Numbers behind belt drive and direct drive.

[Pio1980]

Not having the record solidly 'grounded' (mass-backed) to something more substantual than, say, a few little points ala transcriptors, a felt mat, one of those carbonized foam antistat mats, ect will affect the sound to something other than that actually on the disc thru undamped resonances, undamped traveling waves around the disc, unsupressed microphonic airborn feedback vibration, ect, ect. As a previous poster said, it's about physics.

 

[Bigerik]

I don't think I have bought a piece of audio equipment based on specs since I was 16. Just as I wouldn't order a meal based on specs. Half the fun of the hobby for me is going and trying out different equipment. I don't need the specs to be able to tell the a Sota Sapphire sounds vastly different than a Rega P7. What would I really gain by knowing the numbers?

 

[JohnVF]

Not having the record solidly 'grounded' (mass-backed) to something more substantual than, say, a few little points ala transcriptors, a felt mat, one of those carbonized foam antistat mats, ect will affect the sound to something other than that actually on the disc thru undamped resonances, undamped traveling waves around the disc, unsupressed microphonic airborn feedback vibration, ect, ect. As a previous poster said, it's about physics.

I've been running my wood/copper/delrin mat from TTweights on my VPI platter- it does sound different. Not better or worse, just different. Before, records were clamped to the metal platter, now they're weighted to wood as the contact surface. Try to find a spec for that and, well, I doubt there would be one. And yet, it affects the sound. There's so much that affects the sound, and trying to decipher all of the specs that would be needed to tell the story is pointless, as there would be many, and each would affect the other. So I just listen, sound quality is the best spec there is.

 

[illini]

it's about physics.

One of the record stores in town is selling those $50 Music Hall cork mats like hotcakes. Apparently the owner A/B'd it in-store with a rubber(?) mat and everyone in the store was blown away and heard the difference immediately; more bass with the cork mat. Personally, I believe the cork mat was adding something to the recording, so I have steered clear.

 

[JohnVF]

One of the record stores in town is selling those $50 Music Hall cork mats like hotcakes. Apparently the owner A/B'd it in-store with a rubber(?) mat and everyone in the store was blown away and heard the difference immediately; more bass with the cork mat. Personally, I believe the cork mat was adding something to the recording, so I have steered clear.

That's where it gets kind of iffy- the whole process of playing the record adds something to the recording. The most obvious would be the bad channel separation/cross-talk specs of pretty much every cart. That alone could explain a lot of the difference between CD and LP sound- and lead to the 'bloom' that so many vinyl fanatics love, as its going to seriously alter soundstage. So, then, is it bad? Or is it part of the charm? And do we just accept the things we can't change, or do we say we can change other things, like add the affects of a cork mat?

 

[Dr Tinear]

Test tones courtesy of Dave Cawley from Sound Hi-Fi, some of them i requested to him:

Use your ears and determine how sensitive are you to flutter on the standarized 3150Hz test tone.

http://www.soundhifi.com/tones.html

Tones of interest:

"3.15Khz no modulation at all" (no flutter)

"3.15Khz modulated by 6.66667Hz at 0.1% "
0.1% being the minimum acceptable flutter figure for a turntable

"3.15Khz modulated by 6.66667Hz at 0.05% "
0.05% usually claimed as "inaudible".

NOTE: Better to use headphones for critical listening of these files.

Thanks for posting the link! I downloaded the tones and listened to them on my computer speakers. I had no trouble hearing the flutter at 1% and 0.1%. I heard a trace of pitch instability at 0.05%, though I might have trouble differentiating between this tone and the flutter-free tone in a blind test over speakers. I'd be interested in trying this test with a piano recording to see if the more complex music waveform can mask low levels of flutter that a sine wave clearly reveals.

 

[flavio81]

I've been running my wood/copper/delrin mat from TTweights on my VPI platter- it does sound different. Not better or worse, just different. Before, records were clamped to the metal platter, now they're weighted to wood as the contact surface. Try to find a spec for that and, well, I doubt there would be one.

Platter resonance spectrum as measured from the cartridge. But i agree with you, in that case it's better to do a subjective review.

 

[flavio81]

That's where it gets kind of iffy- the whole process of playing the record adds something to the recording. The most obvious would be the bad channel separation/cross-talk specs of pretty much every cart. That alone could explain a lot of the difference between CD and LP sound- and lead to the 'bloom' that so many vinyl fanatics love, as its going to seriously alter soundstage. So, then, is it bad? Or is it part of the charm? And do we just accept the things we can't change, or do we say we can change other things, like add the affects of a cork mat?

Some cartridges are very different in their channel separation curve than others.

You have carts such as the Denon 103 for example, with consistently good separation (>25dB) at all frequencies.

Then you have carts like the first-gen Pickering XV15 (and others) where the frequencies above 15Khz have almost zero separation. So extreme highs would be mixed to mono...

The M97xE typically has rather poor separaton of 17dB overall and your ears can notice how soundstage is smaller.

You can bet audibly the soundstage will be very different in all cases.

Actually the channel separation graph can also show you where the troublesome resonances of the cartridges are. Very useful.

 

[JohnVF]

Some cartridges are very different in their channel separation curve than others.

You have carts such as the Denon 103 for example, with consistently good separation (>25dB) at all frequencies.

Then you have carts like the first-gen Pickering XV15 (and others) where the frequencies above 15Khz have almost zero separation. So extreme highs would be mixed to mono...

The M97xE typically has rather poor separaton of 17dB overall and your ears can notice how soundstage is smaller.

You can bet audibly the soundstage will be very different in all cases.

I guess from where I'm sitting- I don't consider any of them to be that good. My eyes were opened to that by the simple cross-talk test on a test record. There's a lot of bleed, even on something like my V-15vmr.

The question for me still remains- you can measure all of these parameters, but you'll not be able to describe to me how the table will sound. Like the examples above- you can show me the numbers, which are useful in an of themselves, but you have to listen to the table to know exactly how they'll sound in practice. An experienced subjective reviewer can tell me how something will sound in a paragraph, and as much as some people think they sound like wine tasting, the language is pretty exact and I will have a pretty good idea of what I'm getting.

I bought my VPI without an audition. It did not surprise me when I got it plugged in, besides showing me how much potential was in my system that was being hidden by my previous turntables, including some with very similar basic specs.

 

[illini]

. So, then, is it bad?

It's not bad, but it's creepy and sad. John Q. Douche sells expensive magic mats to people who discovered the pointlessness of cds. Each is own, I guess.

I'm listening to a Motorhead/Another Perfect Day 180gm Bronze reissue, and do you know what I hear on the last track? CD skips/clicks. The whole lp sounds like a wma file; about 1dB stereo separation, no space. I'm going to keep it as an example and warning for others!

Sorry for the tangent, but I had to vent.

 

[Bigerik]

Could someone explain to me how I would be better off of I had and understood those specs?

One of the best systems I have ever heard is Billforts, and I doubt any part of it measures worth a damn. Cept the TT maybe.

 

[wlmill]

So is digital going to give me a more accurate representation of what the artist intended? I have heard some audio engineers say, The CD is a closer representation to the master recording.

 

[Bigerik]

So is digital going to give me a more accurate representation of what the artist intended? I have heard some audio engineers say, The CD is a closer representation to the master recording.

You are only gonna get a fraction of the performance anyway, so I really don't see where that would matter.

 

[wlmill]

I realize that you do not get to hear the full resolution of the recording, so you are right it does not matter. I brought this up because each cartridge has a different sound and different levels of stereo separation. BTw, I am not saying CD sounds better than vinyl. I like them both, but I want to hear the recording as close as possible to what the artist intended.

 

[JohnVF]

Could someone explain to me how I would be better off of I had and understood those specs?

One of the best systems I have ever heard is Billforts, and I doubt any part of it measures worth a damn. Cept the TT maybe.

That's the crux of the matter. At some point, a number of us have come across a system that measures pretty plainly if not badly, yet makes better music than we've heard out of anything else. I'm about to go home and put my perfectly measuring Levinson 432 in the closet tonight because my poorly measureing Leben CS-300x, with all of 18wpc, simply wipes the floor with it for sheer enjoyment of the musical presentation.

I remember in the thread where I was thinking about getting it- somebody pointed out the poor square-wave test showing of the Leben. But it sounds better to me than the Levinson, which is a spec-person's dream of an amp, doubling down to 1600wpc at 2ohm. That's an $8500 amp sitting around unused, in case anybody thinks that $$ is dictating my perception, which seems to be the usually leveled charge.

 

[Pio1980]

It's pretty impressive what a humble reworked console amp can do. I've heard better but the authorized tech still has that one for an unsolvable minor mystery problem that went full-bore bad during the unsuccessful repairs.

 

[melofelo]

One spec i'd like to see more often is how much friction or free play there is in a tonearm's pivot bearings . I think that any arm that has been well designed and engineered to good tolerances in this critical area is worth several cartridge or phono stage upgrades alone.


Also, regardless of manufacturer or turntable type...there seldom seems to be ANY information on how accurately a tonearm's antiskate dial has been calibrated.

wow and flutter & rumble figures only tell half the story...

 

[melofelo]

You have carts such as the Denon 103 for example, with consistently good separation (>25dB) at all frequencies.

i don't know much about moving coils but moving magnet cartridges haven't really evolved much since the early 80's..give or take a few exotic shapes at the diamond end.
In fact , there were moving magnet designs in the early 80's that would spec at 25db separation at 10khz and 28 db at 1khz for a basic elliptical and as much as 33db@10khz and 29db @10khz respectively for their totl shibata offerings.:scratch2:

 

[Pio1980]

Off the top of my head the A-T dual magnet MM was possibly the only real innovation since the original ELAC MM was licensed by Shure and copied by nearly everyone else. ADC had their single pole armature free-pivot induced magnet MI as does Ortofon with their MM free-pivots, 4 poles in a hole just like the ELAC/Shure/what-have-you. The B&O MMC MI and Grado fluxbridger MI carts are more like MCs, turned inside-out.

 

[melofelo]

Off the top of my head the A-T dual magnet MM was possibly the only real innovation since the original ELAC MM was licensed by Shure and copied by nearly everyone else.

...
The tri-pole 'induced' magnet design was an attempt at a further step i think :scratch2: