The Courteous Vinyl Playback Discussion

[Sal1950]

I can't say where (possibly in a HFN article) that research showed the best downforce for a typical elliptical. 2 x -7 tip was around 1/75 g; this is not causing increased wear but helping to push crud out of the way rather than 'bouncing' over it. Over 2.5 g there could be wear, however (the vinyl is elastic).

I'm not sure if you're understanding this correctly but you are agreeing with me..
The universally loved Denon DL-103 MC does have a recommended tracking force of 2.5 or more grams. Your ADC ZLM 1.0-1.5g, a Shure V15 III .75-1.25g, both MM and great as long as they're matched to a light arm. Lots of baloney is written but the bottom line is, needle tip shapes being equal, the higher the pressure the higher the wear. Vinyl is "somewhat" elastic but none the less, wear happens, is cumulative and effects the higher freq faster.

 

[Bob from Florida]

I'm not sure if you're understanding this correctly but you are agreeing with me..
The universally loved Denon DL-103 MC does have a recommended tracking force of 2.5 or more grams. Your ADC ZLM 1.0-1.5g, a Shure V15 III .75-1.25g, both MM and great as long as they're matched to a light arm. Lots of baloney is written but the bottom line is, needle tip shapes being equal, the higher the pressure the higher the wear. Vinyl is "somewhat" elastic but none the less, wear happens, is cumulative and effects the higher freq faster.

Medium compliance seems to be the way for quite awhile now. The 103 likes higher mass arms, but if you have a removable head-shell, a higher mass head-shell will fix the “mass” issue on medium mass arms with the low compliance 103. The 103 is not a bad cartridge- I have one and it has some of the best bass of any cartridge I’ve owned. I don’t use it much anymore since I bought the AT VM95SH, but occasionally it gets played. Damage is more likely running less VTF versus more due to track ability issues- staying within OEM suggested VTF. The low mass arms that worked well with the Shure V15 are not common anymore - neither is the V15 since Shure shut it down. There aren’t any beryllium pipe cantilevers around anymore for comparisons, so you just have to “pick and choose” from what’s being made.

 

[DSJR]

I'm not sure if you're understanding this correctly but you are agreeing with me..
The universally loved Denon DL-103 MC does have a recommended tracking force of 2.5 or more grams. Your ADC ZLM 1.0-1.5g, a Shure V15 III .75-1.25g, both MM and great as long as they're matched to a light arm. Lots of baloney is written but the bottom line is, needle tip shapes being equal, the higher the pressure the higher the wear. Vinyl is "somewhat" elastic but none the less, wear happens, is cumulative and effects the higher freq faster.

1.75g downforce using a 'sharp' elliptical such as Shure promoted back then (.2 x .7 thou) may actually cause less wear in fact, as the stylus *supposedly* pushes crud out of the way rather than riding over it.

No matter sir. You've moved on and I'm still tinkering - with some frustration with the way my rig deals with vinyl now (those effin' ATC actives didn't mind vinyl at all, the sound simply 'shrinking slightly' with a V15VMR)

 

[DSJR]

Medium compliance seems to be the way for quite awhile now. The 103 likes higher mass arms, but if you have a removable head-shell, a higher mass head-shell will fix the “mass” issue on medium mass arms with the low compliance 103. The 103 is not a bad cartridge- I have one and it has some of the best bass of any cartridge I’ve owned. I don’t use it much anymore since I bought the AT VM95SH, but occasionally it gets played. Damage is more likely running less VTF versus more due to track ability issues- staying within OEM suggested VTF. The low mass arms that worked well with the Shure V15 are not common anymore - neither is the V15 since Shure shut it down. There aren’t any beryllium pipe cantilevers around anymore for comparisons, so you just have to “pick and choose” from what’s being made.

The DL103 always had a charm and 'punch' to it, but the loss of hf at side end is clearly audible if there's a reference with which to compare. I used a DL103D in a Mission 774 before Linn got their hooks in me for arms and pickups and of course, the more neutral presentation of the 103D didn't go down to well with a UK press being charmed by soggy sounding, very expensive and bad-tracking Koetsu Reds of the time (I'm certain of this, looking back now). A highish mass tonearm is mandatory for a stock DL103 and a UK forum owner gave chapter and verse I remember, raving over his Technics deck, modding the stock arm around the DL103 and then replacing first with a Jelco 750 and then an expensive Ortofon tonearm ('cos nobody else on the forum know of it nor owned one - bragging rights?).

 

[Mart68]

a UK forum owner gave chapter and verse I remember, raving over his Technics deck, modding the stock arm around the DL103 and then replacing first with a Jelco 750 and then an expensive Ortofon tonearm ('cos nobody else on the forum know of it nor owned one - bragging rights?).

lol - that deck did sound really good. I remember a meet where it was universally agreed that it comfortably saw off all its challengers and we're not talking cheap and cheerful decks either. Although one of the contenders said to me 'It is a better deck but I still prefer mine.' Which you can't argue with really.

