[Harry Lavo]

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
news

snip, irrelevant to point below

I was spinning vinyl back in the days when the first elliptical styli came
out. Lots of us upgraded existing cartridges to use them, even though our
existing conicals were in good shape.

I agree with Arny on this. Ellipticals were a godsend and greatly improved
tracking, improved high-frequency sound, and reduced surface noise. There
was a mass migration and upgrade as a result.

When finelines came along, they carried this further but the improvment was
incremental, not massive.

[Stephen Worth]

In article , Mr.T
MrT@home wrote:

You haven't been following the thread then. It was claimed that a $50
cartridge with a conical stylus at any tracking force, would cause less
groove damage than the most expensive cartridges available using line
contact or any other stylus shape.

Sorry. You're the one who hasn't been listening. That isn't what I said
at all. Are you trying to prop up a straw man?

See ya
Steve

--
Rare 78 rpm recordings on CD! http://www.vintageip.com/records/
Building a museum and archive of animation! http://www.animationarchive.org/
The Quest for the BEST HOTDOG in Los Angeles! http://www.hotdogspot.com/
Rediscovering great stuff from the past! http://www.vintagetips.com/

[Mr.T]

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
Conical styli are generally a step backwards. So we have a big step
backwards into an obsolete format, followed by a step backwards within the
technology of that obsolete format.

Pretty much sums it up. But at least he admits it's only to save money (even
that's doubtful) not that it's actually superior to CD, as many others feel
the need to claim.

MrT.

[Mr.T]

In article , Stephen Worth
wrote:
"Jim Lesurf" wrote in message
...
Think about the shape of an elliptical stylus... imagine it contacting
the groove a little bit off angle. One side will contact harder than
the other. A conical stylus is symmetrical. It can be a little twisted
one way or the other and it still contacts the groove the same.

Not so, there are three axis that need to be aligned. Maybe the horizontal
plane will not affect a spherical tip, but the vertical plane and tracking
angle still have an effect, unless the stylus was a complete sphere.

Alignment does NOT stay the same. If you use your turntable regularly,
things move around as you handle the tonearm. Elliptical stylii need to
be aligned every three to six months with everyday use.

Yet my experience over some decades of using LP replay systems
with non-'conical' styli did not agree with your theory. Although
it has been some time since I used LP on an 'everyday' basis. But
I did do so for many years.

Doesn't match many others experience either. Maybe he is very heavy handed.

For all I know, you are correct. But I haven't found any assessable
evidence, not have you provided any, nor does my experience indicate
that you are right. So unless you are able to provide some specific
reference that I - and perhaps others - could examine, I am afraid I
will have to doubt your assertion. :-)

Given his lack of understanding of the alignment procedure, I would say that
is a wise move.

MrT.

[Mr.T]

"Stephen Worth" wrote in message
...
You haven't been following the thread then. It was claimed that a $50
cartridge with a conical stylus at any tracking force, would cause less
groove damage than the most expensive cartridges available using line
contact or any other stylus shape.

Sorry. You're the one who hasn't been listening. That isn't what I said
at all. Are you trying to prop up a straw man?

I notice you snipped the part where I suggested any doubters merely use
Google groups to ascertain that is pretty much exactly what was claimed.
The thing I love about Usenet is that anybody can claim they didn't say
something, but the whole world can still read exactly what was said.

If you are now making a different claim, maybe you should tell us what it
is?

MrT.

[Mark D. Zacharias]

Stephen Worth wrote:
In article , Jim Lesurf
wrote:

I'd be interested to see some references to some research/measurement
reports that support the above as a generalised assertion about
"elliptical tipped" cartridges.

This is info that goes back to the LP era. Do some googling. You'll
find it. You might try looking for references to stylus shapes
intended for transcription as opposed to everyday use.

Think about the shape of an elliptical stylus... imagine it contacting
the groove a little bit off angle. One side will contact harder than
the other. A conical stylus is symmetrical. It can be a little twisted
one way or the other and it still contacts the groove the same.

