Maybe the simulation, maybe my stripeboard build.
I guess the second one is true
After adding 22R to the sources, one channel is oscillating.
I will set this subproject on ice now, as I real hate such deadlocks.
Franz
Find 4 new matched 2SK170V from the stash you now have, because there is something fishy going on with the GR in the old build, and I will try another set of values around their bias so to get proper gain for the DL160, so not to through your old pre away. Its always worth trying.
Yes yes, I got it: we are guests from Salas!
Sorry again. It is some bad swiss native habit to look for order
Salas made another simulation to save my Pacifique stripeboard, changing the GR's to V's I have in my hobby box.
I'll try it.
Franz
Sorry again. It is some bad swiss native habit to look for order
Salas made another simulation to save my Pacifique stripeboard, changing the GR's to V's I have in my hobby box.
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
I'll try it.
Franz
Yes yes, I got it: we are guests from Salas!
Sorry again. It is some bad swiss native habit to look for order
Salas made another simulation to save my Pacifique stripeboard, changing the GR's to V's I have in my hobby box.
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
I'll try it.
Franz
Bad boy Club Med advice your arm TP16 don't match well with both Denon carts: DL160 FS 6.22Hz (optimum 8-11Hz) or DL103R FS 7.5Hz (optimum 8-11Hz) if you want the best combo with your Thorens TP16 you must look for a cart with these goals to match the best combo results starts with a minimum compliance at 10Hz of 7 & end with a maximum compliance of 20:
Compliance 10Hz: 7 + cart & mounting from 11-15gr
Compliance 10Hz: 8 + cart & mount fm 8-15gr
Compliance 10Hz: 9-14 + cart & mount fm 5-15gr
Compliance 10Hz: 15 + cart & mount fm 5-13gr
Compliance 10Hz: 16 + cart & mount fm 5-11gr
Compliance 10Hz: 17 + cart & mount fm 5-9gr
Compliance 10Hz: 18 + cart & mount fm 5-8gr
Compliance 10Hz: 19 + cart & mount fm 5-7gr
Compliance 10Hz: 20 + cart & mount only 5gr
To know hardware mounting mass preferable wich one measure with a electronic precision scale to be sure how much it's exactly.
Benz Ace Med like Rcruz match perfectly: compliance 15 + cart & moun 9.3gr = FS 8.1Hz
Last edited:
Ola hombre
Thanks for the club med advice, but I dont need or want it
The DL160 is not on my turntable.
My available money does not allow to change the DL103R actually.
And I am satisfied!
BTW: I am using turntables for more than fourty years now and I am used to adjust them, using protractor, balance, test record and last but not least: my ears.
It is not my advice to use TP16/DL103R, but it's my actual life.
Back to the preamps:
The "Original Le Pacifique" clone is now working satifsfying with the V's and the new resistor values.
Thanks Salas
Franz
Thanks for the club med advice, but I dont need or want it
The DL160 is not on my turntable.
My available money does not allow to change the DL103R actually.
And I am satisfied!
BTW: I am using turntables for more than fourty years now and I am used to adjust them, using protractor, balance, test record and last but not least: my ears.
It is not my advice to use TP16/DL103R, but it's my actual life.
Back to the preamps:
The "Original Le Pacifique" clone is now working satifsfying with the V's and the new resistor values.
Thanks Salas
Franz
Club Med
You triggered some thinking in my mind...
I checked again theoretically my choice, combination of TP16 Mk I (16.5g) with added 4g mass and DL103R.
Given the fact, that the compliance at 10Hz of the DL103R will be between 10 and 15 (and not 5 like the measured compliance at 100Hz), the combination looks imho good.
Actually, I have the following choice available:
- Technics 300MC: unsatisfying in practice (too low compliance?)
- Shure V15-III with replica stylus: unsatisfying in practice (too high compliance or minor quality replica stylus?). Bad tracking.
- Shure M75B Type 2: this is a underestimated gem! Correctly adjusted and also capacitive loaded it gives very good results. No wonder, Swiss broadcast used them on EMT930 (because of cost, it would have been to expensive, to replace MC's because of damaged cantilever). Good pragmatically choice, indeed!
I share your opinion regarding the Benz cartridges: very fine products. BUT: I decided for myself prefering conical styluses over eliptical or other exotic shapes.
Less hassle.
Franz
You triggered some thinking in my mind...
I checked again theoretically my choice, combination of TP16 Mk I (16.5g) with added 4g mass and DL103R.
Given the fact, that the compliance at 10Hz of the DL103R will be between 10 and 15 (and not 5 like the measured compliance at 100Hz), the combination looks imho good.
Actually, I have the following choice available:
- Technics 300MC: unsatisfying in practice (too low compliance?)
