My thoughts on cartridge/arm set up

ack · Apr 3, 2018

PeterA said:
So to answer one of your questions, Tasos, I presume that Al meant the 0.049g change in VTF was not significant. In actual use, the difference is even less - 0.033g - as I just demonstrated. That is a change of 1.6% between the extremes. You think this is significant. Al does not, perhaps because he hears the improvements that these changes in arm height make to the sound of my system. I am not sure how significant changes to the other parameters are. I did listen to my cartridge set at 1.95 and at 2.05 VTF which are even greater differences in VTF than the 0.033 figure (1.967g and 2.033g), and I found that arm height impacted the sound to a much greater degree than just a change in VTF. I also know that if you leave your VPI arm fixed, VTF, SRA and overhang do change very slightly as you play LPs of different thickness in that 1mm range.

How do you and Al know that the sound improvement you hear is solely attributed to arm height, to the arm height + VTF, or just VTF, when you have not experimented with first adjusting arm height and then resetting all other parameters? Basically, you have decided that whatever VTF change affected (and all other parameters for that matter) are insignificant - which is the real answer to my question - but you have not proven so. That's the scientific part that's entirely missing, therefore, your observations are more on the subjective side, which is what this hobby is all about and totally fine.

Now consider this: what if these % variations were wow and flutter, or platter speed variations. Would you dismiss them as well?

PeterA · Apr 3, 2018

ack said:
How do you and Al know that the sound improvement you hear is solely attributed to arm height, to the arm height + VTF, or just VTF, when you have not experimented with first adjusting arm height and then resetting all other parameters? Basically, you have decided that whatever VTF change affected (and all other parameters for that matter) are insignificant - which is the real answer to my question - but you have not proven so. That's the scientific part that's entirely missing, therefore, your observations are more on the subjective side, which is what this hobby is all about and totally fine.

Now consider this: what if these % variations were wow and flutter, or platter speed variations. Would you dismiss them as well?

Good Morning Tasos,

Al and I do not know to what the sound improvement is solely attributed. I just know that minor adjustments to arm height sound better to me that setting things once and forgetting them. I presume it would be better to change all the parameters, optimizing them for each LP, every time. I am not willing to spend the effort and time to do that. So I have found the compromise that works best for me in my system. My visitors do not seem to mind or object. They notice the improvements too. I never said that the changed parameters are insignificant. I said that I am not sure how significant they are. What I did say is that in my system, to my ears, changing arm height (with the resulting changes in the other parameters) makes all of the LPs in my collection sound better to me than if I set it up once for a small subset of my LPs and then left it alone. We all tinker with our systems to one degree or another, always searching and striving to improve things. You do probably more than most. Well, and MikeL.

I have answered your question many times to you in emails, conversations and in posts. I never said that other parameters are insignificant as you suggest, just that some seem to make more of an audible difference than others do. I also never claimed to prove anything. I did once point out the obvious fact that if one raises his arm by the same amount that a particular LP is thicker than another, then VTF does not change because the arm angle does not change. I don't need scientific proof, though it would be nice to see. My ears are the final judge in my system for what I like most. I concede that the scientific part is entirely missing. I never claimed otherwise. You are the scientist and must surely realize that all of this is subjective preference because the parameters always change when playing LPs of differing cutting angle and thickness. SRA, overhang and VTF change in your system also when you play various LPs.

I distinctly remember suggesting that you alter the arm height for me while we were listening to one of your LPs at your house, and the sound improved. We all heard it. What does that really mean? That you had improperly set up your turntable? No, just that on that one LP, we could make it sound better by simply lowering or raising the arm by 0.5 or 1.0 mm. I don't know by how much the parameters change in your system when you play different LPs, but they surely do. Most vinyl guys I know adjust VTA by ear. When they do that as the final step in the set up, they are altering slightly the overhang and VTF that they had previously set. If they then go and try to adjust VTF again, it alters the VTA, and so on and so on. Some guys use digital microscopes and try to find that magical 92 degrees. I wonder if they think all of their LPs are optimized for every parameter if they set and forget the parameters. Or do they think they are finding the best compromise settings and then leaving them alone and forgetting about it?

