John Curl's Blowtorch preamplifier part II

[scott wurcer]

Originally Posted by Joshua_G

My cartridge is ZYX Airy R3S, it seems to be an excellent one and I cannot afford a better one.

But that's a micro-ridge stylus, am I the only one who thinks this thread has taken a turn for the surreal?

[zapnspark]

Here is a complete set of those "DYNAGROOVE" Stereophile articles by J. Gordon Holt.

Down with Dynagroove! | Stereophile.com

Cheers.

ZAP

[scott wurcer]

Originally Posted by zapnspark

Here is a complete set of those "DYNAGROOVE" Stereophile articles by J. Gordon Holt.

Down with Dynagroove! | Stereophile.com

Cheers.

ZAP

I agree with Mr. Holt the EMI disks of that era are often stunning, really compelling (any stylus geometry as far as I could tell).

[john curl]

There is nothing 'surreal' here. People have been making phono cartridges for many decades, AND many find that the more sophisticated styli actually sound better, and extract more information from the vinyl grove. To imply that they are all 'crooks' or 'crazy' is just another professional 'impugning' of audio designers.
Scott, first of all, are you going to talk to John Meyer about direct disc recording? His experience should get you 'up to speed' so to speak, at least about disc recording and reproduction. John Meyer and I ran an advanced audio lab at IHEM in Switzerland for 1 1/2 years, and we tested every MC phono cartridge that we could get our hands on, up to 50 KHz. We learned a thing or two, but I don't pretend to be a phono cartridge designer, and perhaps, neither should you. '-)

[zapnspark]

I admired J. Gordon Holt a great deal. However, I think he was overly harsh about some aspects the overall RCA DYNAGROOVE approach.
DYNAGROOVE actually encompassed important and wide ranging improvements to RCA recording techniques.

IMO, this article is a better presentation of what the DYNAGROOVE approach was attempting to accomplish at that time:

Article: Dynagroove: The Sound of Tomorrow

Cheers.

ZAP

[Chris Hornbeck]

It's been said many times before, but I'll say it again, the most important part of playing a vinyl record is to wash it with something that vacuums. Not at all trivial or an extra - essential.

Thanks,
Chris

[john curl]

Phono is a 'pain'. Part of what needs fixing first, usually depends on what annoys you the most. Some people hate ticks and pops, and hate to clean the stylus after every play, so these people should seriously consider cleaning their records, often.
Others, listen through that (me) and listen to the sound quality. This is where phono cartridge quality counts most. Many cheaper cartridges will usually sound 'dull' or opaque.
Better cartridges can just sound more 'real'. However, proper set-up and adjustment becomes more and more important when a 'serious' phono cartridge is used with some sort of exotic stylus. That is one of the advantages of something like a Denon 103C (conical) cartridge. IF you insist on easy set-up, the conical stylus is ideal. However, a 103D, or a 103S would be more sensitive to a sloppy set-up. This is just a 30 year old example. The newer cartridges can be formidable in their set-up, and I tend to avoid it without expert help.

[kevinkr]

While I agree in general I haven't found the standard or Zu version of the DL-103 to be particularly easy to set up well. Seems to need as much attention to the details as anything I've tried. I'll admit though that I am a big fan of the SPU (GM E II) on a Schick arm which has made my life very simple and trouble free, and musical. I also have a DL103D on a rigid low mass headshell on an SME 3009 Series II that I like, but it is also quite fussy about set up.. (Both tables are antique TD-124s)

Quality of set up as well as arm compatibility are always going to be an issue with any cartridge that offers the potential of decent performance.

FWIW I would recommend an audio-technica techni-hard headshell or a Yamamoto over the SME S2 shell on a 3009 any day of the week.

Chris H makes an important point as well.

[SY]

Originally Posted by john curl

To imply that they are all 'crooks' or 'crazy' is just another professional 'impugning' of audio designers.

Of course, no-one did that, but sure, whatever. Keep whacking it, the straw will come out eventually.

[scott wurcer]

Originally Posted by john curl

There is nothing 'surreal' here. People have been making phono cartridges for many decades, AND many find that the more sophisticated styli actually sound better, and extract more information from the vinyl grove. To imply that they are all 'crooks' or 'crazy' is just another professional 'impugning' of audio designers.

I'm trying to have a disscussion here and wade through decades of confusion. Both Thorsten and Groove-T said basicly only a spherical stylus "works" on many classic LP's. Who said crooks? There is serious confusion here, the major cutting lathe makers decide to compensate for spherical stylii, obviating the cartridge makers "continuous improvement" of geometries, to me simply a classic conflict of economic interests. The cartridge makers simply ignore what would hurt their bottom line.