- Shure V15-III with replica stylus: unsatisfying in practice (too high compliance or minor quality replica stylus?). Bad tracking.
- Shure M75B Type 2: this is a underestimated gem! Correctly adjusted and also capacitive loaded it gives very good results. No wonder, Swiss broadcast used them on EMT930 (because of cost, it would have been to expensive, to replace MC's because of damaged cantilever). Good pragmatically choice, indeed!
I share your opinion regarding the Benz cartridges: very fine products. BUT: I decided for myself prefering conical styluses over eliptical or other exotic shapes.
Less hassle.
Franz
Last edited:
Hi Franz,
The problem with the combo TP16 is your high effective mass 16.5 so if you add more mass you are increasing the distance to get the best match, mine advice is that you must take off the 4gr mass added, another good idea but a very difficult is to take off the body plastic of Denon DL103R to get less mass, please let me know your subjective impressions with less mass?
Denon DL103R compliance at 10Hz isn't between 10 & 15, Salas & I both measured 17,5 so 8.5 FS so better if you calculate with a compliance at 10 Hz for the Denon DL103R of 17.5 so if you translate the compliance at 10Hz for the Denon DL160 will be aprox. more than x 3 so 30 or more.
Try the Technics 300MC with the 4gr mass add TP16 & let me know how works, teorical will be a good match?
The Benz Micro Ace Med was only an example of good match.
Felipe
Hi Rcruz,
I'm not Franz but I mind more surface in contact between pick-up & LP
pick up conical: V
pick up elliptical: O
The underline is the LP surface so conicals go more down into the LP than ellipitcals.
Best,
Felipe
Now that is something new for me !!!
I have been listening to pickups for 40 yeras or so and I always experienced better detail retrieval from more expensive carts with special tips.
Now you made me doubt everything.... Maybe the benefits where in the special cantilevers and windings and not on the better tips ?
In my old days of the SP12, I surely detected better results just by replacing the stock conical stylus by an eliptical one Those where the happy days
Ricardo
I have been listening to pickups for 40 yeras or so and I always experienced better detail retrieval from more expensive carts with special tips.
Now you made me doubt everything.... Maybe the benefits where in the special cantilevers and windings and not on the better tips ?
In my old days of the SP12, I surely detected better results just by replacing the stock conical stylus by an eliptical one
Those where the happy days Ricardo
Hi R Cruz,
your listening impression is correct. Don't doubt yourself.
One of the reason for changing from conical tip to elliptical and other similar breeds was to get the tip out of the grunge in the bottom of the groove.
Merlin's stated advantage of the conical is arguably why we should not use a conical tip.
I am aware of some other claimed advantages of the special tips.
Longer contact radius resulting in less wear of the tip and groove.
Narrower side radius resulting in the ability to follow higher frequency information.
This same narrower radius also reduces pinch up as the frequency rises. This pinch up adds stereo information that is not part of the cut groove. It is out of phase information that detracts from the real stereo picture.
Larger bottom radius to lift the tip away from the debris.
The Big disadvantage of the elliptical tips is the need for much more accurate setting up to get the two contact strips/lines to match the cutting edges of the groove blade.
your listening impression is correct. Don't doubt yourself.
One of the reason for changing from conical tip to elliptical and other similar breeds was to get the tip out of the grunge in the bottom of the groove.
Merlin's stated advantage of the conical is arguably why we should not use a conical tip.
I am aware of some other claimed advantages of the special tips.
Longer contact radius resulting in less wear of the tip and groove.
Narrower side radius resulting in the ability to follow higher frequency information.
This same narrower radius also reduces pinch up as the frequency rises. This pinch up adds stereo information that is not part of the cut groove. It is out of phase information that detracts from the real stereo picture.
Larger bottom radius to lift the tip away from the debris.
The Big disadvantage of the elliptical tips is the need for much more accurate setting up to get the two contact strips/lines to match the cutting edges of the groove blade.
R Cruz,
If you were to deliberately set up an elliptical style tip so that it is seriously misaligned, then you might find that in comparison to a correctly set up conical that the conical sounds better.
Would you call that a fair comparison?
If I was a conical tip salesman, that is probably the sort of trick I would resort to.
In fact I would choose the most difficult to set up tips just to prove that the conical sounds better.
Would you believe such a salesman, even though you heard the demonstration with your own ears? I would certainly be looking for independent corroboration.
If you were to deliberately set up an elliptical style tip so that it is seriously misaligned, then you might find that in comparison to a correctly set up conical that the conical sounds better.
Would you call that a fair comparison?
If I was a conical tip salesman, that is probably the sort of trick I would resort to.
In fact I would choose the most difficult to set up tips just to prove that the conical sounds better.
Would you believe such a salesman, even though you heard the demonstration with your own ears? I would certainly be looking for independent corroboration.