|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
173.247.0.211
In Reply to: RE: Soundsmith OLC vs LC stylus comparison? posted by flood2 on September 16, 2014 at 18:50:24
I have had both, although on different cartridges, and I can safely say the OLC tip is significantly more fussy about setup.
So fussy, in fact that when I put the cartridge with the OlC tip on the tonearm, despite having done it several times in the past, I am never quite sure it is set up optimally.
The OLC, according to Soundsmith is extremely sensitive to azimuth set up.
and this has been my experience.
In fact, the next time I have a spare $250.00 I am going to send the cartridge to Soundsmith for the ruby LC option.
Does the OLC sound $100 better than the LC? I dunno, I am never sure I am hearing it correctly set up.
Follow Ups:
It is interesting to read this testimony, as I have been using a Grace Ruby re-tipped by SS with ruby cantilever and OLC stylus. I have another totally OEM Grace Ruby (elliptical stylus) that I regard very very highly, one of my favorite cartridges. So it was with some relish that I first listened to my SS re-tipped version; I fully expected it to be superior to the original. Initially, it sounded a bit more detailed in the mid-treble region, moreso than the original version sounds, but otherwise I was quite pleased. However, over time (20-30 hours now) the tendency toward edginess has only increased. "Break in" has resulted in a less pleasing sound overall. I am using it in a Dynavector DV505 tonearm. I have played with VTA/SRA, both up and down from "level with the LP surface", and neither direction really ameliorates the problem. I also increased VTF a bit, from the original 1.6gm, with not much effect. (I don't hear anything that sounds like mis-tracking per se.) I do plan to discuss my findings with Peter Ledermann, but I hesitate to bug him about it. Perhaps the DV tonearm is a poor match. Dunno. I plan to try a lighter headshell. I have not compared the OLC to the less expensive LC stylus, only to the OEM Grace Ruby elliptical stylus.
Lew: Interesting to read your observations. Actually quite similar to what I experienced with the OLC on my van den Hul.
I have an F9 E I bought used and I am really enjoying it. In fact, I got a message from my cartridge box that indicated the other cartridges were feeling decidedly unloved.
Since my F9 is used, with an undetermined amount of wear on the stylus, I have been looking at the Soundsmith replacements.
I will not be buying the OLC.
One of the marvelous things about the E stylus I have is its ease of setup and that it does not render any records unplayable.
I can clearly hear the differences in recordings, and they all sound good, some better than others.
My Grace is on an SME 309, which is considerably lighter than your DV505, yet I have the same problems you have with the van den Hul and OLC assembly.
Peter sent me a more thorough explanation of setting up a cartridge with the OLC and it strongly stresses the need for near-perfect azimuth set up, which I have never been able to achieve for sure despite a little azimuth adjustment capability in the 309.
I even sent the van den Hul back to SS to make sure there was nothing wrong and they found nothing wrong.
I have complete faith that Peter would not sell something that was anything other than what is claimed, so I don't doubt the fault lies with me.
I am afraid that the OLC is just too perfect for my imperfect world.
Man, that Grace F9 is something very special, indeed.
Thanks. You did not mention what you hear when you fiddle with azimuth. The DV505 headshell has no provision for azimuth adjustment, so the cartridge azimuth is set at a default of 90 degrees. I would think that with MM cartridges, there is less chance for misalignment between the moving magnet and the stationary coils in the cartridge body, as compared to the converse situation in an MC type, but that's just conjecture on my part. I don't hear anything that would lead me to believe I need to adjust azimuth, but perhaps I should remount the OLC in one of my tonearms that does afford azimuth adjustment.Edit: I see now that you described the effects of azimuth adjustment down below this post. Thanks. What you hear seems to be what one would hear any time azimuth is maladjusted, nothing peculiar to the OLC stylus per se.
Edits: 09/19/14
Thanks! That is exactly what I was wondering about - I have the OLC in a 25 year old Denon DL160. A bit of a mistake in hindsight for the same reasons you describe.
I found it ULTRA sensitive to SRA - my OCD comes in handy to resolve this as I measure the thickness of each record and shim to get consistency for the arm height. However, small errors result in a greater increase in distortion than other styli. I also found groove blemishes were actually magnified - I get better overall performance from a MicroLine if I were honest. With records that "hit the mark", the detail retrieval and realism were astonishing, but most of the time I found I wasn't achieving sonic Nirvana...
As a result of the sensitivity to SRA, I also suspect that the OLC requires almost perfect arm/cantilever matching to minimise IM distortion so any compliance mismatch that puts the resonance much below the optimum 10 Hz is probably not going to sound as good as less extreme profiles.
Regards Anthony
"Beauty is Truth, Truth Beauty.." Keats
"I can safely say the OLC tip is significantly more fussy about setup."
The OLC looks like a FG to me.
