Hi honinbou
No, I did not remove this silvery (it is aluminum actually) cartridge mounting.
The most convincing reason for having no desire to try this out is, that my headshell is not detachable and not disposable.
Had I had removed the mounting, the only acceptable way of attaching the cartridge to headshell is by permanently gluing it with Cyanoacrylate (bulgin will become furious now) for to achieve a non compliant joint.
Just out of curiocity, any links to these japanese mods?
Regards
George
No, I did not remove this silvery (it is aluminum actually) cartridge mounting.
The most convincing reason for having no desire to try this out is, that my headshell is not detachable and not disposable.
Had I had removed the mounting, the only acceptable way of attaching the cartridge to headshell is by permanently gluing it with Cyanoacrylate (bulgin will become furious now) for to achieve a non compliant joint.
Just out of curiocity, any links to these japanese mods?
Regards
George
Results of...
Hello George
Some here may have my head for this, but what you are experimenting with is simply not possible with digital. That's why vinyl is an experimenter's dream. It was probably just my general sense of "tidiness" which prompted writing here.
You are of course absolutely correct with your assesment of superglue's properties. I also use the stuff (both high viscosity and gel) and I have firsthand experience with glueing my arm to the diningroomtable and my elbow to my wife's tablecloths😀
Sometimes I "play" with both mm and mc carts which are not of my manufacture. For examle this morning, I had a good look at the construction of a very nice integrated headshell mm cart from AudioTechnica - an AT23a. It is beautifully made and here, the cantilever assembly has been firmly locked into an alloy V'shaped block. This block again is fastened with a single screw, aided by locating pins. This to me is a proper solution to minimising internal resonances and tracking aberrations.
The Steinberg stuff you use is topclass (and pricey). In addition to the Magix Audio Cleaning Lab/10, I use an outboard Edirol USB UA-1Ex soundcard - not bad and affordable.
Proper, professional test records are a serious problem. I have been a record collector for about 30 years and all I have, has been acquired by pure change or luck. My favourite is still an old Decca Microgroove Frequency test record with bands as indicated earlier. With this, I use an Isotech oscilloscope (35mH) and sometimes I hire an HP voltmeter.
Regrettably, these days I have not enough time for mm experiments but have something lined up for my Grace F-9 where I hope to turn some new parts on my lathe, making the cantilever assembly more rigid.
Keep on having fun! This is the very essence of vinyl.
Regards
bulgin
Hello George
Some here may have my head for this, but what you are experimenting with is simply not possible with digital. That's why vinyl is an experimenter's dream. It was probably just my general sense of "tidiness" which prompted writing here.
You are of course absolutely correct with your assesment of superglue's properties. I also use the stuff (both high viscosity and gel) and I have firsthand experience with glueing my arm to the diningroomtable and my elbow to my wife's tablecloths😀
Sometimes I "play" with both mm and mc carts which are not of my manufacture. For examle this morning, I had a good look at the construction of a very nice integrated headshell mm cart from AudioTechnica - an AT23a. It is beautifully made and here, the cantilever assembly has been firmly locked into an alloy V'shaped block. This block again is fastened with a single screw, aided by locating pins. This to me is a proper solution to minimising internal resonances and tracking aberrations.
The Steinberg stuff you use is topclass (and pricey). In addition to the Magix Audio Cleaning Lab/10, I use an outboard Edirol USB UA-1Ex soundcard - not bad and affordable.
Proper, professional test records are a serious problem. I have been a record collector for about 30 years and all I have, has been acquired by pure change or luck. My favourite is still an old Decca Microgroove Frequency test record with bands as indicated earlier. With this, I use an Isotech oscilloscope (35mH) and sometimes I hire an HP voltmeter.
Regrettably, these days I have not enough time for mm experiments but have something lined up for my Grace F-9 where I hope to turn some new parts on my lathe, making the cantilever assembly more rigid.
Keep on having fun! This is the very essence of vinyl.
Regards
bulgin
Sorry gpapag,
The information was passed to me by word of mouth (my Japanese clients) so there is no website. But anyway enjoy your tweaked cart!
Cheers,
honinbou
The information was passed to me by word of mouth (my Japanese clients) so there is no website. But anyway enjoy your tweaked cart!
Cheers,
honinbou
No problem honinbou !
I just would like to see in details what the Japanese “colleagues” have managed.
In fact, with such a mod (removing the aluminum mounting) you described in your #19 post, several factors come into play. These (neglecting the increased difficulty in setting the 90 degrees azymuth angle) that I can spot are:
1st: VTA change. The aluminum mounting places the black body of the cartridge to an angle of 7-8 degrees relative to headshell, as attached photo shows. Removing this, VTA becomes 7-8 degrees less.
2nd: Cartridge mass reduction. Alum. mounting is quite massive, may be it is the 1/7th of the cartridge total weight. Apart from the fact that this mass may place a certain dumping to the cartridge, it consequently affects the:
3rd: Arm/cartridge effective mass, and in conjuction with the cartridge’s (unaltered) compliance:
4th: Raises the arm/cartridge resonance frequency.
These are but the obvious. Each one alone has the potential to affect the perceived sound.
Unfortunatelly –excluding VTA- each of these factors affects the sound differently, depending on the rest of the analogue system.
I know that the Japanese take their mods to extreme. At the same time they treat the subject in an analytical way. That’s why it would be interesting to see a relative site. But, again it is O.K.🙂
Tweaked cart, under-tweaking arm and under-tweaking turntable, are all belly up at my workshop.