Regarding dismissing things. I do not think I ever said that. I certainly did not mean to imply it. I only prioritize things in the order in which I think they have the greatest sonic impact for my listening pleasure. All turntables have measurable wow and flutter figures, and speed variations. No one is dismissing those. It is not that simple. On the most stable turntables, other factors become more important once the speed issues are fairly stable. Some prefer belt drive, others idler or direct. It is not just about wow and flutter figures. Just like SRA versus VTF. It depends on how close each is and how audible the differences are in one's system to his ears. For a turntable which is fairly speed accurate and stable, other factors may be more important like bearing noise, energy dissipation, set up stability, vibration isolation, any number of factors.

People choose to buy speakers and electronics which are shown to be non-linear and which favor certain frequencies over others. Just look at how you have played with the settings of your cable networks, the gain or volume setting in you DAC, the input on your preamp, your cartridge loading, your turntable arm and isolation modifications, etc, etc. You are mostly using your ears and judging changes subjectively, offering no scientific proof of what you are doing. As you say, this hobby is subjective, at least for most end users, "which is what this hobby is all about and totally fine." Vinyl is an imperfect medium and set up is an imperfect art. This is all about finding the best compromise.

ack · Apr 3, 2018

PeterA said:
I distinctly remember suggesting that you alter the arm height for me while we were listening to one of your LPs at your house, and the sound improved. We all heard it. What does that really mean? That you had improperly set up your turntable? No, just that on that one LP, we could make it sound better by simply lowering or raising the arm by 0.5 or 1.0 mm.

I think I remember it sounding better in the sense that there was a tonal balance more to our liking - the result of VTF changes - not that we heard less IMD - the result of SRA. But we are going around and around in circles, and I think we both understand what we are both saying.

Thanks

microstrip · Apr 3, 2018

miniguy said:
“For a static toneram - no difference any case, unless there are secondary effects.”

WRONG. A tonearm achieving VTF by using gravity to unbalance the arm (“static balance”) has nothing to do with its inherent balance. It is stable, neutral or unstable, depending on the location of the CG with respect to the vertical pivot. Take an arm with stable balance, as nearly all tonearms are, and that uses the counterweight position to set VTF (“static balance”). Now measure the VTF on a digital gauge. Then put a thin spacer underneath the gauge to raise it up, say an eighth to quarter of an inch, and measure the VTF again. It will have increased. An arm having inherent unstable balance will exhibit the opposite behavior where VTF decreases as the stylus position is raised. A neutrally balanced arm like the Phantoms will not show any change in VTF

OK, I see the reason of our disagreement - you assume most tonearms are "stable" , I am assuming most are "neutral", as SME tonearms, most gimbal tonearms or airbearings such as my Forsell. ACK VPI tonearm is a "static balance" , probably it explains his measurements.

Effectively I was using the word static not as addressing to COG height, but simply as stating that VTF was not applied by a dynamic way such as a spring.

ack · Apr 3, 2018

microstrip said:
OK, I see the reason of our disagreement - you assume most tonearms are "stable" , I am assuming most are "neutral", as SME tonearms, most gimbal tonearms or airbearings such as my Forsell. ACK VPI tonearm is a "static balance" , probably it explains his measurements.

Effectively I was using the word static not as addressing to COG height, but simply as stating that VTF was not applied by a dynamic way such as a spring.

Like miniguy, I am only aware of only one set of truly neutral arms, Graham's - which was the focus of his patent, and what we have been quoting is from that patent. SME arms are more of the "stable" kind as well, just slightly better. Nonetheless, to me they are remarkable arms. At the same time, exactly because of the high VTF effect on SRA changes in my arm is why I don't willy-nilly adjust arm height per LP as Peter does, and I just don't dismiss any parameter changes as being too low to ignore.

miniguy · Apr 3, 2018

microstrip said:
OK, I see the reason of our disagreement - you assume most tonearms are "stable" , I am assuming most are "neutral", as SME tonearms, most gimbal tonearms or airbearings such as my Forsell. ACK VPI tonearm is a "static balance" , probably it explains his measurements.

Effectively I was using the word static not as addressing to COG height, but simply as stating that VTF was not applied by a dynamic way such as a spring.

