If there are perfect clean records without scratches in use, there is still a very heavy hiss and noise audible between the tracks. Much more than the inherent noise even from cheap and simple RIAA designs with µA741 or 2-transistor RIAA solution.
This record surface noise strongly depends also on footprint of stylus (e. g. shibata, elliptical or hyper elliptical profiles) so as the selected tracking forces.
A spherical styli diamond provides bad results.
Best known styli for high quality are follow:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rEV0-q18-oo
But there are many more (e. g. VDH-styli etc.).
What kind of styli on the cartridge and which appropriate tracking force is ideal in order for lowest mechanical background noise while record playback ?
Which influence are to expect from the tonarm ?
Thank you for advices.
This threads don't provide any advices:
Surface Noise!! | Steve Hoffman Music Forums
What limits surface noise on vinyl? | Steve Hoffman Music Forums
Surface Noise!! | Steve Hoffman Music Forums
This record surface noise strongly depends also on footprint of stylus (e. g. shibata, elliptical or hyper elliptical profiles) so as the selected tracking forces.
A spherical styli diamond provides bad results.
Best known styli for high quality are follow:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rEV0-q18-oo
But there are many more (e. g. VDH-styli etc.).
What kind of styli on the cartridge and which appropriate tracking force is ideal in order for lowest mechanical background noise while record playback ?
Which influence are to expect from the tonarm ?
Thank you for advices.
This threads don't provide any advices:
Surface Noise!! | Steve Hoffman Music Forums
What limits surface noise on vinyl? | Steve Hoffman Music Forums
Surface Noise!! | Steve Hoffman Music Forums
Hi,
What is your question? Do you want to reduce surface noise between tracks or at music playback on a track? I have a spherical stylus (Denon DL-103) and never had any very heavy hiss and noise on either between tracks or on track.
My experience is that the simple "opamp" phono stages tend to exaggerate pops, clicks and hiss, no matter if their frequency response is flat (after RIAA eq). Tube stages are better in this respect. It is not the stylus cut that should be blamed, although there are brighter and duller pickups.
What is your question? Do you want to reduce surface noise between tracks or at music playback on a track? I have a spherical stylus (Denon DL-103) and never had any very heavy hiss and noise on either between tracks or on track.
My experience is that the simple "opamp" phono stages tend to exaggerate pops, clicks and hiss, no matter if their frequency response is flat (after RIAA eq). Tube stages are better in this respect. It is not the stylus cut that should be blamed, although there are brighter and duller pickups.
I want to reduce surface noise both between tracks and on a track. I supposed, the level of background noise from record surface is always the same.
In cases, where phono stages tend to exaggerate pops, clicks and hiss, which is more than that one from record playback itself, the phono stage must be faulty. The inherent noise even from cheap phonostages with µA741 e.g. is much lower than that one from record surface. I check this while take-off the arm.
Last edited:
Thanks for the clarification. It just came to my mind that proper VTA setting also reduces surface noise. In my opinion the most important is clean disc. Second is a phono preamplifier with an input stage having very large overload margin, and very large slew rate. Try a passive RIAA (no-feedback) tube equalizer if you can, and perhaps your problem goes away.
I'm happy with the LP's of certain brands that I bought new and put away quickly after playing. Superior brands of surface noise are RCA red seal or dynagroove (not Camelot), Colombia , Mercury living Presence (not Wing), Epic, Telefunken, Denon, Mobile Fidelity, Telearc. Really vile for surface noise are Atco, Pickwick, Stereo Spectrum, Hifi Tops, those custom record plants in NJ and Nashville under various brands.
Capitol pop was really bad but the post 2008 reissues under EMI are much better.
I find used records left out too long in the dusty room respond well to soap & water to improve noise. This removed mold also from used records that smell bad. I use Pamolive dish detergent, the kind without the lye. I scrub particular lump of debris with my fingers. This doesn't improve records previously played with a heavy (usually ceramic) cartridge, those the highs are wiped out. I lost several Mercury Living Presence that way on Mother's Top Value Stamps RCA stereo, before I educated myself and got a used AR turntable about 1970.
My $79 BIC turntable with a Shure M97 era IV cartridge has been as low noise as anything I have heard. This tracks at 1.5 g. I measured the side to side angle which was wrong & corrected with washers, but the vertical angle I just eyeballed as "normal".
For reference, I've used a dynakit PAS2 preamp, and ST70 tube amp since 1970. Capacitors have been changed periodically as wattage decreased or unbalance occured. Metal film resistors over 100k have helped the hiss quite a bit since 2010. When it actually works which is seldom, a peavey CS800s amp sound slightly better than the ST70, less distorted on top octave piano tracks.
I find the quibbling in the first Hoffman Forum link to be typical hifi mania.
Capitol pop was really bad but the post 2008 reissues under EMI are much better.
I find used records left out too long in the dusty room respond well to soap & water to improve noise. This removed mold also from used records that smell bad. I use Pamolive dish detergent, the kind without the lye. I scrub particular lump of debris with my fingers. This doesn't improve records previously played with a heavy (usually ceramic) cartridge, those the highs are wiped out. I lost several Mercury Living Presence that way on Mother's Top Value Stamps RCA stereo, before I educated myself and got a used AR turntable about 1970.