One thing leads to another.
Like bulgin says: “vinyl is an experimenter's dream”.
Bulgin, thank you for your response (I can say that your head is still on your neck)😉
Reports (hopefully) after 10-15 days
.
Regards
George
I just would like to see in details what the Japanese “colleagues” have managed.
In fact, with such a mod (removing the aluminum mounting) you described in your #19 post, several factors come into play. These (neglecting the increased difficulty in setting the 90 degrees azymuth angle) that I can spot are:
1st: VTA change. The aluminum mounting places the black body of the cartridge to an angle of 7-8 degrees relative to headshell, as attached photo shows. Removing this, VTA becomes 7-8 degrees less.
2nd: Cartridge mass reduction. Alum. mounting is quite massive, may be it is the 1/7th of the cartridge total weight. Apart from the fact that this mass may place a certain dumping to the cartridge, it consequently affects the:
3rd: Arm/cartridge effective mass, and in conjuction with the cartridge’s (unaltered) compliance:
4th: Raises the arm/cartridge resonance frequency.
These are but the obvious. Each one alone has the potential to affect the perceived sound.
Unfortunatelly –excluding VTA- each of these factors affects the sound differently, depending on the rest of the analogue system.
I know that the Japanese take their mods to extreme. At the same time they treat the subject in an analytical way. That’s why it would be interesting to see a relative site. But, again it is O.K.🙂
Tweaked cart, under-tweaking arm and under-tweaking turntable, are all belly up at my workshop.
One thing leads to another.
Like bulgin says: “vinyl is an experimenter's dream”.
Bulgin, thank you for your response (I can say that your head is still on your neck)😉
Reports (hopefully) after 10-15 days
. Regards
George
Attachments
I also experiment with this situation, but from a different angle. I strive to de-couple the stylus from the tonearm. That is, I try to dampen vibration instead of coupling it to the tonearm.
I use silicon automotive gasket maker to secure the stylus in the body, and it is easily reversible. I put some fingernail polish on the cantilever and around the stylus bushing to dampen cantilever vibration.
I did some testing with a frequency test record and an oscilloscope and found that any medium-priced cartridge that I have tends to resonate at high frequencies. The Shure V15 Supertrack does not resonate at all.
The M97E is an unusually good cartridge for the price. I don’t know about it’s hi-freq resonance.
My point is that by solidifying the cartridge/tonearm assembly you may be increasing the resonant energy in the whole acoustic system.
I recall seeing a detachable headshell in one of your pictures. If you do not have a pliant rubber washer between the tonearm and headshell it will tend to transmit vibration. I found that a 1x8 mm metric o-ring is thin enough to allow the headshell to mate with the electrical contacts and still dampen the connection.
Putting the headshell in by using both hands to push the tonearm and shell together while tightening the nut such as to compress the rubber o-ring will give optimum results.
I’m not sure what you have accomplished acoustically. Just wanted to say that I have been approaching the situation from a different angle.
Vinyl is a flexible medium. When the stylus assembly resonates it uses the vinyl like a springboard. Best Regards, Mark
I use silicon automotive gasket maker to secure the stylus in the body, and it is easily reversible. I put some fingernail polish on the cantilever and around the stylus bushing to dampen cantilever vibration.
I did some testing with a frequency test record and an oscilloscope and found that any medium-priced cartridge that I have tends to resonate at high frequencies. The Shure V15 Supertrack does not resonate at all.
The M97E is an unusually good cartridge for the price. I don’t know about it’s hi-freq resonance.
My point is that by solidifying the cartridge/tonearm assembly you may be increasing the resonant energy in the whole acoustic system.
I recall seeing a detachable headshell in one of your pictures. If you do not have a pliant rubber washer between the tonearm and headshell it will tend to transmit vibration. I found that a 1x8 mm metric o-ring is thin enough to allow the headshell to mate with the electrical contacts and still dampen the connection.
Putting the headshell in by using both hands to push the tonearm and shell together while tightening the nut such as to compress the rubber o-ring will give optimum results.
I’m not sure what you have accomplished acoustically. Just wanted to say that I have been approaching the situation from a different angle.
Vinyl is a flexible medium. When the stylus assembly resonates it uses the vinyl like a springboard. Best Regards, Mark
Hi Mark
I am glad that you are willing to offer your view and your experience here.
Taking advantage of your response, I would like to expand a bit
on my approach. Please excuse my long sentences.
Restricting ourselves to the mechanical world, what actually comes out of a given cartridge motor as an electrical signal, is the result of the transfer function of virtually every mechanical component and of the type of coupling of each such component to each other.
There are more than a hundred such components present in any analogue system of any perceived design and construction (analogue system: vinyl record, cartridge, arm, turntable deck, deck support)
Every such component is a real physical object with mass, spring and damper qualities.
Every coupling point possesses mass, spring and damper qualities as well.
The final outcome is an endless interaction of all these moving masses vibrating (free or forced) at the same frequency (but at different phase) or, at different frequencies altogether.
Every attempt to isolate the neighboring parts, adds one more low pass filter(selective amplitude and phase change) and generates one more oscillation frequency (addition of one more degree of freedom).
In addition to these, at every decoupling surface, vibration energy bounces back and forth due to unequal mechanical and acoustical impedances present at the interface .
My (debatable) approach is to provide as little extra mass and decoupling as possible at the low mass system tip (stylus), progressing inevitably to more decoupling as the high mass (turntable plinth and slab) is being approached.
