Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Dedicated Source Components › Post A Photograph Of Your Turntable
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Post A Photograph Of Your Turntable - Page 162

post #2416 of 3429
Quote:
Originally Posted by MorbidToaster View Post


Arm is a Kuzma Stogi with a Dynavector 10x5.

 

Very sexy.

post #2417 of 3429
Quote:
Originally Posted by palmfish View Post
 

Correct me if Im wrong, but aren't records cut and masters EQ'ed to compensate for the alignment changes that occur as a tonarm/stylus tracks across a record?

 

And if that's true, isn't linear tracking solving a problem that doesn't exist? Actually performing worse than a conventional tonearm?

 

I never did understand this one...

 

NO.

 

There never was, or will be, such thing as cutting the record in a way that would try to compensate for the lateral geometry errors of pivoted arms.

You need as mechanically firm and fuss-free platform for the cuttrng head as humanly possible - anything more complicated than straight tracking would compromise that far more than any gains possible. Remember, cutting heads can take power input of the order approx 500 W per channel - one kilowatt of power is sure to excite any mechanical resonances of the supporting platform. 

 

There was such a thing as trying to compensate for the STYLUS errors, by recording master lacquer with exactly the opposite error added to the recorded signal, in hope both would cancel each one out, producing error free transfer from tape to disc. It was called Dynagroove http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dynagroove. Obviously, that error added to the clean signal has to be calculated for the precise geometry of the stylus. 

After the industry moved from conical to elliptical and later to shapes even more approaching the cutting stylus shape, Dynagroove became obsolete.

I have a few Dynagroove records and I might one day record some of it both with a conical stylus, where it kind of works, and a modern say Micro Line - where it sounds disatrous. 

post #2418 of 3429
Quote:
Originally Posted by MorbidToaster View Post



I want your heart...your soul...and your mind...

 

Correction. Arm is not Kuzma Stogi, but Kuzma STOGI S . It is one of the few unipivot arms that have precise and repeatable azimuth adjustment. 

 

This is the late version of the original Stogi. Original did not allow for azimuth adjustment, all current production arms do. As far removed from unipivot as it gets. http://www.kuzma.si/stogi.html

post #2419 of 3429
Quote:
Originally Posted by ]eep View Post

I don't mean to be negative on everything said above, but cartridgealignment is not that hard... You can't really go wrong with 2 screws and four clips. Just like a broken clock tells the correct time twice a day, the horizontal alignment on a normal radial arm is never really right but for two places. If you are not a complete klutz. There is no absolute right or wrong in horizontal angle because it changes all the time. rolleyes.gif I dare say that if you play mostly singles a different alignment optimized closer to the spindle is preferable to the standard alignment. And if you play mostly older shorter records where the groove is cut more towards the rim you need the opposite.
The best you can achieve with 'the 2 screws and 4 clips' is a compromise. The tolerance of your compromise depends on the stylusshape. It always is about which compromise to take and how to most closely approach it. It is relative. So don't be afraid to make your own compromise. Just like you chose your stylusshape according to your own ability to make correct alignment decisions and the skill to carry them out. Or have it done for you.

Then there is azimuth, this is an absolute. But many arms have no adjustment for it just because it is an absolute. Straight is straight. So if your cartridge is out of whack youre straight out of luck.

Now where does the TLC come in? Well, if you can adjust azimuth you will need a small mirror to set the arm straight. And if you cantilever/tip is not properly aligned to the body you will need to listen. And relisten, and adjust, and listen again. But the reward is: when it's right, it's right. Unless you are using a unipivot arm.

And then there is the VTA. rolleyes.gif Again: no absolutes. It can be, with a perfectly plane lp, but they hardly ever are. And if you change a thick 200gr for a thin 120gr, again: you will need to adjust. And with a Rega arm, you can't. Or you need a washer under the 120gr lp. And for many other arms you will have to fiddle with a tiny screwdriver to adjust the height of the arm, never knowing where you had it correct. There are very few arms with on the fly VTA adjustments.

Many if's, but's and unlesses. There's analog for you. Never a boolean when you want it.

 

I agree with most of the above.

 

BUT - straight linear tracking, sharpest stylus that does not threat re-cutting the groove, correctly aligned for azimuth using measuring equipment, on a platter that holds the lumpy wavy LP dead flat against its surface with vacuum, with VTA on the fly with digital micrometer allowing for precise repeatable adjustments, on a turntable that is smart enough to compensate for the off-center pressed records - is better.

 

Good enough is the worst enemy of the best. All of the above is unfortunately costly - but trickle down process usually employed by the manufacturers gives hope that in noooot tooooooooo dissssssstaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa.........nt future ....

post #2420 of 3429
Quote:
Originally Posted by analogsurviver View Post

Correction. Arm is not Kuzma Stogi, but Kuzma STOGI S . It is one of the few unipivot arms that have precise and repeatable azimuth adjustment. 