Most tonearms are not neutral but are weakly stable, meaning they are close to neutral. Others such as unipivots which require a large mass well below the vertical pivot for stability can be described as strongly stable, and will exhibit larger variations in VTF as the vertical position of the stylus deviates from the VTF reference plane. I understood your use of the word “static”, which is why I made a point of differentiating it from the concept of inherent balance.

ack · Apr 3, 2018

miniguy said:
Most tonearms are not neutral but are weakly stable, meaning they are close to neutral. Others such as unipivots which require a large mass well below the vertical pivot for stability can be described as strongly stable, and will exhibit larger variations in VTF as the vertical position of the stylus deviates from the VTF reference plane.

Totally agreed again

microstrip · Apr 3, 2018

miniguy said:
Most tonearms are not neutral but are weakly stable, meaning they are close to neutral. Others such as unipivots which require a large mass well below the vertical pivot for stability can be described as strongly stable, and will exhibit larger variations in VTF as the vertical position of the stylus deviates from the VTF reference plane. I understood your use of the word “static”, which is why I made a point of differentiating it from the concept of inherent balance.

I agree - we should clarify using weakly, close to, etc. However many manufacturers aim at we are calling"neutral balance" tonearms and in practice can be considered as such, although strictly it will always depend on cartridge weight and shape.

Even before the Phantom, Bob Graham already claimed that for my old Graham 2.2 "the arm operates essentially in neutral balance with minimal restoring forces.". Surely for the Phantom he could remove the "essentially".

PeterA · Apr 3, 2018

ack said:
I think I remember it sounding better in the sense that there was a tonal balance more to our liking - the result of VTF changes - not that we heard less IMD - the result of SRA. But we are going around and around in circles, and I think we both understand what we are both saying.

Thanks

Tasos, how do you know for certain that lowering the arm and the resulting sound we heard from your system was a result of VTF as you claim above, or a change in SRA or overhang, which both surely changed as well? My point is that I don't care what caused the improvement, I just care that it sounded better and more enjoyable. It certainly sounded more natural and less strident/fatiguing. Distortion was reduced, and resolution increased. The high frequencies were no longer white noise, indistinct and confusing. Something was clearly wrong with your set up for that particular LP, and I remember with others we heard also that day. We simply set up your arm/cartridge more correctly for that LP by adjusting the arm height. It was a very clear example and we both heard it.

I must correct you again regarding what you ascribe to me. I do not listen for tonal balance when listening to changes in the sound due to arm height adjustments. With such adjustments, we know that all parameters change. I have explained to you before that I am listening for the relationship between the fundamental of a note and its harmonics. I know that you don't agree with that. No matter. It is sometimes heard as a timing issue, but it can also be heard as a distortion. When the SRA is off, which I presume means that it deviates somewhat from the original cutting head angle used to make the record, the sound seems off. When SRA is correct or close to being correct, the notes sound more lifelike, dynamics improve, distortion is lowered, resolution is improved and everything sounds more natural and convincing.

In the case of that LP at your house, I heard excessive cyblance (sp?), way too aggressive high frequencies, and HF distortion. It came in the guise of "detail", but it was etched, fatiguing and unnatural. When you accommodated my request and lowered the arm height, distortion decreased, notes sounded more complete, resolution improved, and the music was more natural and convincing. I suppose it could be construed as a tonal balance shift because the excessive highs were calmed down, but that is not how I assess it or what I listen for. I associate tonal balance changes with things like cable materials, speaker toe-in, and room treatments effects where some frequencies may deviate in volume relative to the others.

You recently wrote that you train your ears to recognize intermodulation distortion by listening to a test record for SRA adjustment. This also does not seem to be about tonal balance shifts. If it were only about tonal balance, that there would be subjective preference and not one more correct than the other. For me, the proper arm height results in a sound which is not just more pleasing or "to our liking", but one that is more real, natural, and convincing.

PeterA · Apr 3, 2018

ack said:
Like miniguy, I am only aware of only one set of truly neutral arms, Graham's - which was the focus of his patent, and what we have been quoting is from that patent. SME arms are more of the "stable" kind as well, just slightly better. Nonetheless, to me they are remarkable arms. At the same time, exactly because of the high VTF effect on SRA changes in my arm is why I don't willy-nilly adjust arm height per LP as Peter does, and I just don't dismiss any parameter changes as being too low to ignore.

