Q's on Headshells

[Trawlerman]

Folks,

I've got some questions on the differences of headshells. I know that headshells are important to sound quality of from turntables and definitely make a difference but i'm unsure of why that should be so?

A fixed headshell on a one piece tonearm (e.g. RB300) will be better because of the overall continuity of the arm. I've got that OK.

But why when one has a quality tonearm with a detachable headshell should there be any major differences. I realise that the headshells can be manufactured from a wide range of materials such as Steel, Magnesium, Aluminium (or other alloys), Carbon Fibre, Plastic. The material that it is made from will obviously make a difference to the overall weight of the headshell but as long as the counterbalance is of a sufficient weight this shouldn't make a difference or should it?

I suppose that the other question that follows on from these points are what are considered to be the best headshells around?

I've seen vintage Orsonsics that are quite well regarded, also seen Empire Carbon Fibre ones and a Yamamoto HS-1/1a Ebony Wood. Any thoughts on these?

 

[ddarch]

Hi,

In my opinion, the average ears won't hear a difference between an excellent arm with detached headshell versus a similarly regarded arm with fixed shell. The difference may show up with electronic measurement...

I have used the Orsonic and must say I still regret selling it. It was a pleasure to use and mated well with the SME 3009 I was using at the time. Extremely adjustable, and a pure joy to mount a cartridge to.

Dave

 

[Nat]

Don't forget that the fixed headshell arms have the psychological (in addition to acoustical) benefit of one less variable to fret about. My experience suggests that for enjoying music, the set and forget method has a lot to offer -- as opposed to constant questioning and tweaking. This is not to suggest that tweaking isn't a delightful hobby, but its different from the hobby of listening to music.
If you like tweaking (and if you didn't why would you be asking the question?), you can also try damping compounds between the cartridge and headshell, and the stylus mount and cartridge, putting a piece of balso or styrofoam between the cartridge and headsell and so on. These things may actually have an audible effect especially if the headshell is flexy or resonant.

 

[House de Kris]

Pretty interesting question which prompted me to think, thanks!

Anyway, I think may have been on the right track, but dismissed it too quickly. True, with headshells made of materials with differeing mass and volume, it would be easy to see how various ones have differing weights. And, it is true that the counterbalance would compensate for it, IN BALANCE ONLY. You have still modified the total arm mass with the change of the headshell. In my opinion, arm mass and cartridge compliance are the two leading contributors to determining where the arm/cartridge resonance frequency is and its Q. So, two different headshells with different mass, on the same arm, with the same cartridge should have different arm/cart resonances. Changing the arm/cart resonance should be audible to the tweaky listener. I hear the biggest change in the bass region. "Fat-n-loose" or "lean-n-mean" take your pick.

Since it is really an iteraction of the arm, the headshell, and the cartridge, it would be impossible to single out any lone headshell as being superior. Headshell A with cartridge C may outperform headshell B with cartridge C, but headshell B may be the ticket with cartridge D. And, this may all change when considering a different arm.

Thinking even further, if you are hearing differences in sound between two different headshells in the upper midrange area, then I would suspect the mechanical resonances of the headshell itself (which is completely different than the arm/cart resonance). In this case, even if the mass is the same, and the materials are the same, the shape of the headshell and all its detals would result in differing resonances. If you can hear the influences of this, I'd be impressed.

 

[Trawlerman]

Thanks for the replies there fellas. Always good to get the old gray matter working overtime.

I meant to post again sooner but have just finished a load of nightshifts.

From what i've read here and a few other places it seems like the differences are down to arm/cartidge resonances upon which pretty much everything will have an effect no matter how small that may be. I guess that's why we have so many differences in arm design, bearings, fixed/detachable headshells etc.

The decks that I have with detachable headshells are nowhere near high end and have many shortcomings so I guess the point of spending mucho $$$ on high wuality headshells and cartridges is a bit of a waste. But nonetheless this is an interesting facet of vinyl playback that I had never considered previously.

Funny, the things that one learns here

 

[reyneman]

A few more considerations- IMHO there are two other areas of headshells (besides weight) that may be of concern:

1. The tightness of the mechanical joint- you would want, I think, as close to a 'one piece' arm as possible, so the tolerance of the mechanical connection would be a concern.

2. You've added an extra electrical connection in an extremely low volt signal path, so the quality of the headshell/arm electrical connection becomes critical.

As for materials, there are several schools of thought here, and I'm not expert in this area. My personal leaning would be towards a lightweight, stiff material, but then again those wood headshells look killer. Since, by your admission, your system isn't state of the art, I think I'd go for a bit of coolness factor here. Wood or black fibre would be my choice, but of course I have no taste.