Alignment does NOT stay the same. If you use your turntable regularly,
things move around as you handle the tonearm. Elliptical stylii need
to be aligned every three to six months with everyday use.

See ya
Steve

If the cartridge is properly secured in place, the alignment should not
change with ordinary handling. This seems obvious.

In the under - 50.00 range, the Grado Prestige Black is a stone bargain.


Mark Z.

[Stephen Worth]

In article , Mr.T
MrT@home wrote:

If you are now making a different claim, maybe you should tell us what it
is?

I said that it's perfectly possible to put together a good sounding
setup for playing vinyl LPs for $250 to $300.

See ya
Steve

--
Rare 78 rpm recordings on CD! http://www.vintageip.com/records/
Building a museum and archive of animation! http://www.animationarchive.org/
The Quest for the BEST HOTDOG in Los Angeles! http://www.hotdogspot.com/
Rediscovering great stuff from the past! http://www.vintagetips.com/

[Randy Yates]

"Arny Krueger" writes:

"Randy Yates" wrote in message

"Arny Krueger" writes:

The general rule of thumb is that it is far easier to
cut an agressive LP than to track it.

Cutting doesn't have to be done in real-time.

Agreed, and there weren't a lot of viable options in the day of.

Today, we can playback vinyl at any speed that suits our other needs, and
still listen to it with natural pitch and timbre.

You mean with sample rate conversion? Yes, we could, but there would be
the problem of the delay as the buffer fills with enough data to go
real-time.

Unfortunately, slow playback won't help problems due to bass excursion, and
will make the tone arm fundamental resonance issues more intrusive because
they will move up the musical scale when we listen.

Huh? I would think that all those things WOULD be mitigated by slowed
playback. A resonance at 30 kHz is better than one at 15 kHz (e.g.)!
--
% Randy Yates % "Midnight, on the water...
%% Fuquay-Varina, NC % I saw... the ocean's daughter."
%%% 919-577-9882 % 'Can't Get It Out Of My Head'
%%%% % *El Dorado*, Electric Light Orchestra
http://home.earthlink.net/~yatescr

[[email protected]]

Randy Yates wrote:
"Arny Krueger" writes:
Unfortunately, slow playback won't help problems due to bass excursion, and
will make the tone arm fundamental resonance issues more intrusive because
they will move up the musical scale when we listen.

Huh? I would think that all those things WOULD be mitigated by slowed
playback. A resonance at 30 kHz is better than one at 15 kHz (e.g.)!

The fundamental arm/stylus resonance is more like 8-12 Hz, not
15 kHz. Playing it at half speed then converting to normal would move
for example, into the 16-24 Hz region.

[Randy Yates]

writes:

Randy Yates wrote:
"Arny Krueger" writes:
Unfortunately, slow playback won't help problems due to bass excursion, and
will make the tone arm fundamental resonance issues more intrusive because
they will move up the musical scale when we listen.

Huh? I would think that all those things WOULD be mitigated by slowed
playback. A resonance at 30 kHz is better than one at 15 kHz (e.g.)!

The fundamental arm/stylus resonance is more like 8-12 Hz, not
15 kHz. Playing it at half speed then converting to normal would move
for example, into the 16-24 Hz region.

Doh! I was thinking of tweeter resonance.
--
% Randy Yates % "Ticket to the moon, flight leaves here today
%% Fuquay-Varina, NC % from Satellite 2"
%%% 919-577-9882 % 'Ticket To The Moon'
%%%% % *Time*, Electric Light Orchestra
http://home.earthlink.net/~yatescr

[Mr.T]

wrote in message
ups.com...
The fundamental arm/stylus resonance is more like 8-12 Hz, not
15 kHz. Playing it at half speed then converting to normal would move
for example, into the 16-24 Hz region.


Yes, but since you are only copying to a computer, then it may not matter
all that much. Any artefacts below 30Hz can be filtered out, (usually
nothing below that on the record), and you needn't use monitor speakers, or
even stay in the room, so physical vibration induced problems will not be so
much of an issue.
However it would require the TT/cartridge system to have a relatively flat
response to 15 or 20 Hz, (to get 30 or 40Hz) which is not so easy to achieve
IME.