Wasn't a DL103 on it by that point though. I've never rated those much. All front (bass, top) and not much behind it.

 

[Mart68]

That was the same meet where we had the 2 box Music First phono against the 4 box Paradise phono (DIY). (Opinion was split pretty much 50=50 on that one).

The Music First cost ten grand (at the time). The bloke who designed it was there. He said 'Yes, I designed it, but I can't afford to buy one.'

 

[DSJR]

That was the same meet where we had the 2 box Music First phono against the 4 box Paradise phono (DIY). (Opinion was split pretty much 50=50 on that one).

The Music First cost ten grand (at the time). The bloke who designed it was there. He said 'Yes, I designed it, but I can't afford to buy one.'

The 'Paradise' put me off back then, as it had numerous transistors in it, all having to be matched anally to within an absolute whisker of each other - the builder seemed to have the patience to do this, however. Another two box stage of our acquaintance seemed to do a great job with a pair of high gain op-amps and a chunky but basically regulated +20-0--20 supply, all the money really being in the supply itself and the casework I think, despite the sh**e around the brand at the time*. Later samples had better shielding too, but I wasn't involved with those and here in fairness, never had an issue with hum and noise on mine when set for MCs.

 

[Sal1950]

Medium compliance seems to be the way for quite awhile now.

True, I in no way criticized the Denon but simply used it as an example of very popular available needles that have been around nearly forever .

1.75g downforce using a 'sharp' elliptical such as Shure promoted back then (.2 x .7 thou) may actually cause less wear in fact, as the stylus *supposedly* pushes crud out of the way rather than riding over it.

Since there's been so little serious modern scientific testing and measurements done it's hard to say.
Sadly I'd estimate that 85% of the claims and advice made on the internet today are total BS with zero solid evidence to support them. Accurate Vinyl playback is totally a dice roll when the variables like needle shape, downforce, anti-skating, cable capacitance and total loading, etc; are considered and the directions that the high-end media has taken users wrong. Mostly the best info available came out in the 1970s but things have taken a lot of wrong turns since then but few want to hear about it.

 

[Bob from Florida]

True, I in no way criticized the Denon but simply used it as an example of very popular available needles that have been around nearly forever .


Since there's been so little serious modern scientific testing and measurements done it's hard to say.
Sadly I'd estimate that 85% of the claims and advice made on the internet today are total BS with zero solid evidence to support them. Accurate Vinyl playback is totally a dice roll when the variables like needle shape, downforce, anti-skating, cable capacitance and total loading, etc; are considered and the directions that the high-end media has taken users wrong. Mostly the best info available came out in the 1970s but things have taken a lot of wrong turns since then but few want to hear about it.

Well, there is the cartridge measurement library here at ASR - https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...he-phono-cartridge-measurement-library.46108/

 

[mpw]

True, I in no way criticized the Denon but simply used it as an example of very popular available needles that have been around nearly forever .


Since there's been so little serious modern scientific testing and measurements done it's hard to say.
Sadly I'd estimate that 85% of the claims and advice made on the internet today are total BS with zero solid evidence to support them. Accurate Vinyl playback is totally a dice roll when the variables like needle shape, downforce, anti-skating, cable capacitance and total loading, etc; are considered and the directions that the high-end media has taken users wrong. Mostly the best info available came out in the 1970s but things have taken a lot of wrong turns since then but few want to hear about it.

What you mean by 'Accurate Vinyl playback', that the speed is slightly off which effects the pitch ?

 

[Sal1950]

What you mean by 'Accurate Vinyl playback', that the speed is slightly off which effects the pitch ?

In the main I was thinking of frequency response - tonal balance . As the measurements that Bob just linked show, they can be all over the place. Then the final result after being mated to a tonearms wiring, preamps RIAA EQ reverse curve, are the proper R/C loading being used, more? There's just a bunch of factors to consider in trying to get the playback FR to be near what is should be.. Next to loudspeakers, that entire chain from needle tip to preamp output, is the next least properly executable path in modern audio.
But then it was concievded around the 1940s LOL

 

[Newman]

Unfortunately the norm for tonearm-needle compliance has (similar to the whole vinyl revival trend) has taken a as-backwards step in what would be the best technical solutions for the medium.

This has reminded me to open a topic within this thread.

THE COMPLIANCE/MASS MATCHING MYTH?

The standard formula for matching cartridge compliance to tonearm effective mass, which dates from the 1950s, predicts that excessive subsonic resonances will result when a high compliance cartridge is used on a high effective mass tonearm, or a low compliance cartridge is used on a low effective mass tonearm.

