That is a very good article. It shows in particular how pretty dreadful things happen due to the resonance between cartridge vertical compliance and tone-arm mass. You get a response peak of up to 10dB between 5Hz and 10Hz, which greatly exaggerates the rumble at the resonant frequency. See Fig 10 where the use of a third-order (18dB/oct) highpass filter would be required to reduce the 10 Hz rumble peak to the general noise level. This is what I have always recommended, though it could be argued it's only just adequate.
The cart/arm resonance is also shown to do fearful things to the flutter performance, usually around 4Hz where the ear is most sensitive.
The snag with the article is that it at no point mentions mono or stereo- the words do not even appear. I am therefore left doubtful as to whether the tests were done on one stereo channel, on two stereo channels summed together, or with a special mono cartridge. I suppose the first possibility is the likeliest, because the other two would much suppress the anti-phase signals produced by vertical stylus movement, and so they would be at much lower levels than shown in the document.
Could be. So far I have found that summing left and right, or removing out of phase signals, suppresses the tone arm peak no more than 10dB. Of course that's not bad.
Will keep looking as time allows.
Will keep looking as time allows.
More evidence that 5-10Hz is where the bad stuff happens... I think this supports the notion that the B&K tests were done using one of the stereo channels.
Last edited:
Figure 31 shows resonance on each channel and how you can see the horizontal (in phase) vs vertical (out of phase) resonances. Sadly only a couple of paragraphs, but does sugggest everything else was done on one channel.
Of course in 1977 you needed some spendy stuff to do this testing. These days should be able to replicate it easily with a PC provided modern test records are good enough (thinking feikert and the HFN or cardas test records).
Of course in 1977 you needed some spendy stuff to do this testing. These days should be able to replicate it easily with a PC provided modern test records are good enough (thinking feikert and the HFN or cardas test records).
Yes indeed. There's a separate test for looking at the arm itself, rather than the cart/arm resonance.
Jan
Tonearm armtube resonant frequencies are a classic series, something like the plot attached.
It is a 2D resonant system, so naturally vibrates like a lissajous figure in both vertical and lateral planes when displaced.
NB this is just for the tube, not with the headshell mass attached, which lowers the frequencies somewhat.
Attachments
In practice it is a 2D resonant system, the cart spring/arm mass system that is. ie vibration follows a lissajous type figure in response to headshell displacement in this system. NB it is different to the armtube flex/headshell mass system, but both have components in vertical and lateral planes which are linked.
I guess we'd need to ask Jan how that resonance was measured. I was assuming some sort of direct excitation as opposed to a test record when I made my comment. I didn't however spell that out.
Edit: I see Jan's actual answer is a little further along than the post I was replying to.
I agree with you Barleywater on all you wrote. Very clear and helpful post!
From some old posts at John Curl's Blowtorch preamplifier part II thread, you can see the complicated situation in detail.
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/loun...ch-preamplifier-part-ii-4483.html#post3689830
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/loun...ch-preamplifier-part-ii-4484.html#post3690356
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/loun...ch-preamplifier-part-ii-4507.html#post3706992
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/loun...ch-preamplifier-part-ii-4500.html#post3703271
Douglas, if there is a specific test I can do for to clear some question marks, please describe it and I will try to implement it (only I don’t have a true mono cartridge)
Bill yes, one more year left behind. Thank you.🙂
George
There is one problem with this. I predict if the sceince is refind to some understanding the sound of LP will still be what it is. Any resonance or out of phase element is a negative. Please accept the sound of the LP is very close to the mastertape. The EQ is done to ensure it, it can take days of trial cuts. For some reason CD's seldom are as well produced. A mystery to me. I listened to a Krell CD player last night. Very good. She has a degree in music and is an ex BBC sound engineer of many years. We spent hours talking about BBC listening trials. I think she would know most of the answers. It was her job and training.
My own system in quality and quantity of bass would greatly favour CD. That is on the rare occasion that the CD disc sounded as good. Brian Eno does.
My own system in quality and quantity of bass would greatly favour CD. That is on the rare occasion that the CD disc sounded as good. Brian Eno does.
As someone who likes both digital and analogue sources, I'd like to add my $0.02. Owning both a reasonable quality multi-disk player with upscaling to 24/192 and a fairly good turntable / cart. combination I enjoy both formats.
I think that recordings of the vinyl era generally sound better on vinyl as they were mastered for that, modern records work better for digital sources because that's what they were mastered for.
Vinyl on paper may not match up to CD, with it's lower dynamic range and distortion figures. But as is mentioned in many audio books, not all distortion and noise is treated equally by the ear. But let me ask a question: What is the THD of the actual sound output in a listening room? Probably a lot higher than anything else in the chain. What is the dynamic range between the noise floor and maximum listening level in an average room, even during a loud listening session (for me: 50-60dB at best).
As an aside, IMHO The redbook specification for it's time of invention in 1980 was exceptional (given at the time most computers were still 8 bit with small if any disk storage). It can give spectacular results on a good playback system with a well mastered disk. Unfortunately, these days well mastered disks are short supply.
I think that recordings of the vinyl era generally sound better on vinyl as they were mastered for that, modern records work better for digital sources because that's what they were mastered for.
Vinyl on paper may not match up to CD, with it's lower dynamic range and distortion figures. But as is mentioned in many audio books, not all distortion and noise is treated equally by the ear. But let me ask a question: What is the THD of the actual sound output in a listening room? Probably a lot higher than anything else in the chain. What is the dynamic range between the noise floor and maximum listening level in an average room, even during a loud listening session (for me: 50-60dB at best).
As an aside, IMHO The redbook specification for it's time of invention in 1980 was exceptional (given at the time most computers were still 8 bit with small if any disk storage). It can give spectacular results on a good playback system with a well mastered disk. Unfortunately, these days well mastered disks are short supply.
Hello
I have hundred of vinyl and cd, and I found that well produced digital music are a minority, most are just ok, not excellent. And lot of cd and dvd players sound lifeless, even with lot of limitations a good percentage of the vinyl sound more alive and musical.
But for both vinyl and cd, most of them are cheap work with too much compressions and flat sounstage sound.
Bye
Gaetan
I have hundred of vinyl and cd, and I found that well produced digital music are a minority, most are just ok, not excellent. And lot of cd and dvd players sound lifeless, even with lot of limitations a good percentage of the vinyl sound more alive and musical.
But for both vinyl and cd, most of them are cheap work with too much compressions and flat sounstage sound.
Bye
Gaetan
Have you ever heard of or experienced, digital fatigue. Try listening to Cd's for hours on end, you get fidgety and bored. Vinyl does not cause this you can listen for hours and still enjoy.
I don't know why this, but it's certainly true
I don't know why this, but it's certainly true
Yes, Off topic , but just for a moment..take a break !
Looks like this IS the reason ! 🙂
Humans do enjoy it .....we can see it in various sports around the globe and in various other 'activities' humans indulge in. It's unfortunate but true ! 😉
You think the Aliens are acquiring a taste for it ? 😕
If so , we are in GREAT trouble ! 😱
Now we can get back 'into the groove' .
I enjoy handling a vinyl cover with it's pictures and text and 'new vinyl' smell. It's a fun experience and so far has not been replicated in CD. The enclosed printed matter is TOO small !
The whole thing is often mostly psychological I think, we are partly physically involved in the process of playback.
Imagine two rooms , one with a guy who plays a vinyl album and in the other , one who plays a CD. A third person can hear clearly the music from each room with identical equipment except for the source. I'm guessing that he will not have the same 'vinyl experience' as he would if HE handled the vinyl playback himself ! Without touching anything , he might consider them same or similar depending on the quality of the pressing/mastering.
Last edited:
Considering tone arm (tube) resonances . Would it be possible that with fluid damping to control LF cartridge/tone arm resonance located at the rear end of the arm or near the pivots ( for 4Hz~10 HZ ) , it also helps to damp out upper frequency resonances traveling down the tone arm ?
I've used fluid damping near the pivot and it certainly improves the sound though I hadn't looked closely at it's sonic effect on the upper frequencies. Bass is more defined and deeper . I should do a controlled test some time. Anyone with any ideas about this ?
I've used fluid damping near the pivot and it certainly improves the sound though I hadn't looked closely at it's sonic effect on the upper frequencies. Bass is more defined and deeper . I should do a controlled test some time. Anyone with any ideas about this ?
Could it be that the 'exercise' involved in getting up and turning over the disc etc. for vinyl causes an 'exercise break of a few minutes ' which reduces the fatigue of long term 'continuous listening' ?
What if someone else did all the 'labour' with two turntables so that the 'break' was very short . Would vinyl sound still be fatigue free for long term listening?
Sometimes I play the CD all day long while working and don't find it fatiguing at all. Is that because I'm not doing 'intense listening' but listening to the music 'in the background' ? Playing vinyl while working can be a real pain in the a**!
Interesting proposition. Maybe we can emulate it by using our CD player without remote and getting up every few tracks to change the CD...
Jan
I do something similar with my Sony HAP-Z1ES, but will confess to not experiencing any more listener fatigue with digital than I do with analog. I will also confess that I physically feel much better when I am forced to get up periodically to deal with the music's end.
With more thought and reference to my system.
In my case it's nothing to do with size of print or the desire to get up frequently. It's all about the way digital reproduces high frequencies. Quantisation distortion perhaps, but then some vinyl comes from digital masters?
In my case it's nothing to do with size of print or the desire to get up frequently. It's all about the way digital reproduces high frequencies. Quantisation distortion perhaps, but then some vinyl comes from digital masters?
- Status
- Not open for further replies.