This is the late version of the original Stogi. Original did not allow for azimuth adjustment, all current production arms do. As far removed from unipivot as it gets. http://www.kuzma.si/stogi.html

If you're gonna be that way it's actually a Stogi S CE. :/
post #2421 of 3429
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eee Pee View Post
 

Surprised you didn't know that actually.  :D

 

Brings up a funny thought.  Imagine 1000 grooves on a record side, and with a regular tonearm, you can only set up the cartridge to play perfectly in two of them.

 

Sorry, but I refuse to let that drive me crazy, or, buy an SLT arm. :bigsmile_face: 

post #2422 of 3429
Quote:
Originally Posted by ]eep View Post

I don't mean to be negative on everything said above, but cartridgealignment is not that hard... You can't really go wrong with 2 screws and four clips. Just like a broken clock tells the correct time twice a day, the horizontal alignment on a normal radial arm is never really right but for two places. If you are not a complete klutz. There is no absolute right or wrong in horizontal angle because it changes all the time. rolleyes.gif I dare say that if you play mostly singles a different alignment optimized closer to the spindle is preferable to the standard alignment. And if you play mostly older shorter records where the groove is cut more towards the rim you need the opposite.
The best you can achieve with 'the 2 screws and 4 clips' is a compromise. The tolerance of your compromise depends on the stylusshape. It always is about which compromise to take and how to most closely approach it. It is relative. So don't be afraid to make your own compromise. Just like you chose your stylusshape according to your own ability to make correct alignment decisions and the skill to carry them out. Or have it done for you.

Then there is azimuth, this is an absolute. But many arms have no adjustment for it just because it is an absolute. Straight is straight. So if your cartridge is out of whack youre straight out of luck.

Now where does the TLC come in? Well, if you can adjust azimuth you will need a small mirror to set the arm straight. And if you cantilever/tip is not properly aligned to the body you will need to listen. And relisten, and adjust, and listen again. But the reward is: when it's right, it's right. Unless you are using a unipivot arm.

And then there is the VTA. rolleyes.gif Again: no absolutes. It can be, with a perfectly plane lp, but they hardly ever are. And if you change a thick 200gr for a thin 120gr, again: you will need to adjust. And with a Rega arm, you can't. Or you need a washer under the 120gr lp. And for many other arms you will have to fiddle with a tiny screwdriver to adjust the height of the arm, never knowing where you had it correct. There are very few arms with on the fly VTA adjustments.

Many if's, but's and unlesses. There's analog for you. Never a boolean when you want it.

 

I'm not going to address the entire text. Frankly, just don't have the time or the real interest, but I will say that an absolute measure - or close to it - does exist. It's called 92* SRA. A one degree change in SRA on, say, a Rega arm equates to a 4mm change in VTA. The fiddling with VTA is essentially pointless, once the correct SRA value is in play. I can go on.... lol

post #2423 of 3429
Quote:
Originally Posted by analogsurviver View Post

I agree with most of the above.

BUT - straight linear tracking, sharpest stylus that does not threat re-cutting the groove, correctly aligned for azimuth using measuring equipment, on a platter that holds the lumpy wavy LP dead flat against its surface with vacuum, with VTA on the fly with digital micrometer allowing for precise repeatable adjustments, on a turntable that is smart enough to compensate for the off-center pressed records - is better.

Good enough is the worst enemy of the best. All of the above is unfortunately costly - but trickle down process usually employed by the manufacturers gives hope that in noooot tooooooooo dissssssstaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa.........nt future ....
And I agree with you completely. But then you are getting close to shooting gnats with naval guns. tongue.gif You can get very good with just a bit of attention. And every bit more takes a lot more effort. I know I don't want to spend more than 5 seconds putting on a record (dropping it on, clamp on, turn, sweep dust and cue). I even get irritated when the inner sleeve won't do what I want it to do.
post #2424 of 3429
Quote:
Originally Posted by ]eep View Post


And I agree with you completely. But then you are getting close to shooting gnats with naval guns. tongue.gif You can get very good with just a bit of attention. And every bit more takes a lot more effort. I know I don't want to spend more than 5 seconds putting on a record (dropping it on, clamp on, turn, sweep dust and cue). I even get irritated when the inner sleeve won't do what I want it to do.

 

I actually will scan the editorial from the Speaker Builder magazine from early 80s - which essentially tarred & feathered Nakamichi record centering turntable, labeling it as band-aid. I agree - in theory, records SHOULD come pressed on center. 

 

In real life - no way. The same for record flatness, VTA, azimuth - these things were not even standardized, not once for all - or not at all. 

 

I am afraid 5 seconds is not enough to change the record and have decent sound from it. I do not like/enjoy  that more than 5 seconds time required either...

post #2425 of 3429
Quote:
Originally Posted by analogsurviver View Post
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by ]eep View Post


And I agree with you completely. But then you are getting close to shooting gnats with naval guns. tongue.gif You can get very good with just a bit of attention. And every bit more takes a lot more effort. I know I don't want to spend more than 5 seconds putting on a record (dropping it on, clamp on, turn, sweep dust and cue). I even get irritated when the inner sleeve won't do what I want it to do.

 

I actually will scan the editorial from the Speaker Builder magazine from early 80s - which essentially tarred & feathered Nakamichi record centering turntable, labeling it as band-aid. I agree - in theory, records SHOULD come pressed on center. 