I also wonder just what benefits would be expected, since a good system can
play all the treble available on any record at normal speed, and the biggest
problem in many cases is in the bass region. Might be better to increase the
playback speed instead.

MrT.

[Mr.T]

"Stephen Worth" wrote in message
...
I said that it's perfectly possible to put together a good sounding
setup for playing vinyl LPs for $250 to $300.

Lets see you said :

Dual 1228 ($75 to $100)
Used 70s preamp with phono input ($40)
New cartridge ($50)

OK so far, (depending on your definition of good sounding of course)
assuming you can actually find a Dual 1228 for that price. Just add a new
belt, and possibly replace motor, spindle and arm bearings :-) (assuming you
can actually get them) Good S/H Duals are pretty thin on the ground around
these parts though unfortunately.

Tell us what NEW $300 turntable/arm/cartridge you consider good sounding
with minimal record wear? I guess we should all trade our expensive TT's in
on the cheapest Pro-ject, which is the only thing I know that even comes
close to your price. Having heard one, I won't be trading mine any time
soon!

You also said :

"A $50 conical/spherical tip cartridge is kinder to records than the
most expensive elliptical, and it's a lot easier to keep in proper
alignment."

Which is what I objected to.
Current denial that you even said it, and lack of supporting evidence on
your part is noted.
Your misunderstanding about cartridge alignment is also noted.

MrT.

[Arny Krueger]

"Randy Yates" wrote in message

"Arny Krueger" writes:

"Randy Yates" wrote in message

"Arny Krueger" writes:

The general rule of thumb is that it is far easier to
cut an agressive LP than to track it.

Cutting doesn't have to be done in real-time.

Agreed, and there weren't a lot of viable options in the
day of.

Today, we can playback vinyl at any speed that suits our
other needs, and still listen to it with natural pitch
and timbre.

You mean with sample rate conversion? Yes, we could, but
there would be the problem of the delay as the buffer
fills with enough data to go real-time.

Real-time listening is not required.

Unfortunately, slow playback won't help problems due to
bass excursion, and will make the tone arm fundamental
resonance issues more intrusive because they will move
up the musical scale when we listen.

Huh? I would think that all those things WOULD be
mitigated by slowed playback. A resonance at 30 kHz is
better than one at 15 kHz (e.g.)!

Tone arm fundamental resonances are in the 6-12 Hz range. Play a LP at half
speed and bring up to playback pitch, and they are now in the 12-24 Hz
range. Remember, that's the center frequency of the resonance. Tone arm
resonances are moderately damped, so their effects afflict several octaves.

[Stephen Worth]

In article , Mr.T
MrT@home wrote:

assuming you can actually find a Dual 1228 for that price. Just add a new
belt, and possibly replace motor, spindle and arm bearings :-) (assuming you
can actually get them) Good S/H Duals are pretty thin on the ground around
these parts though unfortunately.

I've bought three myself for between $50 and $100 at ebay. They were
all in great condition and needed no servicing. There are good Duals
for sale at ebay all the time.

Tell us what NEW $300 turntable/arm/cartridge you consider good sounding
with minimal record wear?

Turntables today are a very weak specialty market. They are either
overpriced cheap decks or way overpriced well made ones. It doesn't
make sense to buy new turntables for so much money, when there are so
many excellent used ones from the 70s that offer so much more value for
the money.

You're just arguing for arguing's sake. You know all this stuff already.

See ya
Steve

--
Rare 78 rpm recordings on CD! http://www.vintageip.com/records/
Building a museum and archive of animation! http://www.animationarchive.org/
The Quest for the BEST HOTDOG in Los Angeles! http://www.hotdogspot.com/
Rediscovering great stuff from the past! http://www.vintagetips.com/

[[email protected]]

Mr.T wrote:
wrote in message
ups.com...
The fundamental arm/stylus resonance is more like 8-12 Hz, not
15 kHz. Playing it at half speed then converting to normal would move
for example, into the 16-24 Hz region.