This is to provide - through tight coupling - a "sink" for the unwanted high frequency and low amplitude vibrations toward the mechanical “ground” with smooth “flow” eliminating steep changes of mechanical and acoustical impedance.
On the other hand, the lower frequency and higher amplitude vibrations existing at the higher mass points (downsteam) are hindered through decoupling to travel toward the low mass areas.
You have opted for a different approach. Decoupled systems right from the start.
I am certain that both approaches have their pros and contras. Man sacrifices something for something else in each case.
No free lunch as usual. Flawless and un-compromised engineering is an oxymoron by definition.
What I think Mark you have to reconsider though , is this fingernail polish at the cantilever. Even the slightest quantity of this ( a fraction of a milligram), hugely affects the ballistics of this critical assembly, which has a few milligram mass and is driven to very high accelerations .
You introduce a heavy low pass filter very early in the reproduction chain. I believe that the high frequency response of the cartridge and it’s tracking ability are seriously injured.
Can you please provide some technical details on this (approximate frequency, amplitude and bandwidth of resonances observed) ?
More on this at another post.
Best Regards
George
Hello George:
I have your reply here and will post a reply. I see exactly what you are saying, but I don't want such a hyper-technical issue to get out of control in length.
For now, this is not a mechanical system so much as an electro-mechanical transducer. It is not supposed to convert mechanical energy, it is suppose to trace an analog of an electrical signal written on the groove wall. Ideally, there should not be a mechanical aspect.
I do not say this is the last word, only a "for now" reply. I will consider this and reply when I get the wording as best as possile.
This is not the first time I have tried to conceptualize this. I have seen writings on this issue in past years and there never seems to be a final verdict.
Mark
I have your reply here and will post a reply. I see exactly what you are saying, but I don't want such a hyper-technical issue to get out of control in length.
For now, this is not a mechanical system so much as an electro-mechanical transducer. It is not supposed to convert mechanical energy, it is suppose to trace an analog of an electrical signal written on the groove wall. Ideally, there should not be a mechanical aspect.
I do not say this is the last word, only a "for now" reply. I will consider this and reply when I get the wording as best as possile.
This is not the first time I have tried to conceptualize this. I have seen writings on this issue in past years and there never seems to be a final verdict.
Mark
Part 1 of reply
quote:
I also experiment with this situation, but from a different angle.”
Hi Mark
* denotes George’s statements.
*I am glad that you are willing to offer your view and your experience here.
Taking advantage of your response, I would like to expand a bit
on my approach. Please excuse my long sentences.
George: Please remember that I am only stating my perspective. I do not maintain that I have the facts. I cannot write everything I would like to about this subject. Over past years there have been times when I would collect some useable information on this subject and act upon it.
First, I will say that if optoelectronics was linear (input/output characteristic) then a groove wall could be reliably traced with a light beam. Then we could do away with the mechanics all together. Example, an optocoupler is not good for audio, only digital on/off.
*Restricting ourselves to the mechanical world, what actually comes out of a given cartridge motor as an electrical signal, is the result of the transfer function of virtually every mechanical component and of the type of coupling of each such component to each other.
Yes, but the mechanical aspect is a confining and unfortunate consequence of the whole phonograph situation. An inexpensive cartridge (cart) with high mass and low compliance is audible without amplification. An nimble cartridge like the Shure V15 is virtually silent when passing through the groove. My point is that one does not want the mechanical aspect affecting the conversion process.
There have been attempts to silence the cantilever tube. There are exotic metals that are supposed to be more rigid and sonically silent than aluminum. There was also the Dynavector solid diamond (probably industrial synthetic) styus/cantilever assembly.
The elastomer bushing that the cantilever mounts in is of critical importance. There is usually a small wire from the hidden end of the cantilever soldered to the mounting that slips into the cart body. The mechanical qualities of these pieces have a tremendous effect on the cart’s ability to faithfully stay in contact with the groove wall. Some cartridges need to warm up (heat the elastomer) a little before there output is optimum.
My point here, George, is that the finer cartridges de-emphasize the mechanical aspects. Low mass magnets, elastomer that hopefully imparts no mechanical perturbations to the signal, plus super polished and meticulously aligned diamonds that cause a minimum of trouble.
The tonearm is not supposed to carry a mechanical signal. The whole quest over audio history has been to silence the tonearm in every way. Unfortunately without several thousand dollars worth of viscously damped tonearm one must contend with resonance and its ability to add energy to the mechanical conversion process and thus distort the path of the stylus as it traces the groove wall. Tracing is the key concept. The groove wall is not supposed to apply mechanical energy. Through the many aspects of mechanical coupling that you delineated in your statement it unfortunately does apply energy.
*There are more than a hundred such components present in any analogue system of any perceived design and construction (analogue system: vinyl record, cartridge, arm, turntable deck, deck support)
Every such component is a real physical object with mass, spring and damper qualities.
Yes, there is some damping and there is also chattering, like hitting a plumbing pipe with a wrench. This reply is already getting too long and will be several feet long unless I shorten responses.
*Every coupling point possesses mass, spring and damper qualities as well.
The final outcome is an endless interaction of all these moving masses vibrating (free or forced) at the same frequency (but at different phase) or, at different frequencies altogether.
Yes, you are describing the effects of resonance. Energy is translated to different orientations.
*Every attempt to isolate the neighboring parts, adds one more low pass filter(selective amplitude and phase change) and generates one more oscillation frequency (addition of one more degree of freedom).
In addition to these, at every decoupling surface, vibration energy bounces back and forth due to unequal mechanical and acoustical impedances present at the interface .