Tasos, if you think I make my arm height adjustments "willy-nilly" and ignore or dismiss the importance of the other set up parameters, I am sorry to say, you have completely missed the point of my many posts on this subject. I started this thread to share my thinking about cartridge/arm set up and to learn from others. I welcome constructive criticism of my ideas, but I respectfully ask that you refrain from mischaracterizing my thoughts and from continuing to insult me. This is a subject I take seriously and I am here to learn from others so that I can improve the sound of my system.

ack · Apr 3, 2018

PeterA said:
In the case of that LP at your house, I heard excessive cyblance (sp?), way too aggressive high frequencies, and HF distortion. It came in the guise of "detail", but it was etched, fatiguing and unnatural. When you accommodated my request and lowered the arm height, distortion decreased, notes sounded more complete, resolution improved, and the music was more natural and convincing. I suppose it could be construed as a tonal balance shift

This is not tonal balance shift, it's IMD reduction. At any rate, no need to go on.

ack · Apr 3, 2018

PeterA said:
Tasos, if you think I make my arm height adjustments "willy-nilly" and ignore or dismiss the importance of the other set up parameters, I am sorry to say, you have completely missed the point of my many posts on this subject. I started this thread to share my thinking about cartridge/arm set up and to learn from others. I welcome constructive criticism of my ideas, but I respectfully ask that you refrain from mischaracterizing my thoughts and from continuing to insult me. This is a subject I take seriously and I am here to learn from others so that I can improve the sound of my system.

Peter, I asked very specific questions and never got a straight answer; that, unfortunately, opens up the door for all kinds of interpretations. Al also said recently "The VTF hardly changes during the VTA adjustment (Peter measured this), and that adjustment for each record clearly yields great benefits." [we have since shown here that "hardly changes" is not accurate, and it depends on the arm; but we will ignore it]

So let me ask again: since you only adjust arm height, thus affecting all parameters (to one degree or another) including SRA, VTF, alignment etc, what is your cutoff point, beyond which you will start re-adjusting all affected parameters when you get the SRA that you are looking for. Today, it does feel like you welcome the change in all other parameters when adjusting SRA (thus, effectively dismissing the changes in those other parameters as being relevant), every time you adjust the height of your arm. If you can please respond in less than 50 words, that would be very clear; long, winding posts don't convey your true message. If you don't care to respond, that's fine too.

ddk · Apr 3, 2018

ack said:
Peter, I asked very specific questions and never got a straight answer; that, unfortunately, opens up the door for all kinds of interpretations. Al also said recently "The VTF hardly changes during the VTA adjustment (Peter measured this), and that adjustment for each record clearly yields great benefits." [we have since shown here that "hardly changes" is not accurate, and it depends on the arm; but we will ignore it]

So let me ask again: since you only adjust arm height, thus affecting all parameters (to one degree or another) including SRA, VTF, alignment etc, what is your cutoff point, beyond which you will start re-adjusting all affected parameters when you get the SRA that you are looking for. Today, it does feel like you welcome the change in all other parameters when adjusting SRA (thus, effectively dismissing the changes in those other parameters as being relevant), every time you adjust the height of your arm. If you can please respond in less than 50 words, that would be very clear; long, winding posts don't convey your true message. If you don't care to respond, that's fine too.

I don’t have any experience with VPI tonearms maybe it’s something unique to them but with any arm I owned one has to be adjusting the VTA by 2-3 inches to affect overhang and if the setup is that far off then there’s really nothing to talk about. My other question is about Peter’s scale, what do you use to trust it down to 1000th of a gram, this is the territory of high end industrial scales starting from a couple of grand and going up with special attachment to place the sensor on the platter, the usual ones we use for audio are accurate to 1/10th at best. If the scale is truly that accurate then it’s also sensitive to external influences as well as the point shere you drop the stylus to weigh the VTF, it will show a different weight if breathe on a scale that sensitive. Accuracy even to 1/100th needs regular calibration and a certain degree of isolation of the scale otherwise the readings might be near but inaccurate, not that you even need 1/100th gram accuracy for cartridges.
When correctly done I don’t see how minor changes to the VTA from one’s initial setup would alter other parameters as much as you suggest, unless again it’s a design issue peculiar to the tonearm.

david

Uk Paul · Apr 4, 2018

2-3 inches?