My $79 BIC turntable with a Shure M97 era IV cartridge has been as low noise as anything I have heard. This tracks at 1.5 g. I measured the side to side angle which was wrong & corrected with washers, but the vertical angle I just eyeballed as "normal".
For reference, I've used a dynakit PAS2 preamp, and ST70 tube amp since 1970. Capacitors have been changed periodically as wattage decreased or unbalance occured. Metal film resistors over 100k have helped the hiss quite a bit since 2010. When it actually works which is seldom, a peavey CS800s amp sound slightly better than the ST70, less distorted on top octave piano tracks.
I find the quibbling in the first Hoffman Forum link to be typical hifi mania.
Last edited:
Noise Reduction of Record Surface Noise by use of a Phono RIAA Stage with bad SNR
under
Shunt feedback in phono preamplifiers : new topics on this forum
I read this in the last posting:
Interesting in this system is the presence of a nearly ideal noise reducer which cleans up LP surface noise along with the preamplifier's input 47kOhm thermal noise. This circuit is very effective in reducing both vinyl and cassette tape noise.
From this approach I have never heard before.
Any experiences (go to the schematics in one of previous postings) ?
under
Shunt feedback in phono preamplifiers : new topics on this forum
I read this in the last posting:
Interesting in this system is the presence of a nearly ideal noise reducer which cleans up LP surface noise along with the preamplifier's input 47kOhm thermal noise. This circuit is very effective in reducing both vinyl and cassette tape noise.
From this approach I have never heard before.
Any experiences (go to the schematics in one of previous postings) ?
Well the link has a privacy protected schematic unless you give the security code for your retirement account to facebook. Unlike 99.999999% of internet users I won't be publishing that information for the whole world. diyaudio allowed me to use a fake birthdate to sign up. I am not really 116 years old.
As far as parallel input, I am using the following op amp circuit in the RA88a which is quite acceptable on surface noise, even pops. It is almost equivalent to the PAS2 12AX7 preamp, but has slightly higher hum. This was quite modified from the original RA88a circuit which hissed. Improving a "Disco mixer" to mid-fi performance - diyAudiohttp://www.diyaudio.com/forums/analog-line-level/164102-improving-disco-mixer-mid-fi-performance.html
Not shown is a 33 pf disc cap from the input to analog ground. That helped kill the interference by the CB radio equipped truck emitting continuous dogs barking out "dixie". Inputs are separated from case ground by rubber rings around the RCA jacks. That really inproved the hum.
This circuit goes to a 10k resistor in parallel with the CD and radio inputs through 10k, boosted 5x by a second 33078, attenuated by the volume pot, and through an 8' RCA cable to the power amp. My amps require 1.6 v or 2 v input for maximum volume, not a "standard" 500 mv.
Leaving all mixer input pots up in the play position does not audibly increase hiss, which is very convenient over the preamp which requires switching every time you change source.
Somebody suggested increasing the .0033 cap to .033, decreasing the 1.5 meg resitor to 150 k, to improve performance. Unfortunately this would decrease the gain by 10x, requiring a 4.7k resistor loading the mag phono input, which is obviously rediculous. Another op amp would be required on the mag phono, which is a can of worms I'm not going to open. Hiss is now lower than the pilot light on the heater in the room.
As far as parallel input, I am using the following op amp circuit in the RA88a which is quite acceptable on surface noise, even pops. It is almost equivalent to the PAS2 12AX7 preamp, but has slightly higher hum. This was quite modified from the original RA88a circuit which hissed. Improving a "Disco mixer" to mid-fi performance - diyAudiohttp://www.diyaudio.com/forums/analog-line-level/164102-improving-disco-mixer-mid-fi-performance.html
Not shown is a 33 pf disc cap from the input to analog ground. That helped kill the interference by the CB radio equipped truck emitting continuous dogs barking out "dixie". Inputs are separated from case ground by rubber rings around the RCA jacks. That really inproved the hum.
This circuit goes to a 10k resistor in parallel with the CD and radio inputs through 10k, boosted 5x by a second 33078, attenuated by the volume pot, and through an 8' RCA cable to the power amp. My amps require 1.6 v or 2 v input for maximum volume, not a "standard" 500 mv.
Leaving all mixer input pots up in the play position does not audibly increase hiss, which is very convenient over the preamp which requires switching every time you change source.
Somebody suggested increasing the .0033 cap to .033, decreasing the 1.5 meg resitor to 150 k, to improve performance. Unfortunately this would decrease the gain by 10x, requiring a 4.7k resistor loading the mag phono input, which is obviously rediculous. Another op amp would be required on the mag phono, which is a can of worms I'm not going to open. Hiss is now lower than the pilot light on the heater in the room.
Last edited:
Hi,
A few years back I did extensive research and tests on this, here's a summary of what I found.