Standard mechanical engineering theory. Totally valid, but I am approaching the situation in terms of the acoustic properties of the metals. You are looking at it as a mechanical system. Once again, I am seeing the parts making noise. The noise must be damped. All that one really wants is a magnet moving in accordance with the shape of the groove wall. The mechanics are a superfluous and destructive nuisance.
The wooden cartridge body is an example of a substance that does not transmit sound as metal does. It’s use is a type of decoupling.
*My (debatable) approach is to provide as little extra mass and decoupling as possible at the low mass system tip (stylus), progressing inevitably to more decoupling as the high mass (turntable plinth and slab) is being approached.
This is to provide - through tight coupling - a "sink" for the unwanted high frequency and low amplitude vibrations toward the mechanical “ground” with smooth “flow” eliminating steep changes of mechanical and acoustical impedance.
Standard theory, I do not say it is wrong. But the internal vibrations of the cantilever directly affect the stylus’ contact with the groove wall. The loading specs of a stylus on the wall are in the tens of thousands of pounds/ sq inch. the vinyl also has resonant qualities and well a molecular grain problems in high frequencies modulations. Anything that the cantilever/stylus assembly does in terms of sonic energy disrupts the tracing process.
It is the undesirable vibrations of the magnet that are the culprit. Looking at the systemic qualities of the entire phonograph assembly is totally valid, but the little micro-world of the cantilever tube with a stone in it trying to play Beethoven’s Fifth is yet another situation all together.
There is so much that I could say, but it would be too long. One important aspect is that there is a continual fluctuation in the force along the axis of the cantilever. The modulations of the groove wall in conjunction with friction tend to pull the cantilever out of the cart. the elastomer makes this situation as source of distortion, especially at the inner grooves where the wave lengths grow dangerous short.
*On the other hand, the lower frequency and higher amplitude vibrations existing at the higher mass points (downsteam) are hindered through decoupling to travel toward the low mass areas.
*You have opted for a different approach. Decoupled systems right from the start.
*I am certain that both approaches have their pros and contras. Man sacrifices something for something else in each case.
No free lunch as usual. Flawless and un-compromised engineering is an oxymoron by definition.
Yes, engineering is a sacrificial art.
*What I think Mark you have to reconsider though , is this fingernail polish at the cantilever. Even the slightest quantity of this ( a fraction of a milligram), hugely affects the ballistics of this critical assembly,
It isn’t as critical as you think. Low priced carts have very sloppy tolerances and high abbreviated quality control. This is why they are low prices. The mechanical aspects are quite undesirable. This is why I emphasize the hi-freq resonance of the cantilever assembly.
*which has a few milligram mass and is driven to very high accelerations
The fingernail polish does add mass, abut it helps secure the bushing in the cantilever. They a pressed into the tube and often don’t have sufficent cement to hold them steady. A nude mounted diamond is usually only pressed in (can’t glue diamond). Think of the velocity related stress on the area of the cantilever around the diamond. Superglue is such a crusty mess and so unstable with time. Fingernail polished is a very pliant and durable paint. Also easily reversible with acetone.
.
*You introduce a heavy low pass filter very early in the reproduction chain. I believe that the high frequency response of the cartridge and it’s tracking ability are seriously injured.
Once again, you are approaching the assembly a conversion of mechanical energy to electrical energy. I approach it as a tracing process : a scanning process. The mechanics are an unfortunate consequence.
see part 2 for the remainder.
quote:
I also experiment with this situation, but from a different angle.”
Hi Mark
* denotes George’s statements.
*I am glad that you are willing to offer your view and your experience here.
Taking advantage of your response, I would like to expand a bit
on my approach. Please excuse my long sentences.
George: Please remember that I am only stating my perspective. I do not maintain that I have the facts. I cannot write everything I would like to about this subject. Over past years there have been times when I would collect some useable information on this subject and act upon it.
First, I will say that if optoelectronics was linear (input/output characteristic) then a groove wall could be reliably traced with a light beam. Then we could do away with the mechanics all together. Example, an optocoupler is not good for audio, only digital on/off.
*Restricting ourselves to the mechanical world, what actually comes out of a given cartridge motor as an electrical signal, is the result of the transfer function of virtually every mechanical component and of the type of coupling of each such component to each other.
Yes, but the mechanical aspect is a confining and unfortunate consequence of the whole phonograph situation. An inexpensive cartridge (cart) with high mass and low compliance is audible without amplification. An nimble cartridge like the Shure V15 is virtually silent when passing through the groove. My point is that one does not want the mechanical aspect affecting the conversion process.
There have been attempts to silence the cantilever tube. There are exotic metals that are supposed to be more rigid and sonically silent than aluminum. There was also the Dynavector solid diamond (probably industrial synthetic) styus/cantilever assembly.
The elastomer bushing that the cantilever mounts in is of critical importance. There is usually a small wire from the hidden end of the cantilever soldered to the mounting that slips into the cart body. The mechanical qualities of these pieces have a tremendous effect on the cart’s ability to faithfully stay in contact with the groove wall. Some cartridges need to warm up (heat the elastomer) a little before there output is optimum.
My point here, George, is that the finer cartridges de-emphasize the mechanical aspects. Low mass magnets, elastomer that hopefully imparts no mechanical perturbations to the signal, plus super polished and meticulously aligned diamonds that cause a minimum of trouble.
The tonearm is not supposed to carry a mechanical signal. The whole quest over audio history has been to silence the tonearm in every way. Unfortunately without several thousand dollars worth of viscously damped tonearm one must contend with resonance and its ability to add energy to the mechanical conversion process and thus distort the path of the stylus as it traces the groove wall. Tracing is the key concept. The groove wall is not supposed to apply mechanical energy. Through the many aspects of mechanical coupling that you delineated in your statement it unfortunately does apply energy.
*There are more than a hundred such components present in any analogue system of any perceived design and construction (analogue system: vinyl record, cartridge, arm, turntable deck, deck support)
Every such component is a real physical object with mass, spring and damper qualities.
Yes, there is some damping and there is also chattering, like hitting a plumbing pipe with a wrench. This reply is already getting too long and will be several feet long unless I shorten responses.
*Every coupling point possesses mass, spring and damper qualities as well.
The final outcome is an endless interaction of all these moving masses vibrating (free or forced) at the same frequency (but at different phase) or, at different frequencies altogether.
Yes, you are describing the effects of resonance. Energy is translated to different orientations.
*Every attempt to isolate the neighboring parts, adds one more low pass filter(selective amplitude and phase change) and generates one more oscillation frequency (addition of one more degree of freedom).
In addition to these, at every decoupling surface, vibration energy bounces back and forth due to unequal mechanical and acoustical impedances present at the interface .
Standard mechanical engineering theory. Totally valid, but I am approaching the situation in terms of the acoustic properties of the metals. You are looking at it as a mechanical system. Once again, I am seeing the parts making noise. The noise must be damped. All that one really wants is a magnet moving in accordance with the shape of the groove wall. The mechanics are a superfluous and destructive nuisance.
The wooden cartridge body is an example of a substance that does not transmit sound as metal does. It’s use is a type of decoupling.
*My (debatable) approach is to provide as little extra mass and decoupling as possible at the low mass system tip (stylus), progressing inevitably to more decoupling as the high mass (turntable plinth and slab) is being approached.
This is to provide - through tight coupling - a "sink" for the unwanted high frequency and low amplitude vibrations toward the mechanical “ground” with smooth “flow” eliminating steep changes of mechanical and acoustical impedance.
Standard theory, I do not say it is wrong. But the internal vibrations of the cantilever directly affect the stylus’ contact with the groove wall. The loading specs of a stylus on the wall are in the tens of thousands of pounds/ sq inch. the vinyl also has resonant qualities and well a molecular grain problems in high frequencies modulations. Anything that the cantilever/stylus assembly does in terms of sonic energy disrupts the tracing process.
It is the undesirable vibrations of the magnet that are the culprit. Looking at the systemic qualities of the entire phonograph assembly is totally valid, but the little micro-world of the cantilever tube with a stone in it trying to play Beethoven’s Fifth is yet another situation all together.
There is so much that I could say, but it would be too long. One important aspect is that there is a continual fluctuation in the force along the axis of the cantilever. The modulations of the groove wall in conjunction with friction tend to pull the cantilever out of the cart. the elastomer makes this situation as source of distortion, especially at the inner grooves where the wave lengths grow dangerous short.
*On the other hand, the lower frequency and higher amplitude vibrations existing at the higher mass points (downsteam) are hindered through decoupling to travel toward the low mass areas.
*You have opted for a different approach. Decoupled systems right from the start.
*I am certain that both approaches have their pros and contras. Man sacrifices something for something else in each case.
No free lunch as usual. Flawless and un-compromised engineering is an oxymoron by definition.
Yes, engineering is a sacrificial art.
*What I think Mark you have to reconsider though , is this fingernail polish at the cantilever. Even the slightest quantity of this ( a fraction of a milligram), hugely affects the ballistics of this critical assembly,
It isn’t as critical as you think. Low priced carts have very sloppy tolerances and high abbreviated quality control. This is why they are low prices. The mechanical aspects are quite undesirable. This is why I emphasize the hi-freq resonance of the cantilever assembly.
*which has a few milligram mass and is driven to very high accelerations
The fingernail polish does add mass, abut it helps secure the bushing in the cantilever. They a pressed into the tube and often don’t have sufficent cement to hold them steady. A nude mounted diamond is usually only pressed in (can’t glue diamond). Think of the velocity related stress on the area of the cantilever around the diamond. Superglue is such a crusty mess and so unstable with time. Fingernail polished is a very pliant and durable paint. Also easily reversible with acetone.
.
*You introduce a heavy low pass filter very early in the reproduction chain. I believe that the high frequency response of the cartridge and it’s tracking ability are seriously injured.
Once again, you are approaching the assembly a conversion of mechanical energy to electrical energy. I approach it as a tracing process : a scanning process. The mechanics are an unfortunate consequence.
see part 2 for the remainder.
part 2 of reply
*quote:
I did some testing with a frequency test record and an oscilloscope and found that any medium-priced cartridge that I have tends to resonate at high frequencies. The Shure V15 Supertrack does not resonate at all.
*Can you please provide some technical details on this (approximate frequency, amplitude and bandwidth of resonances observed) ?
Well, it was over a year ago. Summarily, the amplitude on the scope would rise drastically as the frequency of the test record went over about 10KHz. The Supertrack (I have several with new diamonds, I think I used a type II) stayed at one amplitude through the frequency sweep band on the test record. I have many different cartridges with many different tip configurations so I can optimize the fidelity of a worn groove. It takes a lot of engineering to create a Supertrack, or any other cartridge that doesn’t have an audible resonance. R&D and quality control are manifested in the price of cart.