PeterA · Apr 4, 2018

ddk said:
I don’t have any experience with VPI tonearms maybe it’s something unique to them but with any arm I owned one has to be adjusting the VTA by 2-3 inches to affect overhang and if the setup is that far off then there’s really nothing to talk about. My other question is about Peter’s scale, what do you use to trust it down to 1000th of a gram, this is the territory of high end industrial scales starting from a couple of grand and going up with special attachment to place the sensor on the platter, the usual ones we use for audio are accurate to 1/10th at best. If the scale is truly that accurate then it’s also sensitive to external influences as well as the point shere you drop the stylus to weigh the VTF, it will show a different weight if breathe on a scale that sensitive. Accuracy even to 1/100th needs regular calibration and a certain degree of isolation of the scale otherwise the readings might be near but inaccurate, not that you even need 1/100th gram accuracy for cartridges.
When correctly done I don’t see how minor changes to the VTA from one’s initial setup would alter other parameters as much as you suggest, unless again it’s a design issue peculiar to the tonearm.

david

Thank you for putting things in perspective, David. I am sure that my scale is not accurate to 1/1000th of a gram. The scale cost about $80 and was recommended in some column by Fremer, so I bought it. For the data I presented in my post, I took three measurements and reported the average figure to three decimal places. It does very slightly each time when I change nothing, as I mentioned in the OP. It is very finicky if not inaccurate at those decimal places. If we round my figures to the nearest 1/100th or 1/10th of a gram they look like this:

16.0mm: 2.013g 2.01g 2.0g
16.5mm: 2.008g 2.01g 2.0g
17.0mm: 2.001g 2.00g 2.0g
17.5mm: 1.992g 1.99g 2.0g
18.0mm: 1.987g 1.99g 2.0g
18.5mm: 1.980g 1.98g 2.0g

This supports my friend Al M.s comment that Tasos quotes here: Peter, I asked very specific questions and never got a straight answer; that, unfortunately, opens up the door for all kinds of interpretations. Al also said recently "The VTF hardly changes during the VTA adjustment (Peter measured this), and that adjustment for each record clearly yields great benefits." [we have since shown here that "hardly changes" is not accurate, and it depends on the arm; but we will ignore it]

How much the VTF varies may indeed depend somewhat on the arm, but it also depends in large part by how many decimal places you round to and whether or not anyone thinks this is audible. Some people seem overly influenced by the numbers and deemphasize what they actually hear. The variation in actual use on my turntable is 3/100ths of a gram through my entire range of 2.5mm arm height changes, and 0/10ths of gram.

I also agree with you that these small changes in arm height hardly affect the overhang. Next time I have my MINT protractor out, I will adjust my arm height by this 2.5mm to see if I can even notice under magnification the stylus move off of the arc line printed on the glass. I do know that the SRA changes by less than 1/4 of a degree for each 1.0mm change in arm height of my 12" arm, so again, my SRA is only changing by about 0.5 degrees which is very minor but audible with the other minor changes in the rest of the set up parameters. I wonder if those who try to match the magic 92 degrees SRA angle that Fremer recommends can even detect visually the difference between 91.75 and 92.25 degrees, a 0.5 degree change using their USB microscopes.

These numbers are small. What fascinates me is that some members think they are significant enough to influence the sound and are asking for "cut off" figures, while others think that they are so small that it is not worth the trouble to change anything until you get to 200 gram LPs. I happen to agree with both views in this sense: the numbers are very small, but they do have an audible effect in my system, so I take the trouble to make the minor adjustments. There is clearly disagreement about this topic which makes it so interesting to me.

Al M. · Apr 11, 2018

Yesterday Peter and I listened to chamber music with strings on his system. There was one LPs where both he and I agreed that the VTA should be adjusted from the nominal setting that he had written down from earlier listening (it was from the MSL cartridge, and the AirTight Supreme that we listened to might require a slightly different angle). The LP was Mozart string quintets with the Grumiaux Trio and guests (Philips). We listened to the early quintet KV 174.

We first listened at the nominal setting. It sounded quite good, but there was a problem with a discontinuity of the high register of the violins from the rest. It sounded a bit 'papery', brittle and thin, whereas the basic string tone did not have that character. There were also slight timbral issues with the cello. It was enjoyable enough, but by the third movement the brittleness in the violins' high register had become a bit annoying to me. Then Peter lowered the arm from 17 mm height to 16.5 mm, a 1/10th of a degree shift in SRA. According to his table of measurements above, the VTF would be changed by 0.5 % or less.