 

In real life - no way. The same for record flatness, VTA, azimuth - these things were not even standardized, not once for all - or not at all. 

 

I am afraid 5 seconds is not enough to change the record and have decent sound from it. I do not like/enjoy  that more than 5 seconds time required either...

 

I always thought the Nak TT was a great idea.  I saw it in operation back in the day at the hi-fi emporium where I was employed.  Out of the things you enumerated, flatness, VTA, azimuth, I thought centering was the most important.  I've heard plenty of solo piano records runined by this defect and the Nak fixed that and no amount of fiddling with the other stuff could eliminate that problem.

post #2426 of 3429
Quote:
Originally Posted by bbophead View Post
 

 

I always thought the Nak TT was a great idea.  I saw it in operation back in the day at the hi-fi emporium where I was employed.  Out of the things you enumerated, flatness, VTA, azimuth, I thought centering was the most important.  I've heard plenty of solo piano records runined by this defect and the Nak fixed that and no amount of fiddling with the other stuff could eliminate that problem.

+1.

 

After you get flatness, VTA, azimuth, VTF, antiskating, etc, right - that off cener pressed record ( do on center records actually exist ? ) is like sore thumb.

On piano it is most noticeable, but it affects all music. 

 

It is the reason a decent cassete setup will have upper hand over ANY TT if off-centering is not adressed in one way or another. Naka's solution is the only practical way for "business as usual" (albeit at yet additional time it is required to find the true center of any given record ) playing of vinyl.

post #2427 of 3429
Quote:
Originally Posted by analogsurviver View Post
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by bbophead View Post
 

 

I always thought the Nak TT was a great idea.  I saw it in operation back in the day at the hi-fi emporium where I was employed.  Out of the things you enumerated, flatness, VTA, azimuth, I thought centering was the most important.  I've heard plenty of solo piano records runined by this defect and the Nak fixed that and no amount of fiddling with the other stuff could eliminate that problem.

+1.

 

After you get flatness, VTA, azimuth, VTF, antiskating, etc, right - that off cener pressed record ( do on center records actually exist ? ) is like sore thumb.

On piano it is most noticeable, but it affects all music. 

 

It is the reason a decent cassete setup will have upper hand over ANY TT if off-centering is not adressed in one way or another. Naka's solution is the only practical way for "business as usual" (albeit at yet additional time it is required to find the true center of any given record ) playing of vinyl.

 

"if off-centering is not addressed in one way or another"

 

Are you implying there is another way to address this problem other than with a Nakamichi centering TT?

post #2428 of 3429
Quote:
Originally Posted by bbophead View Post
 

 

"if off-centering is not addressed in one way or another"

 

Are you implying there is another way to address this problem other than with a Nakamichi centering TT?

 

There USED TO BE another. Less precise, had to be done manually, but worked on any turntable. It did disappear from the market before I even became aware of it trough a review in IIRC The Absolute Sound. I forgot the name of the company from the USA, but the ingenious set consisted of self adhesive rings,  appropriate record clamp and some optical device to observe the centering of the run-out groove. 

 

Procedure was as follows: for each side of the record a true center was found manually by observing the run-out groove using the above mentioned optical device. In order to be able to do that, record hole had to be enlarged enough to allow for centering using a file or similar.Without disturbing the position of the centered record on the platter, a self adhesive ring was put in the appropriate record clamp that had in its surface facing the record label a groove that accepted said self adhesive ring. After applying the ring/clamp,. ring did glue itself to the record label. On subsequent playings, ring/clamp interface automatically took care of centering. Obviously, procedure had to be repeated for each side of the record.

 

Drawbacks are numerous: first, precision is hampered by human error in the first place, tolerances necessary to allow relative easy removal/centering of rings and clamp add further to error. I do not know of any record collector that would be thrilled by necessity to permanently glue anything to record label surface of his or hers records. It makes record thicker, necessitating appreciably more shelf place per given number of LPs compared to normal space required. That kind of LP storing might/may lead to increased warpage of the entire record collection. Even if rings are made from transparent material, they do make reading the label more difficult. And most probably a special mat with recess at the ring area would have to be used.

 

So - Naka is not only better, but does not necessitate any change/modification to the record.

 

There is a fly in this ointment - Naka TTs are not offered in actions at the end shelves of Hofer and Lidl in Europe, or their US counterparts ...

 

The above short lived solution was directly influenced by discontinuation of Naka TTs.

 

Found what the device was called :

 

Center A Disc, from HVH Designs, 7647 Densmore Avenue, Van Nuys, California 91406 (defunct since 1987 )

 

http://www.regonaudio.com/NakamichiTX1000.html


Edited by analogsurviver - 10/1/13 at 4:26pm
post #2429 of 3429

"Naka TTs are not offered in actions at the end shelves of Hofer and Lidl in Europe, or their US counterparts"

 

I don't know what this means, Hofer and Lidl?  Actions at the end shelves? 

post #2430 of 3429

 

 

...like a dismantled vinyl factory!

*

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Dedicated Source Components
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Dedicated Source Components › Post A Photograph Of Your Turntable