Why no turntables?

[watchnerd]

You are entirely correct. I did mine with a cheap oscilloscope.. However if your going to test cartridgesn proper setup is crucial for testing. Note that not all headshells are amenable to adjustment. Nor is totally necessary for all stylus geometries!

For which stylus geometry is azimuth unimportant?

 

[watchnerd]

Well I bit the bullet and tried an app! This is the "findings" from my SL1000R. Note the offset. I think it's wise to take the 20k turntable's direct RPM measurement of RPM over a free app's on a phone
Looks pretty good to me

Think the GAE gives similar.

 

[watchnerd]

Measure what? Something that didn't even occur to me back in 85?

All the things people measure on the Fun with Vinyl thread.

Speed, wow & flutter, azimuth error, arm resonance frequency, tracking capability, etc.

Part of the fun of owning a TT today is trying to tune it to be better, much like owning a vintage car.

 

[watchnerd]

I am so glad that this thread has not reduced into bashing those who are passionate about the LP scene.
@Balle Clorin had posted this image (and a few others) at another ASR thread (hope it is not OT):

View attachment 455743

I would have expected a 1200G to measure better, so I'm going to blame the app.

 

[watchnerd]

I don't really have the tools nor the skill. I'm sure 99% of people who buy turntables abd crtriges are in the same boat. I do have a basic oscilloscope that I barely know how to operate! I do have The test disc from Ortofon, Tacet and analog productions which theoretically have all the frequncy sweeps etc that are necessary. Given my lack of tecnical know-how ivm've been limited the "by ear" portions.

You can easily learn.

People here can teach you how to use the test records and analyze the results, either via AD and REW or the o scope.

 

[watchnerd]

One would think. But my experience is that a linear tracking arm doesn't really clean up IGD. I had a couple. In addition to being disappointing in performance, the mechanism that allowed the arm to move towards the spindle fell apart on both turntables. They might have been repairable, but I moved on to other turntables with pivoted arms. One was a pre quartz Technics direct drive with a Shure M-44-7 cartridge. That managed to play more troublesome discs than other turntables I've owned.

View attachment 455742

Which linear tracker did you have?

There should also have been a difference in skating and general uniformity of distortion specs given there isn't a required compromise in alignment.

 

[WisEd]

For which stylus geometry is azimuth unimportant?

The geometry most affected by azimuth is the fine line variants. The least, of course, is the conical. The others are in between. Again, the majority of headshells and tonearms don't allow adjustment at all.

 

[JeffS7444]

The geometry most affected by azimuth is the fine line variants. The least, of course, is the conical. The others are in between. Again, the majority of headshells and tonearms don't allow adjustment at all.

I only started fussing with azimuth in earnest after taking delivery of Parks Audio Waxwing DSP phono, because it has a feature which makes fine-tuning azimuth pretty easy. And I was kind of shocked: With just the tiny amount of wiggle room allowed by my turntable's SME headshell connection, quite a range of adjustment is possible. And an unexpected bonus of better tuning is that groove pre-echo seems greatly reduced. No fancy stylus shape in use here, just a bonded elliptical.

 

[WisEd]

Think the GAE gives similar.

Indeed, I had one!
They should since the 1000R drive system is exactly the same but doubled to handle a platter twice the weight. The only real difference in performance between the 2 is the level of isolation. Aside from simply jumping up and down next to the platter its virtually immune from any feedback!
One thing that people get wrong about direct drive turntables is that they try the rap on the plinth test! The utter failing results are obvious if your aware of turntable construction, yet those old videos of a salesman rapping on the plinth of a Linn never die

 

[Robin L]

Which linear tracker did you have?

There should also have been a difference in skating and general uniformity of distortion specs given there isn't a required compromise in alignment.