Yes, but since you are only copying to a computer, then it may not matter
all that much. Any artefacts below 30Hz can be filtered out, (usually
nothing below that on the record), and you needn't use monitor speakers, or
even stay in the room, so physical vibration induced problems will not be so
much of an issue.
However it would require the TT/cartridge system to have a relatively flat
response to 15 or 20 Hz, (to get 30 or 40Hz) which is not so easy to achieve
IME.

The mechanical system consisting of the tone arm
effective mass and the stylus compliance forms a
second order mechanical resonant system. As such,
that means it's a second-order high-pass filter with
the cutoff frequency corresponding to the resonant
frequency.

Pplaying an LP at half speed,a s one example, means
that ALL the information is shifted down one octave.
But that mechanical high-pass filter remains the same.
Thus, the effect, once the half-speed play is compensated
for, is to have that high-pass filter move up an octave.

That means that, under the somewhat optimistic
assumption that the resonance is damped enough
to give a Butterworth high-pass at, oh, 12 Hz, playing
at half speed and compensating makes it a high-pass
at 24 Hz.

In fact, the vast majority of turntable systems I examined
over the years were seriously UNDERdamped, with effective
Q's in the realm of 2-5, which meant a pretty sizeable peak
(in the range of +6 to +14 dB) at resonance (12 Hz). Now,
move that peak to 24 Hz, and we begin to see the problem.

Now, for sure, the response is minimum-phase, and
can be completely compensated for by a complementary
equalizer, but there are several issues:

1. How many people know, with reasonablt certainty,
precisely what the resonant frequency of the arm/
cartridge system REALLY is, and what is REALLY
the system Q at resonance? (hint: almost none)

2. Regardless of whether it is equalizable (it is), what
you have done by shifting all the audio down by low-
speed playing is that you have now placed it in the
realm of that (likely) under-damped resonance. Now
you face the problem that you have significantly MORE
signal to stimulate that resonance and, being under-
damped, increase the likelihood of potential mis-
tracking problems, rather than decreasing it.

I also wonder just what benefits would be expected,
since a good system can play all the treble available
on any record at normal speed, and the biggest
problem in many cases is in the bass region.
Might be better to increase the playback speed instead.

But you trade one set of problems for another.

Rather, IF people would take the time and effort (and it's
NOT easy) to make sure the arm cartidge resonance is
both at the right frequency AND has a Q in the realm of
about 0.6 to 0.8, then things will be fine.

The problem is that the normal practice of applying some
indiscriminant amount of damping goo DOES NOT WORK.
The ONLY way to do it is to apply the right amount of the
right jind of damping, and the ONLY way to do THAT is
to MEASURE the result with appropriate test equipment.

I have, in fact, done that and when properly done, results
in even rather "ordinary" LP playback equipment being
able to track damned near anything and, by the way, also
reduces isolation problems (an underdamped arm/cartridge
system is more prone to isolation issues, because you
have more gain at the resonant frequency, partically defeating
the low-pass filtering effect of the turntable suspension).

And, for those of you out there eager to jump in an tell
me that their tone arm IS properly damped and all, please,
spare me the waste of time. Of the many hundreds of turntables
examined, ranging to the most esoteric, I never saw ONE
that was even close to the proper Q.

[Mr.T]

"Stephen Worth" wrote in message
...
assuming you can actually find a Dual 1228 for that price. Just add a
new
belt, and possibly replace motor, spindle and arm bearings :-) (assuming
you
can actually get them) Good S/H Duals are pretty thin on the ground
around
these parts though unfortunately.

I've bought three myself for between $50 and $100 at ebay. They were
all in great condition and needed no servicing. There are good Duals
for sale at ebay all the time.

Shipping a cheap turntable from overseas though is not something I'd care
to do, but good luck to you.

Tell us what NEW $300 turntable/arm/cartridge you consider good sounding
with minimal record wear?

Turntables today are a very weak specialty market. They are either
overpriced cheap decks or way overpriced well made ones. It doesn't
make sense to buy new turntables for so much money, when there are so
many excellent used ones from the 70s that offer so much more value for
the money.

I agree, and it doesn't make sense to buy a turntable at all when CD players
offer "so much more value for the money" than any turntable. Except of
course to transcribe old records you have in your collection. Most people
with a record collection will already have an old turntable though. Those
that god rid of their TT usually got rid of their record collection too.

You're just arguing for arguing's sake.

Not at all, I STILL don't think a $50 cartridge is the equal of any CD
player.

You know all this stuff already.

Yes, the bit's that are actually correct anyway.

MrT.

[Mr.T]

wrote in message
ups.com...
The fundamental arm/stylus resonance is more like 8-12 Hz, not
15 kHz. Playing it at half speed then converting to normal would move
for example, into the 16-24 Hz region.

Yes, but since you are only copying to a computer, then it may not
matter
all that much. Any artefacts below 30Hz can be filtered out, (usually
nothing below that on the record), and you needn't use monitor speakers,
or
even stay in the room, so physical vibration induced problems will not
be so
much of an issue.
However it would require the TT/cartridge system to have a relatively
flat
response to 15 or 20 Hz, (to get 30 or 40Hz) which is not so easy to
achieve
IME.

The mechanical system consisting of the tone arm
effective mass and the stylus compliance forms a
second order mechanical resonant system. As such,
that means it's a second-order high-pass filter with
the cutoff frequency corresponding to the resonant
frequency.

Pplaying an LP at half speed,a s one example, means
that ALL the information is shifted down one octave.
But that mechanical high-pass filter remains the same.
Thus, the effect, once the half-speed play is compensated
for, is to have that high-pass filter move up an octave.

That means that, under the somewhat optimistic
assumption that the resonance is damped enough
to give a Butterworth high-pass at, oh, 12 Hz, playing
at half speed and compensating makes it a high-pass
at 24 Hz.

In fact, the vast majority of turntable systems I examined
over the years were seriously UNDERdamped, with effective
Q's in the realm of 2-5, which meant a pretty sizeable peak
(in the range of +6 to +14 dB) at resonance (12 Hz). Now,
move that peak to 24 Hz, and we begin to see the problem.

Now, for sure, the response is minimum-phase, and
can be completely compensated for by a complementary
equalizer, but there are several issues:

1. How many people know, with reasonablt certainty,
precisely what the resonant frequency of the arm/
cartridge system REALLY is, and what is REALLY
the system Q at resonance? (hint: almost none)

2. Regardless of whether it is equalizable (it is), what
you have done by shifting all the audio down by low-
speed playing is that you have now placed it in the
realm of that (likely) under-damped resonance. Now
you face the problem that you have significantly MORE
signal to stimulate that resonance and, being under-
damped, increase the likelihood of potential mis-
tracking problems, rather than decreasing it.

My point exactly. However as usual I simply cannot fault your willingness to
explain all the technical detail involved.
You truly are an asset to usenet Dick.

I also wonder just what benefits would be expected,
since a good system can play all the treble available
on any record at normal speed, and the biggest
problem in many cases is in the bass region.
Might be better to increase the playback speed instead.

But you trade one set of problems for another.
snip

Very true, I was not suggesting there was really anything to be gained with
a properly set up TT, just that it would make slightly more sense than
*reducing* playback speed IMO.

MrT.

[Stephen Worth]

In article , Mr.T
MrT@home wrote:

Shipping a cheap turntable from overseas though is not something I'd care
to do, but good luck to you.

Now I know why you're so contrary. You're a foreigner.

See ya
Steve

--
Rare 78 rpm recordings on CD! http://www.vintageip.com/records/
Building a museum and archive of animation! http://www.animationarchive.org/
The Quest for the BEST HOTDOG in Los Angeles! http://www.hotdogspot.com/
Rediscovering great stuff from the past! http://www.vintagetips.com/

[Mr.T]

"Stephen Worth" wrote in message
...
Now I know why you're so contrary. You're a foreigner.

So we can add Xenophobia to your list of mental problems then.

MrT.