Does that mean that the FG is also fussy?
The reason I ask is the next cartridge I'll use in my system (it's NIB sitting the shelf waiting for it's turn) has a FG stylus.
Tre'
Have Fun and Enjoy the Music
"Still Working the Problem"
I would say so. The FG is shaped to give correct SRA when mounted in a straight cantilever rather than in the usual bent tip aluminium types. For it to give of its best requires the mounting in the cantilever to be perfect as well as perfect alignment by the user.
I was asking Kevin for his opinion on the Ortofon Stylus 30 (LC) compared to the Sylus 40 (FG) and his comment was that the LC seemed to be more forgiving of surface noise.
I've also noticed a trend towards slightly shorter contact radii (40um compared to 70um or larger) in recent model updates for AT (OC9 ML III has a 40um contact radius) and Ortofon are doing similar things with their midrange models. Maybe it's my imagination, but I'm surprised that the Shibata is also making a comeback. The Ortofon Black models all use Shibata rather than Replicant.
Regards Anthony
"Beauty is Truth, Truth Beauty.." Keats
" The FG is shaped to give correct SRA when mounted in a straight cantilever rather than in the usual bent tip aluminium types."
So is the Soundsmith OLC.
Tre'
Have Fun and Enjoy the Music
"Still Working the Problem"
I was agreeing with your comment that it looked like an FG! :)
For what it's worth, my DL160 with OLC does sound amazing when the stars line up properly (i.e the record has been shimmed to the correct position for SRA), but I also feel that the sound rapidly becomes coarser compared to other styli designs when things aren't perfect. Consequently, if our guess that the OLC being an FG-S is correct, you may find that any other cartridge you buy could suffer in the same way.
Regards Anthony
"Beauty is Truth, Truth Beauty.." Keats
"...if our guess that the OLC being an FG-S is correct, you may find that any other cartridge you buy could suffer in the same way."
That's what I suspect.
Tre'
Have Fun and Enjoy the Music
"Still Working the Problem"
I have limited experience with the Gyger...have a Goldring 1042 that has one. Does not seem to me to be as delicate about azimuth, etc. as the OLC I have, but does require careful set up.
When you say the OLC is delicate about azimuth, what exactly do you mean? Does it not sound good with the cartridge level to the record playing surface?
When you speak about azimuth, I'm assuming you are referring to the azimuth of the stylus in the groove since you are connecting your concern to specific type of stylus. The normal type of azimuth that most of us are concerned with refers to the azimuth of the electromagnetic generator inside the cartridge body. For example, the Fozgometer aligns the azimuth of the electromagnetic generator to minimize crosstalk. Stylus shape has no influence on that type of azimuth or its adjustment sensitivity. In other words, a conical stylus has the same sensitivity to that kind of azimuth as a Geiger stylus. Therefore, I'm trying to determine what your concerns are with azimuth and what your cartridge sounds like when it's level to the playing surface like most people set azimuth.
Thanks,
John Elison
John...I don't speak for anyone else, but when I speak of azimuth I mean the relationship of the stylus in the groove...leaning, or not leaning, to one side or the other.
And my experience with the Fozgometer, with this very cartridge and its OCL stylus, was that the Fozgometer was no closer than putting a small bubble level on top of the headshell.
The OCL-tipped van den Hul MC 10 I have wants to be absolutely, positively, perfectly straight up and down...not the slightest lean to one side or the other.
The CL, on the other hand, is pretty happy with "close enough for government work."
Ultimately, speaking only for my own self, the OCL is not worth the trouble.
Well, the Fozgometer is not designed to level the cartridge. It is designed to tilt the cartridge one way or the other until it produces maximum channel separation. Rarely is the optimal azimuth position level.
I guess you must use a microscope in order to see whether stylus azimuth is correct. That would be the only way to tell for sure.
Thanks,
John Elison
Poor choice of words on my part. Your description of how the Fozgometer works is exactly what I meant.
What I am saying is that the Soundsmith Optimized Contour Nude Contact Line Stylus/cantilever is extremely sensitive to this.
In fact, in case anybody has not understood what I have been trying to say, the ruby cantilever/Optimized Contour” Nude Contact Line Stylus combination I have on my van den Hul MC10 is a royal PITA to just play records with.
I wish I had known this because I do like the sound of the cartridge, and would have, I have no doubt, been blissfully happy with the $250 selection and happily spent the $100 on used records I can't, generally, play with the Optimized Contour Nude Contact Line Stylus.
Let me make it clear I am not saying there is anything wrong with the Optimized Contour” Nude Contact Line Stylus.
Just that, in my system, for me, it is not a practical, everyday stylus shape.
If you use the Dr. Feikhart software and measure crosstalk: you can adjust the arm to get optimum or even perfect azimuth. This is IMO the only way to get accurate azimuth. Yes I have used the Fozgometer but found that it only gets close. Once you use the Feickhart software, you come to understand how important azimuth is.
