-dependent compression, etc. so the real world result will be much different from what the graphs suggest.

 

[dallasjustice]

If RIAA and LP QC was that great, there would be no reason for the JVC test disc to need a custom EQ. JVC could just manufacture the disc using RIAA just like any other disc.

Please explain. I know that it is possible to faiely easily check the FR of a cut disk by optical means, and people who cut disks frequently in the day tell me they did it often to QC their setups.

 

[dallasjustice]

IMO, the weakest part of the LP chain is the medium itself. There’s way too much focus on the gear and virtually no emphasis on how highly variable discs are. I’ve done log sweep measurements using a different test disc. I used different arms and cartridges and the FR was never that flat. I’m very skeptical of any test disc which requires its own EQ. It seems like cheating to me.

 

[TBone]

Fascinating to see the lid lifted on the horrors, compromises and myriad decisions that have to be made in order to play vinyl!

Nothing new above ... and no lid came off anything ... makes me wonder if you actually have any first hand knowledge concerning these so called decisions (rhetorical) ...

... so so so many times and so easily demonstrated within my system ... playing back ripped vinyl copies, often for pure digital based audiophiles, most with no understanding or care for vinyl reproduction and 1) they never clued it was a vinyl rip. and 2) they consistently inquire about the dynamic sound (high DR original recordings) source and or mastering, and most importantly .... 3) they`d ask to hear more ...

 

[Cosmik]

Nothing new above ... and no lid came off anything ... makes me wonder if you actually have any first hand knowledge concerning these so called decisions (rhetorical) ...

... so so so many times and so easily demonstrated within my system ... playing back ripped vinyl copies, often for pure digital based audiophiles, most with no understanding or care for vinyl reproduction and 1) they never clued it was a vinyl rip. and 2) they consistently inquire about the dynamic sound (high DR original recordings) source and or mastering, and most importantly .... 3) they`d ask to hear more ...

Big deal. Of course a recording that has been hand-crafted and massaged to sound reasonable when played back on a gramophone will sound the same when played back on digital. The real test would be to play back a big, dynamic symphonic recording that sounds earth-shattering on CD and see how well it fares when transferred to vinyl.

 

[TBone]

Of course a recording that has been hand-crafted and massaged to sound reasonable when played back on a gramophone will sound the same when played back on digital.

Who said it sounded the same, because if it had, no further interest in the session by the listener would have ensued.

 

[Arnold Krueger]

If RIAA and LP QC was that great, there would be no reason for the JVC test disc to need a custom EQ. JVC could just manufacture the disc using RIAA just like any other disc.

My informants tell me that equalization in the disk cutting signal chain in addition to that for implementing the standard RIAA curve is not the least bit unusual.

It is common for analog recording and playback gear, whether disc or tape to have various means for adjusting frequency response and other parameters, including some adjustments that are built into the equipment. Bias, equalization, and azimuth come quickly to mind for analog tape. LP disk cutting is by most accounts even more demanding.

Other general-purpose equalizers, either parametric or graphic are often part of the signal chain that drives the disk recorder. Limiters and/or dynamc range compression gear was often in the disk cutting chain as well.

One of the undesirable aspects of analog recording gear is the need for frequent adjustment.

For example, it was common to put test tones on production tapes so that azimuth and equalization could be adjusted every time the tape was played for a critical purpose. This makes the process more time-consuming, labor-intensive, skill-sensitive, and costly.

It is a matter of history that the advent of digital led to staffing reductions across the industry.

Being able to properly optimize these adjustments is a basic job skill that is commonly possessed by the people who do this kind of work. After all, their jobs often have the word *engineer* as part of their job title!

I can't find any details about exactly what JVC did, so I can't possibly comment on that.

I think that there may be a misinterpretation of routine practices as being something unusual. Just because something ends up being mentioned in marketing materials doesn't mean that it is unusual. Apparently, it made an impression on some people.

 

[Cosmik]

Who said it sounded the same, because if it had, no further interest in the session by the listener would have ensued.

A vinyl-to-digital rip will sound the same as it sounds on vinyl; digital will, of course, reproduce it faithfully. Not so the other way round.

 

[TBone]

A vinyl-to-digital rip will sound the same as it sounds on vinyl; digital will, of course, reproduce it faithfully. Not so the other way round.

One would hope so, but not always realized ... hence why I`ve had a few too many vinyl recorders pass.

