|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
84.173.75.59
In Reply to: On neutrality... posted by mosin on April 19, 2007 at 21:29:51:
Moisin,you are right. Any solution (mat, plinth, tonarm etc.) that damps resonances at a turntable system will kill the "bad" and the "good" resonances. You get rid of distortions, but dynamics and details get lost too.
Im not a friend of damping - the best way would be not to have the wrong resonances and work on the source of that resonances instead of damping them.
But this way is much more complicated and sophisticated instead of damping.Back to the modern SME arms like the 309, 310, IV and V. My expierience is that they are much more damped than other straight forward designs.
A lot of modern MC carts need damped arms due to their uncontrolled resonances, but a older MC design f. e. Koetsus were damped to death at such tonearm designs.Best
Follow Ups:
"Any solution (mat, plinth, tonarm etc.) that damps resonances at a turntable system will kill the "bad" and the "good" resonances."There is no sure thing as "good resonances".
Tre'
Have Fun and Enjoy the Music
"Still Working the Problem"
"There is no sure thing as 'good resonances." (I assume you meant 'such' thing...)I disagree. Everything resonates, like it or not. Most attempts to damp out resonant energy merely shift its frequency around, sometimes for better, sometimes for the worse.
Oft times when something light and rigid (high resonant frequency) is allowed to resonate freely, it quickly dissipates its resonant energy and does very little harm to the musical presentation.
OTOH, when a designer places too much reliance on primitive mass loading in an attempt to damp out resonance, the result is often excessive energy "storage" due to the resultant low resonant frequencies involved.
If, for example, a bass note excites a massive TT component to resonate, the note quickly ends but its energy is still being released back into the system after the event, causing the note attack to be smeared, its sustain bloated, and its decay truncated. That's why so many TTs that rely on excessive mass-loading sound mechanical and lifeless.
The judicious use of mass, coupled with some real engineering work can yield musically spectacular results (Linn, Avid, Michell, Roksan, etc.), but all-out resonance damping assaults via crude mass-loading usually result in a musically-incompetent TT, IME.
What you say is true, but even then there are subjective decisions to be made. Those are made depending on the degree of change the maker believes is most suitable, assuming he has a decent starting point. I believe that some components are doomed at the outset because the original design is inherently flawed. On the otherhand, I am pretty sure that some would have immense potential, but the maker went too far with his tuning. Then, there are those which make the grade, some acceptable, and some spectacular.Anyway, the job isn't easy because endless prototypes aren't practical, and there are other constraints for manufacturers to consider that have nothing to do with the audio aspect of their businesses. It's no wonder most of us are on some bizarre upgrade path. It is an unending learning process.
.
Actually you are both right and wrong.If you have a stylus in a groove it is resonating and its resonance adds to whatever is in the groove. Look further down the chain. Your cartridge engine is resonating. The cartridge body is resonating. The headshell and tonearm is resonating. The platter is resonating. Even the electrical signal resonates.
Now look at the damn speakers. These things are creating and reflecting a whole different issues regarding resonance. Your entire system is pressurizing a room and the room creates some really fascinating resonance.
You simply cannot eliminate resonance in any electronic audio reproduction event. Nor can you eliminate resonance in the live musical event or the processes used to capture the event to the media of your choice. Even the microphone resonates!
How we manage resonance is absolutely critical to getting a life like sound reproduction.
Managing resonance is not a simple matter just as Mosin describes. We have to first reduce resonance to the lowest point of intrusion and then manage the resonance so it does the least harm to the music.
Some manufacturer's have this really nailed. Some are attrocious. System matching is hugely responsible for managing good and bad resonance.
Even my Viola when perfectly played will exhibit good and bad resonance. The result is music and the music is natural. Where I stand on the stage will determine how my Viola sounds to the audience. So even the live music event incorporates resonance management issues. If the Viola is not resonating there is no music. Eliminating all resonance...what is the fun of that?
"Im not a friend of damping - the best way would be not to have the wrong resonances and work on the source of that resonances instead of damping them.
But this way is much more complicated and sophisticated instead of damping"René,
I agree. Getting it right is a very serious balancing act, however. I believe it is also the reason that people sometimes buy equipment that is all first-class, yet their systems are somehow lacking. What they have are wonderful executions, but by designers who work independently. It happens even if they get all of the equipment from the same maker, and perhaps more so. I suppose that the trick is to carefully match everything. It is easier said than done, though.
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: