Schmitz77
I see where myhrrhleine is pointing....
I knew it, your capsule was designed for broadcasting, just like the Denon DL301
It is very likely that this is why both do not fully capture the clicks. (no pops) because it has a spherical spike and high work force, along with a high mass arm.
But, equally, I think it is a bit reckless to affirm the following, as you have said.
With such a system, you will never be disturbed with that noise and even clicks and pops absolutely dissappear into the nowhere. I simply don't hear them, and my system has 99dB efficiency speakers. This is an ultra sensitive system, every small thing on the record is highly amplified, but no clicks and pops are audible. Nothing. Nothing. Zero.
Because if there is dirt or microrayons in the groove, the electromagnetic system will detect it, what happens is that the higher the tracing force, and the greater the mass of the arm, the signal generated will be much lower than in the low-mass arm systems and capsules. MM that work with forces of 1.0 to 1.5 grams.
PS: I think that much more important than a mat change is to use a weight on the vinyl for a good mechanical coupling with the plate.
I see where myhrrhleine is pointing....
I knew it, your capsule was designed for broadcasting, just like the Denon DL301
It is very likely that this is why both do not fully capture the clicks. (no pops) because it has a spherical spike and high work force, along with a high mass arm.
But, equally, I think it is a bit reckless to affirm the following, as you have said.
With such a system, you will never be disturbed with that noise and even clicks and pops absolutely dissappear into the nowhere. I simply don't hear them, and my system has 99dB efficiency speakers. This is an ultra sensitive system, every small thing on the record is highly amplified, but no clicks and pops are audible. Nothing. Nothing. Zero.
Because if there is dirt or microrayons in the groove, the electromagnetic system will detect it, what happens is that the higher the tracing force, and the greater the mass of the arm, the signal generated will be much lower than in the low-mass arm systems and capsules. MM that work with forces of 1.0 to 1.5 grams.
PS: I think that much more important than a mat change is to use a weight on the vinyl for a good mechanical coupling with the plate.
What's the Difference Between a Conical and Elliptical Stylus?
I think this is not off topic, if the adm. consider it, delete it.
For me it is related to the thread, however.
If we want less noise from clicks and pops, the spherical pick is better.
Look at the pictures. Both the particles deep in the groove and the surface scratches are outside the contact area in the spherical needle, quite the opposite in the elliptic needle.
I think this is not off topic, if the adm. consider it, delete it.
For me it is related to the thread, however.
If we want less noise from clicks and pops, the spherical pick is better.
Look at the pictures. Both the particles deep in the groove and the surface scratches are outside the contact area in the spherical needle, quite the opposite in the elliptic needle.
Last edited:
The pictures in the link are not correct. From that perspective, an elliptical and conical tip would look identical. The side view would be different.
It is only for the purpose of understanding the text.
Write to Ortofón, they probably have a transparent side view for you.
Ortofon DJ FAQ replacement styli.
" 4. I've heard a lot of varying statements on the differences between spherical and elliptical styli. What are the real differences, and the reasoning behind them?
The physical difference between a spherical and elliptical stylus is the shape of the diamond.
An elliptical diamond allows for more detailed sound quality, as it fits better within the groove and therefore has more contact area with the groove itself. Elliptical diamonds penetrate the groove walls further, extracting more intricate detail, especially in the high end, than is possible with a spherical diamond. It is commonly misrepresented that elliptical styli cause more wear than spherical styli. "
Write to Ortofón, they probably have a transparent side view for you.
Ortofon DJ FAQ replacement styli.
" 4. I've heard a lot of varying statements on the differences between spherical and elliptical styli. What are the real differences, and the reasoning behind them?
The physical difference between a spherical and elliptical stylus is the shape of the diamond.
An elliptical diamond allows for more detailed sound quality, as it fits better within the groove and therefore has more contact area with the groove itself. Elliptical diamonds penetrate the groove walls further, extracting more intricate detail, especially in the high end, than is possible with a spherical diamond. It is commonly misrepresented that elliptical styli cause more wear than spherical styli. "
Last edited:
True, but the stabilizers right at the surface would be of concern. Anything that reacted quickly enough with the calcium carbonate would probably react with the stabilizers also, but of course only with those with which it comes in contact. Of course all this is splitting hairs.
Increased noise with repeated cleaning
I have read the entire thread and there are a few comments concerning the risks of cleaning induced damage. I use an ultrasonic cleaner together with a vacuum RCM for final rinse and drying. The ultrasonic fluid is de-ionised water IPA 20% plus surfactant (Ilfotol). I have one LP that was recently purchased new. It is the first available pressing (2015) of a recording only previously available on CD (1990). It is 180 gm virgin vinyl from a reputable European label. This jazz recording has a wide dynamic range with some quiet passages and the LP was previously dead quiet but has now developed pops and clicks which appear to be getting worse with repeated cleaning cycles. I can't recall any of the '000's of LP's previously cleaned behaving this way. I don't have a microscope but the surface looks pristine. One factor that makes me suspicious is the inner sleeve is the original. I usually replace them with new thin polyethylene inner sleeves but the original was so nice I re-used it. It is a thicker grade but nice and smooth and the new LP showed no obvious contamination from the sleeve. I have since ditched it just in case there is some issue with it (reacting with nano-traces of the cleaning solution maybe?).
Any ideas what is going on?
I have read the entire thread and there are a few comments concerning the risks of cleaning induced damage. I use an ultrasonic cleaner together with a vacuum RCM for final rinse and drying. The ultrasonic fluid is de-ionised water IPA 20% plus surfactant (Ilfotol). I have one LP that was recently purchased new. It is the first available pressing (2015) of a recording only previously available on CD (1990). It is 180 gm virgin vinyl from a reputable European label. This jazz recording has a wide dynamic range with some quiet passages and the LP was previously dead quiet but has now developed pops and clicks which appear to be getting worse with repeated cleaning cycles. I can't recall any of the '000's of LP's previously cleaned behaving this way. I don't have a microscope but the surface looks pristine. One factor that makes me suspicious is the inner sleeve is the original. I usually replace them with new thin polyethylene inner sleeves but the original was so nice I re-used it. It is a thicker grade but nice and smooth and the new LP showed no obvious contamination from the sleeve. I have since ditched it just in case there is some issue with it (reacting with nano-traces of the cleaning solution maybe?).
Any ideas what is going on?