|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
68.7.183.188
In Reply to: RE: Moving coil cartridge advice posted by Kristian on March 26, 2015 at 08:57:49
That is a great price! I will definitely check it out. Thanks for pointing that out.
Follow Ups:
the OC9, no matter which mark, is a cool/lean type cartridge which requires your auxiliary equipment to be of a certain quality, have some degree of setup, plus it's tonal balance requires careful matching. Given what you've described so far, the last thing I'd advice you would be an OC9.
I should also add ... one of the most common mistakes that can cause it's own form of "tizzyness" is incorrect azimuth. I've seen far too many people (including a certain prominent reviewer) not pay "special" attention when re-attaching the removable headshell; twisted back into the arm, without any consideration for re-aligning proper azimuth.
I have been using this MM for a few years now and fed into my Silvaweld phonostage it sounds pretty awesome. It uses the same cantilever and stylus as the OC9/mkII but in my setup at least it doesn't sound the least bit cold or sterile.
It is very dynamic and explicit and the sound varies from record to record...as it should.
I have had relatively expensive Lyras, Dynavectors and Ortofons and i have to say that this relatively inexpensive MM is just as resolving and perhaps even more dynamic. It might not have quite the subtlety of the Lyra Skala or the absolute resolution of the Dyna 17D2-Mk2 but it is darn close and a fraction of the money.
I haven't heard the sound of the OC9 (whatever incarnation) but I would guess an already analytical phonostage would not be the best match. Since most posting on this thread seem to have SS phonostages, I could kind of understand why they might reach the conclusions they have.
have very limited experience with the 150 ...
but the 140, I've long recommended this cartridge to others (and set it up for 'em). It tonal nature leans towards the bright side, no matter which phono-stage is involved. It may not have the sweetest highs (it doesn't) but it offers relatively wide bandwidth, and retains reasonably good control during difficult modulations. It does require careful setup, but still, I think it offers great value.
To me, the AT house sound (-AT33) is very similar to Lyra. And I should also point out, as you've already alluded, AT does offer consistent build quality/stylus alignment. (at least the ones I've dealt with).
Tire hits the road so to speak, consistent build quality I consider very important w/carts, even at the budget level. If you physically NEED to offset any cart, in any major way, because it's "askew" right from the factory, in order to attain a certain "measured" performance, you're still dealing with a compromise setup, any way you cut it.
tb1
System matching is definitely critical, and as such, I am leaning towards the Quintet Red. But 3 bills for an OC9 is a very nice price. Maybe for my next table...
I'm *somewhat* careful about checking azimuth. I have the Hi-Fi news lp which allows me to check it. I admit I am a bit lazy in not checking it via multimeter methods, though. At some point, I want to get a Fozgometer to make that part of setting up that much easier.
the greater the requirement for correct azimuth.
Stylus shape has absolutely no effect on the impact of azimuth. It has an impact on SRA, but not azimuth. Of course, this assumes we are talking about the kind of azimuth you would adjust using a Fozgometer.
A conical stylus is just as sensitive to the Fozgometer setting as the most aggressive stylus shape you can find because the Fozgometer adjusts the azimuth of the cartridge's electrical generator to the groove. It doesn't measure stylus azimuth. The only way to adjust stylus azimuth would be to use a powerful microscope so you could see the position of the stylus in the groove looking directly at the front of the stylus. Most of us choose electrical azimuth over physical azimuth in order to minimize and equalize crosstalk, which is what the Fozgometer does.
Thanks for that post. I own a Grace Ruby that was re-tipped by SoundSmith with their OCL stylus (their most expensive option, at $350). (Ruby originally was elliptical.) I have not been happy with the results. When I reported that fact to Peter Ledermann by phone, I was told that azimuth was very critical to the sound quality obtainable with that tip. I was and still am a little incredulous about this explanation. But your distinction between electrical adjustment of azimuth and azimuth as it pertains to the way the stylus sits in the groove is perhaps relevant. What bothers me is that I don't hear the problem as being more in one channel vs the other, as one might expect if azimuth is to blame. The sound is equally distorted and a bit irritating in both channels. And as to "physical" azimuth, I use this cartridge in a Dynavector DV505 with DV headshell that does not permit azimuth adjustment. Thus it also stands to reason that the top of the cartridge body is parallel to the LP surface, which means that unless the new OCL tip is mounted askew, there should be no problem with physical azimuth of the tip.
I should add that after Peter admonished me to check azimuth, he also did kindly invite me to return the Ruby for his inspection. I have not done that yet. I did inspect the tip with a microscope. Apart from a gob of glue under the new tip, which may or may not be normal, I see no problem.
perhaps of interest ...
> > What bothers me is that I don't hear the problem as being more in one channel vs the other, as one might expect if azimuth is to blame. < <
The Gyger SGII and OrtofonRep100 are very dependent on azimuth. But they are very aggressive stylus. I use a test record w/mono for setup and record the results to digital for more clinical comparison, when needed.
My stylus is mounted with fine precision, as typical of every top Benz (& Orts) I've owned. So I'm not looking for obvious distortion in any channel. What I do hear is still very telling, in that the soundstage opens up dimensionally. You may also discover greater bandwidth (easier to hear w/a freq.sweep test rec), but to my ears, that's more an SRA issue.
One other thing, and I'm not certain you've heard this before ... but I know with my particular stylus, incorrect azimuth and increased stylus drag are directly related. You can actually see the strobe shift, very slight decrease in speed, but obvious none the same.
> > Thus it also stands to reason that the top of the cartridge body is parallel to the LP surface, which means that unless the new OCL tip is mounted askew, there should be no problem with physical azimuth of the tip. < <
Is it mounted askew?
You need to determine this first, before moving forward. Otherwise ...
Thanks for taking the time to compose that response. I do appreciate it. However, I think your points may be moot. In your first paragraph responding to one of my sentences that you quoted, you are talking about correct "electrical azimuth". My definition of correct electrical azimuth is the condition where you have physically altered azimuth such that any misalignment of the signal generating system with respect to the LP surface/groove (and the visible exterior of the cartridge body) is corrected. In theory, this leads to equal crosstalk or at least lowest practical crosstalk. Very often or at least sometimes, achieving correct electrical azimuth will result in the stylus tip being slightly askew in the way it contacts the groove walls, which might make for incorrect "physical azimuth" for a given cartridge sample.
My understanding of the message I got from Peter Ledermann and others is that the SS OCL stylus needs to have correct physical azimuth. That is, the relationship of the contact points between groove and either side of the stylus needs to be symmetrical. It seems to me that this is not always compatible with correct electrical azimuth. Further, I said that the re-tipped Ruby was riding in a Dynavector DV505 headshell. This headshell fits the tonearm in only one way, such that the bottom surface of the headshell is plane parallel to the LP surface. This won't always give correct electrical azimuth, but it pretty much guarantees that you start out with near correct physical azimuth, unless the stylus/cantilever was cockeyed wrt the cartridge body, from the get-go. That would be an issue with the re-tipping, not that I claim such an issue exists.
I certainly don't disagree that correct electrical azimuth is to be desired, and I did not mean to say that.
> > My definition of correct electrical azimuth is the condition where you have physically altered azimuth such that any misalignment of the signal generating system with respect to the LP surface/groove (and the visible exterior of the cartridge body) is corrected. In theory, this leads to equal crosstalk or at least lowest practical crosstalk. Very often or at least sometimes, achieving correct electrical azimuth will result in the stylus tip being slightly askew in the way it contacts the groove walls, which might make for incorrect "physical azimuth" for a given cartridge sample. < <
Yes, my point exactly (although perhaps not well stated in my earlier post)
Restated: given the degree of cut with any particular stylus shape (some more aggressive than others), if physical azimuth is off, or needs to be physically offset in order to achieve "best-case" electrical azimuth, you're still dealing with a compromise setup. And given that compromise; I'd still opt for physical azimuth, because to my ears, this will have an even greater effect on sound quality.
But my opinion is based ONLY on my experiences with certain stylus types. I've never used this particular stylus.
> > My understanding of the message I got from Peter Ledermann and others is that the SS OCL stylus needs to have correct physical azimuth. That is, the relationship of the contact points between groove and either side of the stylus needs to be symmetrical. It seems to me that this is not always compatible with correct electrical azimuth. < <
It isn't compatible, hence the problem. And perhaps Peter considers this stylus less forgiving of physical azimuth errors/offset?
Lew, another possibility maybe that the stylus is mounted well, but that the the cut of the stylus is askew. Also, the problem you're hearing may be related to another issue. I still think this needs to be determined before you can move forward, no matter which tonearm. If it were me, I'd send it back for examination pronto.
tb1
Dopogue is lives nearby and owns a Grace F9E that he set up in a VPI tonearm on a Lenco. (My possibly defective re-tipped Ruby is riding on a Dynavector in a Lenco, too, as it happens.) Yesterday, I took my stylus assembly over to Dave's house, and we simply swapped my stylus assembly for that of his F9E, without changing anything. Dave had aligned his F9E using a Fozgometer, and the set-up checks out perfect for "electrical azimuth". Dave and I together heard the same qualities of distortion from my Ruby re-tip that I heard in my own system, as compared to the F9E, in this case. Dave could hear the problems even better than I, because he is of course more used to the sound of his own system. He felt as I do that the distortion does not seem to be due to any phenomena that we associate with azimuth error, although I certainly cannot rule out that this is azimuth error of the "physical" type, as we discussed.
Anyway, I have been re-energized to send this back to Peter.
I once had Chris Feickert (aka Dr. Feickert) and his software designer over at my place when they were just rolling out their Adjust + software for cartridge alignment.
I had just (about 2 months before) installed my AT150MLX on my Yamaha GT-2000 using a Clearaudio alignment protractor. They wanted to demo the software for me and see what I thought of it and its user friendliness. So we set about checking all kinds of parameters and, well, there was nothing to improve! I had the alignment absolutely nailed; VTA, overhang, including azimuth, which i had done by setting the cartridge on a thin mirror and magnifying glass without a record. So I had aligned it for the stylus and body (very good alignment of these two by AT). It seems that this resulted also in good electrical alignment. What this tells me is that AT has extremely good build quality so that all these things lined up well.