And yet, when two cartridges with compliances varying by a factor of two (or three) are put on the same tonearm, the resonant frequency doesn’t vary by a factor of root two (or three) as per the formula. Instead, it often stays pretty much the same or a small variation. And the response to a sweep signal also seems to have a variety of components, not a simple resonance at a particular frequency.

This probably means that modern cartridges (no idea about the vintage gear) have either too much damping to build up much of a resonance, and/or their suspensions have complex stress-strain functions that don’t resonate in the way that a simple spring suspension would.

I believe that this is why Gandy won’t publish compliance values for Rega cartridges: he doesn’t believe it gives a useful guide to the suitability of a given cartridge for use in a given tonearm. (Some claim he does it to trap customers into using Rega carts with Rega arms, but I don't think cynical is right in this case.) And IMHO he seems to be on firm ground.

This doesn’t mean that every cartridge will behave perfectly in every tonearm, but it does mean we should ignore the usual way of deciding the question. If one already has the cartridge and the tonearm, a sweep test with an appropriate LP test track is a good way to decide. But for a shopper who wants answers up front, it isn’t easy….and the usual formula is not the way. I am tempted to suggest sticking to ‘all-purpose’ cartridges and ‘all-purpose’ tonearms, and treat exotic examples of either as an unknowable risk that one should only consider if willing to find out the hard way, after purchase, by trial and error.

@Bob from Florida what do you think? Have you been using the standard formulae to derive tonearm-cart combinations for your own use and for making recommendations?

cheers

 

[JP]

The formula doesn't predict "excessive subsonic resonance", it calculates the resonant frequency. You can't get to transmissibility with only mass and compliance - you need the damping terms for the cartridge and arm as well.

Damping will move fres a bit, but no cartridge or arm is critically damped, so the magnitude of that is usually around 0.5Hz in practice. And, one must remember, Carlson's point in calculating fres and the 8-12Hz or whatever guidance was to place it where there'll be the least excitation and the least damage.

Excessive hand-waving in your post so it's difficult to correct, but if you want to play with the physics: https://docs.myhi.fi/tools/tonearm-lf-mechanics.html.

Note that cartridge compliance isn't always spec'd correctly, that there's a lot of mfg variability, and single-DOF model isn't going to completely represent the reality. Horizontal and vertical will give you two peaks with a bit of distance, and there are many degrees between. If c really tripled you'd have a ~4Hz shift. Real-world damping can't hide that.

The only nugget of truth is to call into question how important it is. If there's no excitation, and/or if transmissibility is low, then does fres at 6Hz or 15Hz matter? No. The guidance was never "You have to be in this range", it's "This is the safe range if nothing else is known". It's just general guidance.

 

[Balle Clorin]

I remember in my cybernetics class we were presented oscillating systems , resonance and feedback, and instability criteria( Laplace , roots and all) . Then my poor understanding about resonance was that you need a specific frequency input to trigger it. Later in real life I found that a Bump or any disturbance could trigger resonance and feed back oscillations. This is because discontinuity or disturbance actually contains a lot of frequencies.. and will make the resonance frequency react. That is the same thing I now see in vinyl playback: you do not need a 8 Hz warp to set off the 8 hz resonance, any EDIT bump/warp can to it.

That is why I like electronic arm from Denon and JVC,

 

[JP]

I'm not in the habit of bumping my turntables.

 

[Balle Clorin]

Record warp=Bump at 1:48

 

[JP]

This so far afield of my point and such a contrived case that it's not worth engaging.

 

[Balle Clorin]

The essence was simply that you do not need a disturbance with an exact frequency at the resonance frequency to trigger oscillations at resonance frequency.
Many different warps and disturbances can trigger it. The resonance is a true problem , whatever Korfs simulation or the mass -spring equation say.

But the video was kind of fun was it not?

 

[MatrixS2000]

This arrived a couple of days ago and is currently spinning on the Techinics and being digitized:

 

[JP]

The essence was simply that you do not need a disturbance with an exact frequency at the resonance frequency to trigger oscillations at resonance frequency.
Many different warps and disturbances can trigger it. The resonance is a true problem , whatever Korfs simulation or the mass -spring equation say.

But the video was kind of fun was it not?

Not exact, but close, and the essence is that some "disturbances" are broadband. But again, the old guidance is general guidance with the largest net.

Korf's work on this subject is absolute garbage. Experiments with obvious and unaddressed confounders, incorrect models (force excitation rather than base excitation) and his calculator uses a Q of 1, which isn't even possible. It does push fres meaningful far away from Carlson, which I guess makes it look like it's doing something.

Audio-Utilities/korf_compliance_calc at main · FidelisAnalog/Audio-Utilities

Contribute to FidelisAnalog/Audio-Utilities development by creating an account on GitHub.

github.com