I know one was a Sony, not an expensive one, bought used. Not an overwhelming performer. In any case I no longer have a turntable or LPs. I started collecting LPs in 1968, was done by 2018. Had to move, knew I was moving into a much smaller place. My guess is that my last turntable (the Technics I displayed a photo of) was much more secure. I suspect the cartridge, tracking at 3 grams with a conical stylus, and the medium mass tonearm of the Technics 'table, were better matched than some of the low mass arms with high compliance cartridges I've owned.

 

[watchnerd]

The geometry most affected by azimuth is the fine line variants. The least, of course, is the conical. The others are in between. Again, the majority of headshells and tonearms don't allow adjustment at all.

I only buy headshells that allow for azimuth.

Then again, my arm allows it, too, it just makes life easier to do it at the head shell for swappabilty.

Most of my carts use ‘advanced’ stylus types (LC, Shibata, ML)

 

[WisEd]

I only started fussing with azimuth in earnest after taking delivery of Parks Audio Waxwing DSP phono, because it has a feature which makes fine-tuning azimuth pretty easy. And I was kind of shocked: With just the tiny amount of wiggle room allowed by my turntable's SME headshell connection, quite a range of adjustment is possible. And an unexpected bonus of better tuning is that groove pre-echo seems greatly reduced. No fancy stylus shape in use here, just a bonded elliptical.

I'm wodering if you are confusing VTA with azimuth? Azimuth affects primarily left to right channel balance. To change it you have to rotate either the headshell or on some straight tonearms the tonearm itself. On some old test records they hade a tone recorded out of phase on the L and R channel. The correct azimuth was achieved by a cancelation of of the tone or the biggest reduction you could achieve. VTA does have clear effects on the tonality of the cartridge and is adressed the moving tonearm pivot point up or down or if the turntable doesn't have a mechanism for that adjustmen by using shims. Of course you can also use shims for azimuth too if you have no other means.

 

[Bob from Florida]

Technics makes good turntables, but in my opinion, they are not the kind of be all end all vastly superior things some people seem to hold them.

Direct drive is indispensable to DJs, but for normal home usage, belt drive is perfectly fine. A belt drive requires a bit more maintenance, and it takes couple of seconds to reach the correct speed, but if ease of operation is paramount, then one should stay with the digital media anyway.

A quartz controlled direct drive can achieve very good speed accuracy, but the direct connection between the motor and the platter does not provide the kind of isolation from vibration and noise, as the belt. Technics has solved this drawback better than most, but there are still belt driven turntables that offer lower noise, hum and rumble through the groove, while still maintaining speed accuracy that is easily good enough,

Having freshly converted to direct drive with a SL1300G from a Clearaudio belt drive - Performance DC, I cannot agree with your characterization of belt drive versus direct drive. The speed regulation on the Technics is essentially “perfect” and the variation via wow and flutter is much lower than belt drives. The reason belts drive motors are low torque is to avoid stretching the belt too much from the motor pulsations. You can greatly increase the mass of the platter to help smooth things out, but that potentially stretches your belt more on startup and wears it out sooner. Adding optical encoders for speed feedback and a motor controller that helps smooth things out helps enormously, but the cost is now higher than the SL1300G - which still beats the belt drive table in terms of measurable performance. Interestingly, Clearauadio has changed all their motors to air core coils and have included speed control as well. It seems that all motors exhibit “cogging” and belt drives can benefit from some of the motor advances as well. I do agree that belt drives can have sufficient performance if designed well. Ironically, the belt versus direct drive argument is eerily similar to the tubes versus solid state argument.

 

[watchnerd]

I'm wodering if you are confusing VTA with azimuth? Azimuth affects primarily left to right channel balance. To change it you have to rotate either the headshell or on some straight tonearms the tonearm itself. On some old test records they hade a tone recorded out of phase on the L and R channel. The correct azimuth was achieved by a cancelation of of the tone or the biggest reduction you could achieve. VTA does have clear effects on the tonality of the cartridge and is adressed the moving tonearm pivot point up or down or if the turntable doesn't have a mechanism for that adjustmen by using shims. Of course you can also use shims for azimuth too if you have no other means.