There is much that I didn’t say. I have been looking into groove geometry for many years and have made great progress. Consequently I have made great improvements in the sound of my phonograph. There are specific events and encounters with information in the past that brought understanding, but this post would become way too long.
I haven’t really addressed your results. At this point I can’t, except with the theory that your are coupling resonant energy into the stylus/groove contact point. I must say that your results are very surprising and also add a new piece to the electro-mechanical puzzle. I also can’t hear it. I don’t know how worn and/or dirty your vinyl is. I also don’t know what type of equalizer you are using. Conventional feedback equalizers are a major culprit as pertains to increasing noise and distortion.
*quote:
The M97E is an unusually good cartridge for the price. I don’t know about it’s hi-freq resonance.
*More on this at another post.
OK
Summarily, the cantilever assembly is a mechanical system that is hopefully apart from the overall mechanical system of the phonograph.
It should be as isolated as much as possible. Once unwanted energy is imparted to the cantilever assembly it interacts with the properties of the vinyl and acoustical properties of the cantilever and creates distortion.
The aim is to move a magnet in according with an analog in the groove, not derive mechanical energy from the groove.
Onward Through the Fog, Mark
*quote:
I did some testing with a frequency test record and an oscilloscope and found that any medium-priced cartridge that I have tends to resonate at high frequencies. The Shure V15 Supertrack does not resonate at all.
*Can you please provide some technical details on this (approximate frequency, amplitude and bandwidth of resonances observed) ?
Well, it was over a year ago. Summarily, the amplitude on the scope would rise drastically as the frequency of the test record went over about 10KHz. The Supertrack (I have several with new diamonds, I think I used a type II) stayed at one amplitude through the frequency sweep band on the test record. I have many different cartridges with many different tip configurations so I can optimize the fidelity of a worn groove. It takes a lot of engineering to create a Supertrack, or any other cartridge that doesn’t have an audible resonance. R&D and quality control are manifested in the price of cart.
There is much that I didn’t say. I have been looking into groove geometry for many years and have made great progress. Consequently I have made great improvements in the sound of my phonograph. There are specific events and encounters with information in the past that brought understanding, but this post would become way too long.
I haven’t really addressed your results. At this point I can’t, except with the theory that your are coupling resonant energy into the stylus/groove contact point. I must say that your results are very surprising and also add a new piece to the electro-mechanical puzzle. I also can’t hear it. I don’t know how worn and/or dirty your vinyl is. I also don’t know what type of equalizer you are using. Conventional feedback equalizers are a major culprit as pertains to increasing noise and distortion.
*quote:
The M97E is an unusually good cartridge for the price. I don’t know about it’s hi-freq resonance.
*More on this at another post.
OK
Summarily, the cantilever assembly is a mechanical system that is hopefully apart from the overall mechanical system of the phonograph.
It should be as isolated as much as possible. Once unwanted energy is imparted to the cantilever assembly it interacts with the properties of the vinyl and acoustical properties of the cantilever and creates distortion.
The aim is to move a magnet in according with an analog in the groove, not derive mechanical energy from the groove.
Onward Through the Fog, Mark
Results of...
Hi Guys
I know someone who has spent 7 years on the vexed questions you address so very elequently here.
His research led him to spend almost 2 years experimenting on cantilever suspensions and damping. He uses a very fine, supple cable, instead of the single wire found in most carts. Externally, his cart bodies (made from either wood or a soft grade aluminium) are 'pressured or tensioned' for want of a better description by 3 small screws - one in the nose, one across the cart's body and a third between the connecting pins.
All components inside the cart is therefore also placed under pressure on all sides except the top and bottom to make them as united as possible with the body.
He has gone further in selecting the carrier material for the inside components not from the commonly used nylon or delrin, but instead went into consultation with industrial plastics stockists or suppliers and picked 8 samples and spent another year to decide which material had the lowest resonance. Also, although it would be possible to manufacture his cart bodies in one piece, he instead opted for two pieces - the lower part holding his moving components and the upper, which is the 'massive' mounting plate.
The two parts are bonded together with a substance so rigid that a red hot stove plate is needed to separate the two parts again, yet providing further isolation between the lower and upper parts.
Since this thread specifically concerns MM carts, the best cantilever and suspension arrangement I have seen for this type of cart, refers to a cartridge which doesn't have the usual 'push-in' arrangement for the cantilver and suspension. The cantilever and it's suspension is clamped securely by a small setscrew in a metal block milled in a V shape. The block in turn, has two locating pins and one setscrew. In other words, the extra compliance usually present in stock mm carts, has been removed and the stylus/cantilever/suspension assembly is fitted into the cart like that of the usual MC arrangement.
The previous paragraph, refers to almost the same procedure George followed. George did it with superglue and the commercial manufacturer did it with a screwed-down V-block
Insofar as painting the cantilever with nail paint, I have to ask myself - does this affect tipmass? And the firm affixing of nude-mounted styli - these are not just 'pushed-in' they are most definitely glued but from the top. A short section of nude diamonds' shanks protrude at the top of the cantilever which is often folded a bit like a spoon. This is where the bonding adhesive is applied.
bulgin
Hi Guys
I know someone who has spent 7 years on the vexed questions you address so very elequently here.
His research led him to spend almost 2 years experimenting on cantilever suspensions and damping. He uses a very fine, supple cable, instead of the single wire found in most carts. Externally, his cart bodies (made from either wood or a soft grade aluminium) are 'pressured or tensioned' for want of a better description by 3 small screws - one in the nose, one across the cart's body and a third between the connecting pins.