Irreducible (non-dirt, non-damage) surface noise is mostly due to random variations in friction between stylus and vinyl. Crackle-pop is an artefact of stick-slip friction, whereas background noise is an artefact of random variation in friction which follows a flicker noise law 1/f.
All of the above suggestions on this thread already are true, and act in the same way: by reducing friction. Wet playback, for example, works by lubrication and is highly effective as a demonstration. VTA works by altering approach angle the stylus and vinyl surfaces make. Same with azimuth. Different stylus profiles have different results because of different friction coefficients. Results vary from record to record because of vinyl composition and pressing conditions.
So the answer to the OP is 'anything which reduces stylus-groove friction'.
HTH !
LD
A few years back I did extensive research and tests on this, here's a summary of what I found.
Irreducible (non-dirt, non-damage) surface noise is mostly due to random variations in friction between stylus and vinyl. Crackle-pop is an artefact of stick-slip friction, whereas background noise is an artefact of random variation in friction which follows a flicker noise law 1/f.
All of the above suggestions on this thread already are true, and act in the same way: by reducing friction. Wet playback, for example, works by lubrication and is highly effective as a demonstration. VTA works by altering approach angle the stylus and vinyl surfaces make. Same with azimuth. Different stylus profiles have different results because of different friction coefficients. Results vary from record to record because of vinyl composition and pressing conditions.
So the answer to the OP is 'anything which reduces stylus-groove friction'.
HTH !
LD
I find this a wrong topic. In "Digital Stress" we discussed this; Gnobuddy meant, that Vinyl has 68dB dynamic range, while i meant, that one can hear deep into the hiss, so dynamic range is higher. Now is hiss really -68dB hi? Certainly not unweighted. Take a fresh single with fade-out and turn up the volume at the fade-out. Still at the knob stop i hear no hiss, but i admit that i did not stand up to face the tweeter. I would say that vanilla Vinyl has hier dynamic range than CD and leaves nothing to be wanted in this regard.
You can say it, and you have, repeatedly, but saying it repeatedly does not make it any less nonsensical.
Generally, surface noise has a strong 1/f law, very low end weighted. In the time domain, it also has tick and pop events that coincide with stylus momentarily encountering friction so great it loses contact with groove walls. The distribution of these peaks in time and magnitude also follows a flicker law and is effectively random. The spectrum of these 'micro-mistracking events' is impulse like, and broad spectrum, and contributes most to hf spectral analysis - but is audible as ticks and pops, not continuous hiss.
LD
Get smooth sheaths for your discs, as i did for my LPs, or manage to not rub them with the sheaths when taking them out and sticking them in, should this be really possible. Handle them only with clean hands and clean hair in clean rooms. Be aware that previous record owners prolly did not. If you do so, you may be able to avoid most people dressing like anal chefs for a living.
The same topic I have start by this German portal:
Möglichkeiten zur Verringerung des Grundrauschens der Schallplatte - Phono - allgemein - Analog-Forum
There I read some hints concerning stylus profiles with very low record surface noise resp. record groove noise:
1) ZYX Ultimate series (post #13), Stylus: Micro-Ridge, Contact Radius: 3μm×60μm,
Life Time: 2000Hour/2.0gm (Solid Diamond□0.1mm)
ZYX Official Website - Ultimate 100
2) VDH Frog Series (post #6) Stylus: VDH - IS, Contact Radius: 2µm x 85µm
Van Den Hul - The FROG ® Series* | Product (phono)
3) Transfiguration Ogura (post #5) Stylus: Ogura PA, Contact Radius: 3µm x 33µm
Transfiguration – AuDeus
4) Audio Technica ATN150MLX
AT150MLX Dual Moving Magnet Cartridge (DISCONTINUED) || Audio-Technica US
Möglichkeiten zur Verringerung des Grundrauschens der Schallplatte - Phono - allgemein - Analog-Forum
There I read some hints concerning stylus profiles with very low record surface noise resp. record groove noise:
1) ZYX Ultimate series (post #13), Stylus: Micro-Ridge, Contact Radius: 3μm×60μm,
Life Time: 2000Hour/2.0gm (Solid Diamond□0.1mm)
ZYX Official Website - Ultimate 100
2) VDH Frog Series (post #6) Stylus: VDH - IS, Contact Radius: 2µm x 85µm
Van Den Hul - The FROG ® Series* | Product (phono)
3) Transfiguration Ogura (post #5) Stylus: Ogura PA, Contact Radius: 3µm x 33µm
Transfiguration – AuDeus
4) Audio Technica ATN150MLX
AT150MLX Dual Moving Magnet Cartridge (DISCONTINUED) || Audio-Technica US
Last edited:
Well if you can, then you can also hear 'deep into the hiss' of a CD. And then it is clear that CD has more what you call 'dynamic range'.
Generally it is more convincing if you compare apples with apples.
Jan
Of course a cd does not hiss, but all CD players do. You want to see vinyl background noise, listen to the few seconds before the music starts. Is there anyone here that doesn't hear this noise even at low volume? Now try a cd. You seriously believe that the vinyl noise is better?