New test records have azimuth test tracks, too.

The Puffin and Waxwing have built in azimuth tests that work with these test trecords.

The hardest part isn’t measuring, it’s making frustratingly small adjustments

 

[WisEd]

I only buy headshells that allow for azimuth.

Then again, my arm allows it, too, it just makes life easier to do it at the head shell for swappabilty.

Most of my carts use ‘advanced’ stylus types (LC, Shibata, ML)

Indeed! Even on some adjustable headshells (my LH9000 is still a royal pain. The screw faces down so to adjust it you have to remove the headsell from the arm. since a degree or 2 can make a difference its a frustrating ordeal

 

[watchnerd]

Having freshly converted to direct drive with a SL1300G from a Clearaudio belt drive - Performance DC, I cannot agree with your characterization of belt drive versus direct drive. The speed regulation on the Technics is essentially “perfect” and the variation via wow and flutter is much lower than belt drives. The reason belts drive motors are low torque is to avoid stretching the belt too much from the motor pulsations. You can greatly increase the mass of the platter to help smooth things out, but that potentially stretches your belt more on startup and wears it out sooner. Adding optical encoders for speed feedback and a motor controller that helps smooth things out helps enormously, but the cost is now higher than the SL1300G - which still beats the belt drive table in terms of measurable performance. Interestingly, Clearauadio has changed all their motors to air core coils and have included speed control as well. It seems that all motors exhibit “cogging” and belt drives can benefit from some of the motor advances as well. I do agree that belt drives can have sufficient performance if designed well. Ironically, the belt versus direct drive argument is eerily similar to the tubes versus solid state argument.

How is it similar to tubes vs solid state?

 

[watchnerd]

Indeed! Even on some adjustable headshells (my LH9000 is still a royal pain. The screw faces down so to adjust it you have to remove the headsell from the arm. since a degree or 2 can make a difference its a frustrating ordeal

My AT and Jelco headshells have adjustable azimuth while attached

 

[Bob from Florida]

How is it similar to tubes vs solid state?

There are folks in the “tubes” camp that firmly believe tubes always sound better than solid state. Substitute belt for tubes and direct drive for solid state and you may see the similarities.

 

[WisEd]

Having freshly converted to direct drive with a SL1300G from a Clearaudio belt drive - Performance DC, I cannot agree with your characterization of belt drive versus direct drive. The speed regulation on the Technics is essentially “perfect” and the variation via wow and flutter is much lower than belt drives. The reason belts drive motors are low torque is to avoid stretching the belt too much from the motor pulsations. You can greatly increase the mass of the platter to help smooth things out, but that potentially stretches your belt more on startup and wears it out sooner. Adding optical encoders for speed feedback and a motor controller that helps smooth things out helps enormously, but the cost is now higher than the SL1300G - which still beats the belt drive table in terms of measurable performance. Interestingly, Clearauadio has changed all their motors to air core coils and have included speed control as well. It seems that all motors exhibit “cogging” and belt drives can benefit from some of the motor advances as well. I do agree that belt drives can have sufficient performance if designed well. Ironically, the belt versus direct drive argument is eerily similar to the tubes versus solid state argument.

All this discussion actually goes back to the introduction of DD. In fact, the first DD drives suffered from less than excellent rumble figures. By the second generation of DD, they were as good or better than any belt table. Since then, it has not been a real competition. Belt turtable manufacturers wax and wane about the sound signatures of their turntables because they have to! The physical fact is that the best turntable has no "sound" at all. Its purpose is to maintain as perfect rotational speed as possible (wow wow and flutter) and be as quiet as physically possible so as not to color the signal of the component that is supposed to be the transducer, the cartridge!

 

[watchnerd]

There are folks in the “tubes” camp that firmly believe tubes always sound better than solid state. Substitute belt for tubes and direct drive for solid state and you may see the similarities.

I thought it was the idler wheel guys who were most into that discussion