Don`t confuse how the vinyl rip compares to it`s origin, rather how it sounds compared to the consumer based CD. That`s the real saga ...

 

[Thomas savage]

Seems to me they master the vinyl with a hifi in mind, the digital offerings seem to be aimed at radio, mp3, earphones etc..

If the CD/digital copy was put together with the premise it was to be exclusively played on a hifi system it would be a fair comparison.

I can fully believe plenty prefer a premium rip to the CD version.

As per usual, what we obsess over is 5% of the final sound, 95% already been decided for us imo.

Folks spend too much time arguing about formats, there’s more important factors even when your dealing in the compromises of vinyl.

 

[TBone]

Seems to me they master the vinyl with a hifi in mind, the digital offerings seem to be aimed at radio, mp3, earphones etc..

Dreadful compression. However early CD transfers (many of which were taken from the vinyl based tape masters) did not have the music killing compression inherited in most CD transfers sold later ... the remasters are in general terms, terribly compressed in comparison to the orig CD, but that can be said for vinyl also ... nearly all the newly remastered vinyl I`ve purchased has been disappointing ... far too much added compression.

In fact, I rarely purchase new vinyl anymore for that very reason.

 

[TBone]

... the compromises of vinyl.

compromises be damned ... I recently purchased a used original Yes LP and the original owner(s) must have used some compromised eq or incorrect tracking, damaging the groove walls at two brief sections, you can easily hear brief mistracking ... but the overall recording (and rip) are so damn dynamically concvincing(DR13) as to make you forget about these silly brief moments and enjoy the performance as may have have sounded pseudo live. Can`t get that from the CD I own. Hells Bells, it so damn difficult to get Chris Squire`s amazing bass techniques correct, on any system at any cost, especially difficult with vinyl ... but when it`s done right without compression, who cares the format ... awesome.

 

[NorthSky]

Hey, I'm a big Yes fan. Some of my best moments in life were from spinning Yes albums on my turntables. ...Ecstasy.

 

[TBone]

the venerable Shure M97E ... been around near forever ... still going ... still a v.good starter cartridge ... more forgiving than budget AT carts, the 97 has always had issues of omission, esp at the frequency extremes, sounds a little compressed during dynamic peaks, but these would go mostly unnoticed on the vast majority of turntables and equipment sold at this intended price point. It`s quality elliptical stylus does not require super precise alignment and remains gentle on vinyl.

The long discontinued V15mr5, however, was one truly great cartridge, the jewel in the Shure crown, it could be mounted on any good turntable with high-end-only issues ... contrary to what many esoteric minded vinylheads chimed, when set up properly the V15mr5 often competed favorably and more accurately, with far farrrrrrrrrrrr more expensive esoteric moving coils. Still be a winner today, if available ... like all great carts, it included a very stiff cantilever and a precisely aligned but relatively aggressive line contact stylus (mr=microridge).

 

[TBone]

... plenty cart measurements, along with plenty digital and other equipment at http://www.milleraudioresearch.com/ (AVTech).

 

[Arnold Krueger]

the venerable Shure M97E ... been around near forever ... still going ... still a v.good starter cartridge ... more forgiving than budget AT carts, the 97 has always had issues of omission, esp at the frequency extremes, sounds a little compressed during dynamic peaks, but these would go mostly unnoticed on the vast majority of turntables and equipment sold at this intended price point. It`s quality elliptical stylus does not require super precise alignment and remains gentle on vinyl.

The long discontinued V15mr5, however, was one truly great cartridge, the jewel in the Shure crown, it could be mounted on any good turntable with high-end-only issues ... contrary to what many esoteric minded vinylheads chimed, when set up properly the V15mr5 often competed favorably and more accurately, with far farrrrrrrrrrrr more expensive esoteric moving coils. Still be a winner today, if available ... like all great carts, it included a very stiff cantilever and a precisely aligned but relatively aggressive line contact stylus (mr=microridge).

It has been a while since I tweaked the high end frequency response of a V15 or lesser Shure into line with parallel caps. Did it stop working?

Besides, if I really wanted to get the most out of a groove, I'd investigate things like fractional speed playback. Its easy enough to get the speed back to what it needs to be in the digital domain.

Also, I would not be really critical about FR at all, because again that is very easy to bring back into line in the digital domain.

Finally, the oppressive FM distortion might just be something that could be mitigated, again in the digital domain with Celemony Capstan.