All components inside the cart is therefore also placed under pressure on all sides except the top and bottom to make them as united as possible with the body.
He has gone further in selecting the carrier material for the inside components not from the commonly used nylon or delrin, but instead went into consultation with industrial plastics stockists or suppliers and picked 8 samples and spent another year to decide which material had the lowest resonance. Also, although it would be possible to manufacture his cart bodies in one piece, he instead opted for two pieces - the lower part holding his moving components and the upper, which is the 'massive' mounting plate.
The two parts are bonded together with a substance so rigid that a red hot stove plate is needed to separate the two parts again, yet providing further isolation between the lower and upper parts.
Since this thread specifically concerns MM carts, the best cantilever and suspension arrangement I have seen for this type of cart, refers to a cartridge which doesn't have the usual 'push-in' arrangement for the cantilver and suspension. The cantilever and it's suspension is clamped securely by a small setscrew in a metal block milled in a V shape. The block in turn, has two locating pins and one setscrew. In other words, the extra compliance usually present in stock mm carts, has been removed and the stylus/cantilever/suspension assembly is fitted into the cart like that of the usual MC arrangement.
The previous paragraph, refers to almost the same procedure George followed. George did it with superglue and the commercial manufacturer did it with a screwed-down V-block
Insofar as painting the cantilever with nail paint, I have to ask myself - does this affect tipmass? And the firm affixing of nude-mounted styli - these are not just 'pushed-in' they are most definitely glued but from the top. A short section of nude diamonds' shanks protrude at the top of the cantilever which is often folded a bit like a spoon. This is where the bonding adhesive is applied.
bulgin
Bulgin: Interesting post, Linn did this with their K-9? cartridge. A set screw in the front. With high-end equipment the solid assembly is surely most acceptable, if it is engineered as an assembly.
I thought I saw a low-end headshell in one of George’s pictures. These arms have very little acoustic engineering in them. I don’t say that affixing the stylus to the body is wrong. I was hypothesizing that the increase in output was due to resonant energy.
Possibly the loose fit into the cartridge body does cause some energy to be wasted. I use silicon gasket maker to secure the stylus in the body. Possibly the rigid nature of superglue is transmitting vibration.
The nail polish is for low-end cartridges that I use to play older vinyl like Dynagroove which is specifically cut for a conical tip. High end cartridges with a conical like the Shure V15 type G are gone from the marketplace. Much of the domestic vinyl here in the USA sounds bad with a small tip radius. European classical vinyl is best with .2 mil or smaller.
Tracing simulation (if you know what it is) was extensively used by many American record companies and is a subject that is almost impossible to research, except for the 1964 Audio Magazine article on Dynagroove. Dynagroove sounds horrible with a small tip radius and very good with a conical. I have a Pickering XV15 with a conical. It does very well with Dynagroove.
I haven’t put nail polish on any expensive cartridges. It does help the cartridges I put it on. I got this idea from Joe Grado. He put an anti-resonance compound on the 8MZ that I have. I talked to Joe on the phone years ago and he said the 8MZ is nominally a .3mil, but is in really close to .4mil. He was not one to go into the very small radii.
Interesting that you say there is cement on a nude diamond. Nothing will stick to diamond. Evidently it has the same function as the nail polish around the bushing. It provides support.
The reason I focus on resonance is because a couple years ago I built a high-impedance (2 meg ohm) input preamp for ceramic cartridges so that I could listen to some of the more compliant ones made in the 70s. I listened to five of the better ones. The word better is relative.
The resonance of the cantilever assemblies and also of the piezo elements is drastic. The ability of the stylus to track is sorely disrupted by the resonant energy. They have a great tendency to peak in the midrange. Thus, I know how pernicious mechanical resonance is.
As usual, I am more confused than before, but it is constructive in the long run. I don't doubt that your friend knew what he was doing.
Best Regards, Mark
I thought I saw a low-end headshell in one of George’s pictures. These arms have very little acoustic engineering in them. I don’t say that affixing the stylus to the body is wrong. I was hypothesizing that the increase in output was due to resonant energy.
Possibly the loose fit into the cartridge body does cause some energy to be wasted. I use silicon gasket maker to secure the stylus in the body. Possibly the rigid nature of superglue is transmitting vibration.
The nail polish is for low-end cartridges that I use to play older vinyl like Dynagroove which is specifically cut for a conical tip. High end cartridges with a conical like the Shure V15 type G are gone from the marketplace. Much of the domestic vinyl here in the USA sounds bad with a small tip radius. European classical vinyl is best with .2 mil or smaller.
Tracing simulation (if you know what it is) was extensively used by many American record companies and is a subject that is almost impossible to research, except for the 1964 Audio Magazine article on Dynagroove. Dynagroove sounds horrible with a small tip radius and very good with a conical. I have a Pickering XV15 with a conical. It does very well with Dynagroove.
I haven’t put nail polish on any expensive cartridges. It does help the cartridges I put it on. I got this idea from Joe Grado. He put an anti-resonance compound on the 8MZ that I have. I talked to Joe on the phone years ago and he said the 8MZ is nominally a .3mil, but is in really close to .4mil. He was not one to go into the very small radii.
Interesting that you say there is cement on a nude diamond. Nothing will stick to diamond. Evidently it has the same function as the nail polish around the bushing. It provides support.
The reason I focus on resonance is because a couple years ago I built a high-impedance (2 meg ohm) input preamp for ceramic cartridges so that I could listen to some of the more compliant ones made in the 70s. I listened to five of the better ones. The word better is relative.
The resonance of the cantilever assemblies and also of the piezo elements is drastic. The ability of the stylus to track is sorely disrupted by the resonant energy. They have a great tendency to peak in the midrange. Thus, I know how pernicious mechanical resonance is.
As usual, I am more confused than before, but it is constructive in the long run. I don't doubt that your friend knew what he was doing.
Best Regards, Mark
The damping for the 8MZ was some auto undercoating mixed with silicone.
BTW, that setscrew trick was done back in the late '70s/early 80s by Technics. The EPC-100CMk4 is still the finest cartridge I've ever owned or heard.
BTW, that setscrew trick was done back in the late '70s/early 80s by Technics. The EPC-100CMk4 is still the finest cartridge I've ever owned or heard.
Werner's M97 response graph
What type of set up did you use for the response graph? Did you use a test record with a frequency sweep? Is this graph from the output of a digital converter?
I don't suspect that the M97 will have the hi-freq peak like the carts I was talking about, the tip mass is too low.
The ones I was referring to were in the M44 category with the more massive cantilevers and heavier stylus bushings.
What I am wondering about is why the roll-off at hi-freq. Is this caused by the cartridge or something else? The yellow line is curious.
My results last year were using the output of the RIAA eq. into an oscilloscope. I was connected through RG58 lo-cap coax coming out of the equalizer. Could you be rolling off your eq. output?
Mark
What type of set up did you use for the response graph? Did you use a test record with a frequency sweep? Is this graph from the output of a digital converter?
I don't suspect that the M97 will have the hi-freq peak like the carts I was talking about, the tip mass is too low.
The ones I was referring to were in the M44 category with the more massive cantilevers and heavier stylus bushings.
What I am wondering about is why the roll-off at hi-freq. Is this caused by the cartridge or something else? The yellow line is curious.
My results last year were using the output of the RIAA eq. into an oscilloscope. I was connected through RG58 lo-cap coax coming out of the equalizer. Could you be rolling off your eq. output?
Mark
Pink noise track. Flat equalizer, then into ADC and to PC.
FIR filter to convert from pink noise to white noise (flat).
No hidden nasties. I have measurements of many cartridges.
Some are near-flat. Some are peaky. Shures have muted treble.
That's part of their design. The recent 'x' series are deliberately
warm in sound.
FIR filter to convert from pink noise to white noise (flat).
No hidden nasties. I have measurements of many cartridges.
Some are near-flat. Some are peaky. Shures have muted treble.
That's part of their design. The recent 'x' series are deliberately
warm in sound.
Hi Werner
In the High Frequency plot, is the cartridge stabilizer lowered or is it up?
Also, what is the resistive loading of the cartridge?
Regards
George
In the High Frequency plot, is the cartridge stabilizer lowered or is it up?
Also, what is the resistive loading of the cartridge?
Regards
George
last word for now
I never use the brush. It has a "talk" to it that transfers groove noise to the signal.
I'm out of time for now. I will return later to read any more posts.
Lots of new questions, glad you brought this issue up, George.
I worked on older changers from 40s and 50s in years past, total overhaul including replacing the steel needle crystals with later generation flip-over ceramics like Tetrads and BSR.
The tone arms had a great interaction with the resonance of the ceramic carts. I would stuff the tonearms with neoprene sponge foam from an industrial gasket supply. Helped reduce the resonance.
Also, some of the better tonearms were bakelite, like the old table radio cabinets.
Bakelite has a very pleasing tonal quality. So, I am predisposed to looking for interactions of the tonearm with the mechanical qualities of the cartridge. Gotta run guys, I read your replies later.
George, it would be nice to have you take one channel only and have the upper graph without glue and the lower with glue. Best Regards, Mark
I never use the brush. It has a "talk" to it that transfers groove noise to the signal.
I'm out of time for now. I will return later to read any more posts.
Lots of new questions, glad you brought this issue up, George.
I worked on older changers from 40s and 50s in years past, total overhaul including replacing the steel needle crystals with later generation flip-over ceramics like Tetrads and BSR.
The tone arms had a great interaction with the resonance of the ceramic carts. I would stuff the tonearms with neoprene sponge foam from an industrial gasket supply. Helped reduce the resonance.
Also, some of the better tonearms were bakelite, like the old table radio cabinets.
Bakelite has a very pleasing tonal quality. So, I am predisposed to looking for interactions of the tonearm with the mechanical qualities of the cartridge. Gotta run guys, I read your replies later.
George, it would be nice to have you take one channel only and have the upper graph without glue and the lower with glue. Best Regards, Mark
Re: last word for now
And done on a pink noise track, with a measurement of RMS levels
over a limited bandwidth (say 50-15k). Because, frankly, I don't
believe the large 2.7dB level difference quoted in the initial post. In the 80s the UK Flat-Earth brigade all glued their stylus assemblies to their K5s and K9s, and if such a macroscopically-measurable difference resulted from that it would have been published in all magazines.
Of course, you are always welcome to surprise me 😉
hailteflon said:
And done on a pink noise track, with a measurement of RMS levels
over a limited bandwidth (say 50-15k). Because, frankly, I don't
believe the large 2.7dB level difference quoted in the initial post. In the 80s the UK Flat-Earth brigade all glued their stylus assemblies to their K5s and K9s, and if such a macroscopically-measurable difference resulted from that it would have been published in all magazines.
Of course, you are always welcome to surprise me 😉
- Status
- Not open for further replies.