I have not found the SS OLC stylus to be any pickier than a spherical.
Azimuth is splitting hairs no matter what the stylus shape.
As for what does correct azimuth elicit? Dynamics is much better universally. Soundstage only marginally on most cartridges. Tracking extreme passages are better as well.
it's about the music
I had the OLC sylus put on a Benz M2 Woodbody. IMO the cartridge sounds better than it did before. Maybe a little brighter, definitely more detailed which is just what the Benz needed. If your cartridge is already on the bright side, it might be too much.
I always find azimuth to be critcal in getting the best sound out of any cartridge.
Could it be that the Soundsmith Optimized Contour Nude Contact Line Stylus (or other similar shaped stylus) is/are much better at extracting soundstage, etc. that when it's right, it's really right and when a "lessor" shaped stylus is right it's just not that much better than when it's wrong?Tre'
Have Fun and Enjoy the Music
"Still Working the Problem"
Edits: 09/18/14
NT
Can you describe what you hear when the azimuth is suboptimal vs when it is optimized? I am a little puzzled that sound QUALITY would be so compromised by azimuth settings; I have generally observed that proper adjustment of azimuth has its major effect on "sound staging" or imaging (or whatever term you like that applies) but nearly no effect on whether the cartridge sounds good or bad. Thanks.
The short answer is that I have, on some records, record noise in only one channel..clicks, pops...record noise.
When the stars are aligned in perfect order, no noise in either channel.
But yes, incorrect azimuth does affect soundstaging...shrinks it or leans it toward one side or the other very slightly.
I am certainly not claiming to be an expert on the OLC stylus shape or anything close to that.
Just reporting what I hear with the example I have.
means the orientation of the stylus is optimized. At least that's my understanding. Maybe Peter will jump in and splain.
Opus 33 1/3
It is important to think about stylus shape in a new way than you might have previously. The contact area both up the groove wall as well as the radius front to back (edge sharpness) have an effect on "radius of curvature problems" (inner groove distortion - esp. for high frequencies) but more importantly how the stylus responds to the cartridge.
Wait a minute - you might say - hey peter - "don't you mean the way the cartridge responds to the stylus??"
No - not at all. The reflected energy that is not damped by the cartridge design (and not all can be - due to the physics) goes back DOWN the cantilever and must be input into the record. Does that work well?? Absolutely not.
Ask folks like John Ellison - he might be able to tell you how much of a mechanical impedance mismatch the stylus-record interface is for energy going in THAT direction!! The result is stylus jitter. How much?? Quite a bit. The stylus does not weigh much - and energy going INTO it from the cartridge will move it quite easily. Think in a new way about the stylus/record interface.....
Here is why you need to think in a new way - all cartridges have a natural range of resonant frequencies - dependent on the moving mass and damping. MC's are usually 30-50KHz. Ours are 50-130KHz. The higher the frequency, generally speaking the lower the amplitude of the resonance, and if designed correctly and more importantly, consistently built, can be lessened to a degree. It is terribly important to keep these frequencies generated by the cartridge itself under best control, because you are asking the stylus to "try" to dump some of these into the record. It does a poor job of this, but it tries. There is also reflected energy from the normal modulation as well. If one has less moving mass INSIDE the cartridge, it is easier to damp or control. Our designs have 5 times LESS than MC's, at a minimum. That one reason I build MI designs. Lower jitter = more details/less distortion.
This is where the stylus shape, and VTF come in, as does your thinking in a new way. If one has a exotic stylus shape, designed to perform better in terms of inner groove performance, but not aligned correctly, it does a poorer job at trying to damp out some of this reflected energy. Lots more jitter due to poorer contact with the record and less energy or "damping" at the stylus/groove interface. The less exotic, the more likely you will be in reasonable contact by whatever degree - and therefore, achieve whatever stylus/groove interface damping is possible.
Yes, a more exotic profile that traces more of the groove wall vertically can statistically pick up more pops/record damage/dirt, etc....whereas a simpler design can trace statistically less, pickup less pops/ticks, but may not damp that well, or have more potential high frequency distortion, etc.....IT is COMPLEX - and harder to choose from than buying tires.
So there is not one simple set of "rules" for styli - Soundsmith often uses exotic styli as our designs have lower internal mass, so less reflected energy, better damping, etc.... so we can enjoy the benefits of exotic designs, whereas other designs MAY not perform as well with exotic shapes due to higher internal mass, poor damping, misalignment, cartridge design, etc.....
I hope this explains in part why there is such a spread of likes/dislikes for varied styli configurations. It is NOT just about the shape. It is far more complex - and interactive - than one might initially realize.
Peter Ledermann/Soundsmith
Post a Followup:
FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: