Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [regsaudioforum] Re: A puzzling interconnect experience.

Expand Messages
  • Fred
    I tried a helluva lot of cartridges in the 1970s and the winner for me has remained the Ortofon VMS-30 which matches so well with my SME Series III tonearm.
    Message 1 of 36 , Apr 2, 2007
    • 0 Attachment
      I tried a helluva lot of cartridges in the 1970s and
      the winner for me has remained the Ortofon VMS-30
      which matches so well with my SME Series III tonearm.

      :-)

      Fred.



      --- regtas43 <regonaudio@...> wrote:

      > PS When it comes to that, the Sheffield people
      > checked carefully that
      > the moving magnets sound LIKE THE LIVE MICROPHONE
      > FEED
      > by comparing lacquers(where they had not quite made
      > it to the end)
      > with the live feed playing the same music on a
      > second try.
      > This is like the totally acid test. And the moving
      > magnet(a Stanton)
      > passed with flying colors.
      >
      > You really do not need a better cartridge. What one
      > really needs is
      > BETTER RECORDS. But of course it is a bit late in
      > the afternoon to
      > expect much of that before night falls completely.
      >
      > REG
      >
      > --- In regsaudioforum@yahoogroups.com, "regtas43"
      > <regonaudio@...>
      > wrote:
      > >
      > > Back when the people who cared about such things
      > as phono playback
      > > were the same people who had access to the
      > mastertapes of records,
      > > lots of comparisons of tapes with vinyl (and even
      > lacquer) playback
      > > were carried out.
      > >
      > > Almost everyone who did this arrived at the
      > conclusion: that moving
      > > magnet phono cartridges sounded extremely close to
      > the tapes while
      > > moving coils did not.
      > >
      > > Of course one can find lots of things wrong with
      > moving magnets in
      > > principle, but audibly, what happened happened.
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > > Even HP(who liked moving coils) said that Bernie
      > Grundman's Shure
      > was
      > > almost indistinguishable from the master tape on a
      > lacquer playback
      > > (one of the Classic recuts) when he was at the
      > cutting session and
      > > they played the best lacquer. I am not taking his
      > words amiss: this
      > > is in TAS!!
      > >
      > > Everyone who tried it that I know of(and that is
      > quite a few of the
      > > famous record cutting engineers and so on, not to
      > mention HP) came
      > to
      > > the same conclusion:
      > > Moving magnets, whatever their theoretical flaws,
      > sound almost
      > > exactly like the tapes. Moving coils do not.
      > >
      > > I do not see why people would want anything but
      > something that
      > > sounded like the tapes.
      > >
      > > REG
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > > -- In regsaudioforum@yahoogroups.com,
      > "Hans-Martin" <martinburm@>
      > > wrote:
      > > >
      > > > Hi Ned
      > > > I have been waiting looking for getting details
      > about your
      > > cartridge,
      > > > your tonearm and the interconnect cables you
      > referred to and your
      > > preamp.
      > > > All other information given was/were very
      > general. So there were
      > > some
      > > > replies from competent people about the matter
      > in general.
      > > >
      > > > Your (if average) magnetic cartridge probably
      > will put out 2.5mV @
      > > > limoited 1cm/sec , at peak excursions it will
      > give more than 50mV.
      > > >
      > > > The output of your preamp will be in the same
      > range if you listen
      > to
      > > > average speech /room levels, if your power amp
      > puts out 100Winto
      > > 8Ohms
      > > > at 1V input signal (like most modern amps do).
      > > > The load for the cable to power amp will be
      > around 50 K which is
      > not
      > > > for from typical 47k for magnetic cartridges
      > load.
      > > >
      > > > Any modern cartridge should have lower
      > inductance to cope with
      > high
      > > > capacitance inputs like common practice of the
      > last more than 20
      > > years.
      > > >
      > > > If the cable is to be selected to fill the gap
      > for giving the
      > > correct
      > > > capacitive load I believe you are on the wrong
      > path.
      > > > Cables pick up sonics from speakers (modulated
      > cable capacitance
      > > will
      > > > have an impact on voltage at constant charge),
      > they introduce
      > > > dielectric absorption and more length will pick
      > up more HF.
      > > > Microphonic effects will be boosted by the +20dB
      > boost of the RIAA
      > > > characteristic of the phono preamp in bass and
      > the HF behaviour
      > of
      > > the
      > > > first stage should be well done by a brand name
      > manufacturer...
      > > > otherwise it could lead to unwanted side
      > effects)
      > > > If the cartridge requires some more capacitive
      > load to give smooth
      > > > frequency response to 20kHz, additional paralled
      > capacitors
      > inside
      > > the
      > > > preamp should do the job, not the cable.
      > > >
      > > > Unfortunately capacitive load adds phase shift
      > and this seems to
      > be
      > > > less problem with moving coil cartridges.
      > > > There is a website of a German HighEnd
      > manufacturer about the
      > math
      > > and
      > > > the physics behind it, maybe you can understand
      > it with the help
      > of
      > > an
      > > > online translator program...
      > > >
      >
      http://www.sac.de/sac/start_frame.php?Pfad=11_12_30&BL=8
      > > > L1 = inductivity of pickup
      > > > R1 = Ohm Resistance of pickup
      > > > C1 = Cable capacitance from pickup to
      > phonoinputstage
      > > > C2 = Capacitance of phonoinputstage
      > > > R2 = Load resistance at phonoinputstage
      > > >
      > > > Maybe there is a solution by placing the
      > required parameters into
      > > the
      > > > equation...
      > > >
      > > > In my experience the cables between source and
      > preamp introduce
      > more
      > > > audible difference than same cables applied
      > between preamp and
      > > power amp.
      > > > This appears logic to me because the preamp will
      > not improve
      > signal
      > > > quality, rather degrade it and quality matters
      > less here.
      > > > If a CD-player puts out 2V and at listening
      > level the power amp
      > > > receives 20mV from the preamp, why do we need so
      > much preamp
      > > > amplification (apart from amp required for RIAA
      > EQ) and attenuate
      > it
      > > > in a potentiometer with questionable quality of
      > the signal path?
      > > >
      > > > IMO the phono preamp and EQ should be placed
      > close to the
      > cartridge
      > > > (inside the turntabel plinth) and the power
      > supply with its stray
      > > > field of the transformer kept away from it.
      > > > Generally spoken, this might solve some of your
      > problems...from my
      >
      === message truncated ===




      ___________________________________________________________
      Now you can scan emails quickly with a reading pane. Get the new Yahoo! Mail. http://uk.docs.yahoo.com/nowyoucan.html
    • nedmast2@aol.com
      Thanks, Hans-Martin. This is an EMC-1. The number on the bottom of the cartridge is 826475. I ll take a look at the site you included. Best, Ned
      Message 36 of 36 , Apr 2, 2007
      • 0 Attachment
        Thanks, Hans-Martin.  This is an EMC-1.  The number on the bottom of the cartridge is 826475.  I'll take a look at the site you included.
         
        Best,  Ned 




        See what's free at AOL.com.
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.