@Hans Polak
What do you think about publishing your (or yours, as you are a team) raw data sets here in the forum? Perhaps you could even repeat some tests, for example play and record the secret test record at 33.33333 / 2 rpm. Recording at half the standard speed was quite common in the 1960s and 1970s, wasn't it?
kindly,
HBt.
What do you think about publishing your (or yours, as you are a team) raw data sets here in the forum? Perhaps you could even repeat some tests, for example play and record the secret test record at 33.33333 / 2 rpm. Recording at half the standard speed was quite common in the 1960s and 1970s, wasn't it?
kindly,
HBt.
The picture in your post is really old, coming from the times when the ETM (effective tip mass) was more than 1mg.
In my particular case I see that (needle+vinyl) resonance above 20kHz:
- with Stylus 10 (ETM == 0,5mg; needle == ellips) it sits at 24kHz
- with Stylus 40 (ETM == 0,3mg; needle == FG70) it sits at 38kHz
The picture in my posting #100 is actually from the early days, perhaps it is the original system called Shure V15 from 1964.
Twenty years later it looked like this picture above.
Here is the article as published in AudioXpress, maybe renewed reading it will answer some of your questions, IMO all that's relevant is mentioned in this article.@Hans Polak
What do you think about publishing your (or yours, as you are a team) raw data sets here in the forum? Perhaps you could even repeat some tests, for example play and record the secret test record at 33.33333 / 2 rpm. Recording at half the standard speed was quite common in the 1960s and 1970s, wasn't it?
kindly,
HBt.
https://audioxpress.com/article/individual-transfer-curves-of-moving-magnet-cartridge-subassemblies
When still curious about certain details, place a concrete question, other than a super vague "publishing raw data sheets", still have no idea what that is supposed to be.
Mentioning things like "being honest", and referring to the paper as a "pseudo document" , etc. etc. does not exactly contribute to a good realm.
You even made the used test record suspicious with your remark of being "secret" although the paper clearly mentions CH Precision.
When you also want this record, just order it from them.
Hans
thx Hans,
The colorful glossy article doesn't answer a single one of my questions. Apparently, you are also the wrong person to ask. Dagfinn Ramussen, as the supplier of the raw data, seems to be the correct addressee. It is clear from the article that he sent you the data and you sent the transformation or metamorphosis into an article framework.
At the same time, you take a sideblow in the direction of Bob's VinylTrak.
The question or request for the raw data is clear.
My choice of words is unambiguous - it expresses the value of the article in my eyes and puts it in the right light. It just doesn't really say anything.
Where is the link to the source of supply? To what extent are you yourself involved in this company?
But I am not at all interested in this test disk, dear Hans.
All the best,
HBt.
In this example of the V15III, the groove needle resonance is clearly above 30kHz. The modulus of elasticity will be less than 4 GPa and Q greater than 1 but less than sqrt(2).
I have broken down the known oscillation formula of a simple spring-mass oscillator into factors and the result is also the formula presented by Mr. Polak. However, one can also simply take it from the literature of the last century.
HBt.
PS
Here it is now, the often freely mentioned 33kHz rosonance boost.
Yes,
VN 35 E-M black
result in always >28kHz with a mild boost. Back in the year of 1978; when Hans decided to take a short course in electrical engineering.
😉
Last edited:
To complete the list:
The excitation (i.e. the information to be transformed) does not rush towards us at a constant speed (we are the virtual center point or vertical axis of the probe tip). The wavelength lambda changes.
This means that fc moves between two boundaries, approaching fo from the outside in.
As a guide, Q (in this case) is always greater than 2*sqrt(2). A neat, deep cut - this increases the negative slope (of the falling branch, the asymptote) of posting #109.
"resonance"
kindly,
HBt.
PS
Formula broken down into factors again.
The excitation (i.e. the information to be transformed) does not rush towards us at a constant speed (we are the virtual center point or vertical axis of the probe tip). The wavelength lambda changes.
This means that fc moves between two boundaries, approaching fo from the outside in.
As a guide, Q (in this case) is always greater than 2*sqrt(2). A neat, deep cut - this increases the negative slope (of the falling branch, the asymptote) of posting #109.
TYPO
"resonance"
kindly,
HBt.
PS
Formula broken down into factors again.
Hi Anton,
I tried to find some details on this OMP Cart, or could it have been a OM Cart ?
You are right that the ETM alone is indeed not explaining this big difference between the two Styli since fres increases according to a sqrt law when mass decreases, in this case ca. 30%, a step in the direction but not enough to get 38kHz.
But there is more than just the Vinyl's spring function and that is the elastomer that in most cases both acts as a spring and as a damper.
This part is probably determining just as much of the mechanical behavior as the ETM or the cantilever.
A simple fact is that MC's that usually have a much larger BW also have a much stiffer suspension or a lower compliance thereby extending Fres.
So maybe the Stylus 40 you mention may also have a suspension with a much lower compliance..
Compare it to a wheel under your car, It's not just the mass of your wheel that determines the tracking abilities.
Spring and damper are just as, if not more important.
It's must be a very delicate process for a Cart manufacturer to find the right materials that are as stable as possible versus temp, and give the right counter response to the electrical part's FR to form a satisfactory overall response for a given termination.
With MC's the electrical FR has a much larger BW with inductances in the low uH range, thereby not being sensitive to cable or other capacitances.
To exploit that advantage, it makes full sense why compliances are much lower, and to compensate for the higher forces on the cantilever, it's usually shorter as with MM's.
To get more control over the damping, some manufactures like Lyra have even split the spring and damping function into different parts.
Hans
P.S. The shape of the tip is of course another part that sets a limit to maximum achievable frequency tracking..
A conical tip will never be able to follow the same frequency span as a Nude line version to mention two opposites of the spectrum.
That difference in some way also seems to be the case in both tips that you mention.
Last edited:
Just another completely irrelevant question from a non believer.
See attachment.
Hans
Goededag, Hans!
The OMP is just a T4P (P-Mount) version of the Ortofon OM cartridge.
The Stylus 10 and Stylus 40 have almost equal elastomer compliance, this is barely detectable at the tonearm's main resonance frequency (~13Hz in my case).
The difference between the 24kHz and 38kHz is totally due to the different neddles' shapes: an elliptical with bigger pressure on the groove wall and the FG70 (Fritz Gyger 5×70nm) which has so much less pressure that the vinyl stays more rigid under the needle.
To have that (needle+vinyl) resonance at ~15kHz requires very massive elliptical needle on a very heavy cantilever (so I think).
If I had more time and money - I'd repeat a lab-research measuring the needle+vinyl resonance frequency with these stylii:
- Stylus 5S - as the spherical reference for which the pressure and vinyl rigidity are well known
- Stylus 20 - as the low-mass elliptical giving higher pressure for the same VTF
- Stylus 30 - as the lower-mass and larger contact area needle giving lesser pressure for the same VTF
Last edited:
Stylus 10 m=0.5mg
€40
Stylus 40 m=0.3mg
€600
Using the factors within the equation, formula, you can easily recognize or derive the interdependencies. But perhaps we could return to your actual concern, the potential RIAA EQ preamp, in the meantime. Or you can afford the high-end pre from CH-Precision, the P1.
HBt.
€40
Stylus 40 m=0.3mg
€600
Using the factors within the equation, formula, you can easily recognize or derive the interdependencies. But perhaps we could return to your actual concern, the potential RIAA EQ preamp, in the meantime. Or you can afford the high-end pre from CH-Precision, the P1.
HBt.
hbtaudio, I have given up trying to understand your 'input' to this thread. There seems no purpose to the many (probably good) bits of info you throw at us. Your underlying narrative appears designed to obfuscate the issue rather than clarify anything. Perhaps you should try harder to make your stuff easier to understand ..
Is there a list of MM cartridges which respond well to 150k loading and small C; perhaps with recommended C .. compared with the recommended 47k & C loading from the makers.
and I've looked through the 100+ posts of this thread and others trying to find the original article that proposes 150k & small C loading without success. May I beg a kind soul to post a link to the original article.
Is there a list of MM cartridges which respond well to 150k loading and small C; perhaps with recommended C .. compared with the recommended 47k & C loading from the makers.
and I've looked through the 100+ posts of this thread and others trying to find the original article that proposes 150k & small C loading without success. May I beg a kind soul to post a link to the original article.
See the starting post of https://www.diyaudio.com/community/threads/nick-sukhov-su-xxi-mm-phono-stage-85-dba-sn-ratio.387375/ for a couple of references to articles (usually not in English, rather in Russian or in Ukranian). A 150 kohm or so load with very little capacitance has been advocated by Nick Sukhov for many years.
Thanks for this Marcel
Alas, there's too much noise there from some trolls that are thankfully no gone. There's no doubt that Nick's 150k & low C can have less noise in MM RIAA. But I'd like to know how real cartridges which have been designed for 47k & more input C behave with this. Hence my question ...
You show in #88 that SHURE V15 type III has effective series resistance @ 20kHz of 30k !!? My interest in MM RIAA goes back to V15 type I. Type II had a droop in mid HF cos SHURE raised the HF mech. resonance via smaller effective tip miss (etm). They were reluctant to raise it even higher (even smaller etm) cos the droop would be even greater. V15 type III had laminated poles which allowed flat response with sensible input C and a higher HF mechanical resonance.
Are you saying V15 type III still had very lossy iron even though it was laminated? How about more 'modern' stuff like the MM Ortofons?
Some people at that time recommended with V15 type II, replacing 75us with 50us in RIAA preamp ... but this starts becoming designing RIAA preamps matched to the cartridge beyond simple choice of input C