- Thread Starter
- #1,081
or maybe it will not change?
Focus on this.
or maybe it will not change?
I do not have PC with me.You should get REW it is free.Hi Fi News Record Side B track 7, sweep 20Hz-20kHz
Ortofon Concorde 20 (first version), different effective mass, other parameters the same.
I can't show the difference between measurements in REV.
How do I do it?
Concorde_20_przeciwwaga_Technics.wav
drive.google.comConcorde_20_przeciwwaga_Ortofon.wav
drive.google.com
You can hear with your naked ear that a given cartridge plays differently on the X arm and differently on the Y arm.Focus on this.
vaderetro satanas....tracking difference?
Arms do sound different, I vividly remember demo done with two Different arms on same TT with same cartridge where swithed in 0.2 seconds back and forth.
With eyes closed and random order I could identify each arm. The sibilants and tszch sounds in lip sounds and cymbals where different, also the space around the instruments were different. The frequency response / warm/bright etc was not affected.
It is known that the same cartridge on one tonearm, or turntable, plays one way, and on another turntable and tonearm, plays differen
Analyzing the behavior of the cartridge itself, in isolation, or even deliberately making the measurement result independent of the turntable, is useless.
Might have a bit more output in the <50-100 Hz range. Probably worth trying if you listen to an organ music or some other stuff with frequencies around the 20-30 Hz range.I am interested in the behavior of a given cartridge with a turntable. If I increase or decrease the effective mass, or use a damping system, or do not use a damping system, change the tonearm, or change the entire turntable, what effect will this have on the frequency response of the turntable cartridge.
It is known that the same cartridge on one tonearm, or turntable, plays one way, and on another turntable and tonearm, plays differently.
Analyzing the behavior of the cartridge itself, in isolation, or even deliberately making the measurement result independent of the turntable, is useless.
You can hear with your naked ear that a given cartridge plays differently on the X arm and differently on the Y arm.
I want to measure this difference.
It could be that they play the same and it just seems to me that they play differently
Reading and understanding 54 pages of this topic is beyond my capabilities.Should I bother asking what controls you used in that comparison?
The frequency response of the cartridge will not change...This is what I want to measure: if I shift the resonance peak from a frequency of 10 Hz to 7 Hz, because I increase the effective mass of the arm by about 15 grams, or shift the peak from 7 Hz to 10 Hz, because I decrease or reduce the effective mass (different arms), how will the frequency response of the turntable cartridge change, or maybe it will not change?
You would record the sweep, compensate for the cut characteristics, and import into REW, do the adjustment needed to show correct frequency response.Reading and understanding 54 pages of this topic is beyond my capabilities.
Please tell me which signal from the CA--TSR-1007 test disc I should use to check the frequency response of my phono cartridge. I don't need those nice graphs that generate the script, I'll check it in the sound editor, I don't need to measure crosstalk etc. Only the frequency response.
Thank you
Which signal should I record and what should it do?You would record the sweep, compensate for the cut characteristics, and import into REW, do the adjustment needed to show correct frequency response.
Track 1 and 2. You need to apply a biquad filter as well but I cannot help you with this. Parks audio RIAA have those functions to enable or disable. Otherwise needs to be applied in sofware.
There is no easy way due to the cutting used if you don’t use the script. See alsoThe method of measuring the frequency response of a phonograph cartridge posted on this forum is the most mysterious, convoluted and incomprehensible method.
The thread has over 55 pages, completely incomprehensible to me.
Please provide clear, simple instructions, step by step, on what to do.
I have a Clearaudio CA-TSR-1007
There is no easy way due to the cutting used if you don’t use the script. See also
Unless it is written in a clear, simple and readable way, it is not worth wasting time.There is no easy way due to the cutting used if you don’t use the script. See also
Fun with vinyl measurements
Have always found the phone app W&F ’measurements’ to be quite poor.www.audiosciencereview.com
i followed user's step by step for windows in post 6 of this thread. i initially had some trouble getting it going due to installation issues, but that had nothing to do with the instructions. after getting it installed, it took a couple tries to get it to work properly due to user error, but again, no fault of the instructions here. i and others have posted questions in trying to get it working, and jp and others have been very helpful in providing answers. give it a shot!The method of measuring the frequency response of a phonograph cartridge posted on this forum is the most mysterious, convoluted and incomprehensible method.
The thread has over 55 pages, completely incomprehensible to me.
Please provide clear, simple instructions, step by step, on what to do.
I have a Clearaudio CA-TSR-1007 disc
Great!!!Might be an idea to venture on the worldaudiohistory site to the UK HiFi Choice mag scans from the late 70's and early 80s (the A5 test books). The late Paul Messenger writes may introductions here concerning how turntable/arm 'systems DO sound different and in the case of many simple 'solid plinth' designs, even the beautifully made and substantial Trio/Kenwood L07D, can have dire quality of playback sound if badly sited relative to the speakers and room corners. I doubt this comes out on a simple response/separation test, but reviewer Martin Colloms and his assistants did extensive isolation tests on the turntables they tested and the results were telling, hence the rise and rise of suspended belt driven models back then, which traded absolute speed stability for better isolation... Sadly, as the 80s wore on, using a master recording as reference was abandoned to purely subjective opinions, the increasing 'guru confidence' of the author taking over bit by bit and of course, 'digital' was subjectively derided by so-called 'experts' despite the evidence telling otherwise back then (a horny subject not for this post) as they had to sell magazines to people not then ready for this technology...
Here's a link to a 1984 turntable report, the consumer introduction being well worth a read. The site also has the vintage cartridge review books too and details at the beginning showing how tests were done, the discs used and loadings etc, as many older designs of pickup tilted their hf response alarmingly with capacitance loading while others seemed more immune.
Loading…
www.worldradiohistory.com
The NAD deck with later arm-tube assembly was tested pn page 74-75 here, but little comment was made about the adjustable counterweight damping. Interesting in forty years how an OM10 cartridge if made now, would cost more than the complete turntable back then (2M Red is I believe, a Super OM10 in drag and the Concorde Music Red has the new stylus descendent it seems, without physically checking)
Apologies for being such an old fart here, but my UK based lot took all this for granted forty five years ago, where I suspect many of you came into this long after vinyl all but died as a format in the 90s and I suspect the entire 'turntables-affecting-sound-quality' mantra passed many audio enthusiasts by in the US by, as now it's regarded as sales spiel by Linn products, brainwashing the likes of me nearly fifty years back. I do remember, however, having people with then ten year old Technics and similar direct drives (the more solid top-line models) for stylus and cartridge updates in the mid 80s and being pleasantly surprised how they responded to later and better pickups (the fashion was to push Rega instead at the time over here, but those of us with some experience back then, didn't feel that way if said direct drives were properly sited away from corners and the speakers themselves and not set up in a 'HiFi Shrine' between the speakers as 'enthusiasts' tend to do).
Apologies for the digression/rant above and back to current topic regarding tonearm lf resonances, NAD used to provide a test disc for their rather capable inexpensive turntable with adjustable damping on their suspended counterweight (my Dual 701 has vertical counterweight decoupling optimised for the V15 III, but it's not adjustable and does nothing laterally). One could judge the lf resonance of the arm/cartridge and adjust the damping to suit. No idea if any of these records are floating about, but if similar can be found, they'd help with the questions above I'm sure. Sadly, I don't have one