The result: the brittleness and 'papery' sound in the high register of the violins was gone, and the coherence of sound from low to high register of these instruments was much better. Overall the sound had more weight, and also the cello sounded more realistic. Oddly enough, the music also clearly sounded louder, something we both noticed independently. It just seemed as if the needle was tracking the groove better. In the development section of the first movement there is a dynamic upward swoop, led by cello and viola, and accentuated by the violins in low register. It had considerably more heft, weight and dynamics than before. Peter commented that transients in the music were better, and we both clearly heard more micro-texture from the friction of the bow on the strings. Overall, involvement became more intense and the sound more convincing, more like the real thing. It was clear to both of us: The differences were real, they were not subtle, and they were for the better.

Another LP that we listened to was the Janaki Trio debut; we listened to the Penderecki string trio. The sound was enjoyable, but a bit dark in my view. I also missed some resolution, and the sound seemed a bit diffuse. Peter raised the arm from 17.5 to 18mm. The result: a sound that was less dark, seemed more transparent, had more resolution of string texture, and was more direct, as I also would expect from my CD of the same recording which sounds more direct on my system than other more spatially accentuated recordings. The sound was also more incisive. Again an overall improvement.

It is clear that these two LPs, of different thickness, required different VTA settings, one with 16.5 mm arm height, the other with 18 mm arm height. If you would play them on a system where VTA is not adjusted by individual LPs, one will sound right and the other will sound off, or both will sound off. It does not matter how sophisticated and expensive the turntable set-up may be, if no adjustment is made between the LPs, this will be the result that would be expected.

LIke Peter, I am strongly convinced after experiences like this recent one, but also others before that, that VTA adjustment is necessary between LPs. If I would acquire a vinyl set-up, I certainly would follow Peter's example. You just leave too much potential resolution, realism of tone, and enjoyment off the table otherwise.

bonzo75 · Apr 12, 2018

How big are these differences? Is this obvious and affects enjoyment if done wrong, or is it that you have to listen carefully for it

Al M. · Apr 12, 2018

bonzo75 said:
How big are these differences? Is this obvious and affects enjoyment if done wrong, or is it that you have to listen carefully for it

At the level of resolution of Peter's system it is very obvious. I noticed immediately the problems and the improvements, and the brittleness in the high register on the Mozart clearly affected my enjoyment, which greatly increased after the arm height change when it went away.

I found it interesting that both Peter and I had the same reactions to the improvements, for example the fact that in the Mozart the music just seemed louder with the change of VTA, with more weight and coherence of sound. More than once, when Peter articulated such things, this was exactly what I was about to say if he had yet not done so at that moment.

PeterA · Apr 12, 2018

Al M. said:
At the level of resolution of Peter's system it is very obvious. I noticed immediately the problems and the improvements, and the brittleness in the high register on the Mozart clearly affected my enjoyment, which greatly increased after the arm height change when it went away.

I found it interesting that both Peter and I had the same reactions to the improvements, for example the fact that in the Mozart the music just seemed louder with the change of VTA, with more weight and coherence of sound. More than once, when Peter articulated such things, this was exactly what I was about to say if he had yet not done so at that moment.

Al, Thank you for so well articulating what you and I heard the other night. Yes, these adjustments are extremely small, with a 0.5mm change in arm height affecting SRA by roughly 1/10th of a degree. This is the kind of stuff perhaps not even visible using a USB microscope and setting the SRA for the magical 92 degrees. But it is quite noticeable my ear. As my experiments have shown, this adjustment also represents, respectively, only a 7/1000th and a 5/1000th of a gram in VTF or not even a 1/100th of a gram. As David wrote, the change in VTF is not enough to notice. When I have some time, I will get out my MINT protractor and see how raising the arm height effects overhang by seeing how far the stylus tip moves off of the inscribed arc on the surface of the protractor. I suspect that this will not even be visible to the naked eye and only barely under 10X magnification.

However, the slight change in SRA is very audible and clearly demonstrated whenever my audio buddies hear the system. I can not say how much it would affect others' enjoyment of the music. Right now, I am still switching back and forth between analytical listening and listening for pure pleasure because my speakers are so new and I am still playing with fine tuning their position in the room. But like toe-in adjustments, very slight adjustments to arm height (VTA/SRA) seem to be more significant and audible than very small adjustments to overhang and VTF, at least in my system.

Al and I have listened to quite a few live string performances together and separately, so we tend to be pretty sensitive to the sound of reproduced strings on our systems. Anything that we can do to reduce cartridge/groove (or in Al's case, digital) distortion and create a more convincing and believable illusion of real stringed instruments in our listening rooms, helps to further our enjoyment of the music. Again, we all enjoy this hobby in different ways, and I am not suggesting that anyone go out and change their habits regarding vinyl playback. I am just sharing my approach and reporting on the sonic effects as I hear them in my system.

PeterA · Apr 21, 2018

ddk said:
When correctly done I don’t see how minor changes to the VTA from one’s initial setup would alter other parameters as much as you suggest, unless again it’s a design issue peculiar to the tonearm.

david

David, this does indeed seem to be the case. I spent some time today with the MINT Protractor investigating the effect on overhang resulting from small changes to arm height. I first measured the thickness of the glass MINT protractor. I then measured the thickness of the average LP in my collection. I compared these to my average arm height level per my measurement methods and set up the experiment.

MINT Protractor: 3.0mm
Ave. LP: 1.5mm
Ave. arm height: 17.25mm

I took the difference between the MINT and LP thickness of 1.5mm and added this to my arm height so that the surface of the MINT relative to the arm height (VTA and SRA) would mimic the condition when the stylus is on an average LP.

17.25mm + 1.5mm + 18.75mm.

I raised and set the arm height to this 18.75mm level. This is a true representation of the arm height when playing an average LP except that the stylus is now resting on the inscribed arc line on the MINT protractor rather than in the groove of the thinner LP. That arc line looks to be slightly wider than the 0.1mm thickness of a human hair.

I now adjusted the arm up and down by 1.5mm in each direction which is slightly more than I raise and lower the arm up or down when playing the various LPs of my collection. I wanted to see how these changes in arm height would affect the movement of the stylus tip relative to the inscribed arc line on the MINT protractor.

With the arm at 18.75mm, the stylus made contact with the center of the arc line throughout its entire length. This was not visible by my naked eye, so I used the 10X loupe supplied by MINT and a good lighting source to confirm.

I raised the arm by 1.5mm to 20.25mm and looked at the stylus through the loupe. It was extremely hard to see the exact amount of movement, but it looked like the stylus now rested on the inner edge of the arc line representing the outter most grooves of an LP. Toward the spindle, or inner groove of the LP, the stylus was on the line.

I then lowered the arm by 1.5mm to 17.25mm and again looked at the stylus through the loupe. Now it appeared to rest on the very outside edge of the arc line at the outer groove of the LP. Near the spindle, the stylus was again on the line.

So the only detectible movement in overhang was at the outer part of the arc and it was only visible through the 10X loupe and it only changed by roughly the thickness of the line or 0.1mm. I could not see any movement at the inner part of the arc.

So it seems as though David was correct all along. The change in overhang through an arm height adjustment of 3.0mm with a 12' tonearm is not detectible by eye and only barely visible through a 10X loupe magnification. As shown previously, the change in VTF is also extremely small and does not change if measured to 1/10th of a gram and it is only barely detectible if measured to 1/100th of a gram at the extremes of my 2.5mm changes in arm height.

Perhaps others can try to do these measurements and get different results, but based on my fairly careful attempts to understand what is going on at this extremely small scale using typical analog measurement devices for cartridge and arm set up, I can only conclude that the changes or effects that I hear in sonics when adjusting arm height are primarily the result of SRA changes of 1/10th of a degree for each 0.5mm change in arm height, and not the almost undetectable changes in the other parameters of VTF and overhang. This is as I suspected, but I wanted to see the actual data collected when trying to measure this stuff.

My thoughts on cartridge/arm set up

VIP/Donor & WBF Founding Member

Well-Known Member

VIP/Donor & WBF Founding Member

VIP/Donor

VIP/Donor & WBF Founding Member

Well-Known Member

VIP/Donor & WBF Founding Member

VIP/Donor

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

VIP/Donor & WBF Founding Member

VIP/Donor & WBF Founding Member

Well-Known Member

Member Sponsor

Well-Known Member

VIP/Donor

Member Sponsor

VIP/Donor

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Similar threads