I haven't had to touch my alignment since...it is bang on and I didn't really need Adjust + ...at least for the AT cartridge...with another more hand made one it might be very useful.
We have a local (v.big city, so take "local" figuratively) store that sells much analog, including Feickert, and his setup software. I went in to demo a particular tonearm. It happened to be setup on a Feickert tt. The demo lasted all of 3 minutes, bc I couldn't judge anything on what I was hearing. I'm not saying it sounded bad, it didn't, but it didn't come close to meeting my expectations.
Was it the arm, the turntable, the room, or the setup, I don't know, but as a demo, it failed to impress me on any level. And considering the reputation for Feickert gear and setup, it was doubly disappointing.
Well, not long ago, I was sent a flac digital copy of a complete Feickert TT. This was a home based setup, by EAR! Still not expecting much, I was instantly surprised, perhaps one of the best rips I've ever heard of this particular recording (although it should be noted that he used a superbly mastered "audiophile" LP). Not only did it display amazing depth, background instruments had much more impact. It sounded NOTHING like the store demo.
So impressed, this demo (like some others before) sent my own turntable back to the workbench for upgrade/re-setup.
Personally, I consider turntable setup a black art. If you simply go by the standard aligned numbers, graphs, fozzers, and rely on only those factors to attaining "superior" sound quality, well, good luck. When I setup my turntable, the real test is ALWAYS ear based. If everything measures perfectly, but it still sounds compromised to my ears ... something still is wrong, something needs to change.
Consider the Alan Wright's "Guru" method, obviously (and purposely) incorrect based on standard(s) alignment methodology. Most people would skwak at such blasphemy, purposely setting something wrong to achieve a preferred sound?
Yet, I know some who swear by this method, and never look back. Personally, I don't use any of the standard alignment methods, having developed a methodology that suites my rig specifically. I tried the Guru method, I certainly didn't hear anything "wrong". In fact, it sounded as good as ever. I even sent out a demo LP-CDR using the Guru method (but w/~half the offset) and had comments come back such as (I paraphrase) "sounds great, you obviously have it aligned perfectly".
Defined set points/numbers, graphs and "standard" practices, still need to impress at the listening stage. Otherwise ...
tb1
My current Gieger FGII (much like Orts.Rep100) is easily the most sensitive cart I've had concerning proper azimuth.
J.Carr ...
"If the stylus has straight-sided walls, this may very well be the case. However, modern high-quality Japanese line-contact styli like Namiki's MicroLine (microridge) or Ogura's PA have a gentle radius on the sides, so that even if you get the azimuth slightly wrong, you won't recut the LP groove."
tb1
However, unless you use a microscope to set stylus azimuth, you'll never know for certain whether it's set correctly.
On the other hand, most of don't care about stylus azimuth. Instead, we want to minimize crosstalk and maximize stereo separation, which is the purpose of a Fozgometer.
The reason we don't care about stylus azimuth is because the edge of the stylus that contacts the groove is curved to allows the stylus to be tilted in either direction a few degrees. It normally requires less than two degrees to adjust for electrical azimuth.
If you believe your cartridge has been manufactured properly, all you really need to do is set the cartridge body level with the vinyl surface for zero-degree azimuth and the stylus should be perfectly perpendicular in the groove. That is a very simple process. You really don't even need a mirror. Simply shine a flashlight at the front of the cartridge when it's playing a record and observe its reflection on the vinyl surface. However, this method has no influence on crosstalk and stereo separation.
Best regards,
John Elison
"However, unless you use a microscope to set stylus azimuth, you'll never know for certain whether it's set correctly."Well, certainly true if you don't trust your ears, however setting azimuth by ear using a test record is something I'm very comfortable doing, furthermore, it provides me the exact SONIC result I covet. It's long been sonically obvious that a wider more dimensional soundstage is equivalent to attaining less crosstalk, greater separation.
Personally, I put more stock into physical azimuth, if you've ever dealt with a FGII or Ort100 stylus, you'd understand that requirement.
"The reason we don't care about stylus azimuth is because the edge of the stylus that contacts the groove is curved to allows the stylus to be tilted in either direction a few degrees. It normally requires less than two degrees to adjust for electrical azimuth.:"
Many different shapes/curves exist, as John Carr stated, some are more line orientated than others. The FGII isn't nearly as curved as the microline, just one example.
"If you believe your cartridge has been manufactured properly, all you really need to do is set the cartridge body level with the vinyl surface for zero-degree azimuth and the stylus should be perfectly perpendicular in the groove. That is a very simple process. You really don't even need a mirror. Simply shine a flashlight at the front of the cartridge when it's playing a record and observe its reflection on the vinyl surface. However, this method has no influence on crosstalk and stereo separation."
Well ... thanks John ... but I wasn't asking for your advice. In fact, your "simple" method above represents my starting point, I'll still need to continue using a far more comprehensive methodology to achieve the results I'm already attaining.
tb1
Edits: 03/27/15
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: