Hi Balle. This is an older post of yours but I need your help. I bought the UR23 you mentioned in the post, and tried it with my Waxwing. I wanted to use it with the second Line Out from my preamp, so I set the Waxwing up (I think correctly) with ‘EQ’ to ‘Line In’, ‘Output’ to ‘24/96’, and gave it a try by running the 1KHz Track 1 signal from the UA test record. What I saw on my computer was a nasty saw-tooth waveform. The Waxwing Gain is set to -4dB; the saw-tooth does not change if I set it to 0dB or even a bit higher. If I keep raising the Gain it winds up getting worse.
Analog Magik
- Thread starter Tirebiter
- Start date
I am not sure what you are trying to do. I use the Toslink OUTPUT from Puffin to go via Toslink-to-USB to connect to my PC. A preamp has no place here.
I’m doing the same with the Waxwing, but rather than taking the cartridge output directly into the Waxwing I am using the line out from my phono preamp. The Waxwing has the ability to be configured for Line In, and without RIAA. I figured since I’d normally be using the phono preamp output when using either Adjust+ or AM, this would be the way to use the Waxwing.
First, no lockups with Apogee Duet, got them regularly with ART
Second, any consensus on going to V2 from V1. The azimuth L-R at same time looks handy but worth the $$$ ?
Second, any consensus on going to V2 from V1. The azimuth L-R at same time looks handy but worth the $$$ ?
Not sure it is worth it, I upgraded to V2 to get the zenith right, but I am not sure I managed properly anyway.
The V2 has a very good pink noise track, but the first set of records were badly warped and unusable so I complained and the store got me a good set, thankfully.
The V2 has a very good pink noise track, but the first set of records were badly warped and unusable so I complained and the store got me a good set, thankfully.
I’ve been thinking about how so many of our cartridge alignments are of a “teeter totter” nature. Move the cartridge one way, the value in one channel gets better; move it the other way, the other channel gets better, usually at the expense of the other (although not always).
Right now I’m thinking of the AM v1 VTA measurement, which can also be effective for zenith. Used with respect to VTA, as I understand the instructions we want to adjust VTA to minimize the distortion readings. I won’t get into our much more recent discussions about how it is proposed that the cantilever VTA of virtually every cart is much higher than the suggested ideal of 17 degrees. Let’s not go there right now.
But before I get to that, let’s look at the AM v1 Vibration measurement. The guidance is that anything between 1.5% and 3% is considered good. In my case, unless I move into other forms of isolation, the best I can do on my solid concrete floor plus a deadening layer plus a rug underlayment plus a close pile rug, on which is my 260 pound turntable rack with columns filled with sand and lead shot, on which is a 3” thick maple shelf spiked to the rack, and finally on which is my turntable with pneumatic resonance tuned feet, is a vibration value distortion of 5%. According to the AM info, there is no tonearm or cartridge tweak I can do to make this better. Let’s for the moment consider it the baseline and move on to VTA.
My arm has what I consider to be a reasonably effective VTA on the fly adjustment capability. I normally mount cartridges initially so that - depending on whether the bottom of the cartridge has a flat edge or the face is a flat 90 degrees, I use eyeballs plus a 4 axis laser level (accurate to well with a fraction of a degree at these short distances) to make sure the bottom of the cart is flat relative to a known surface (like the SMARTractor baseplate). From there I can use VTA to do what I need to do.
After this long winded lead in I’m finally getting to my point. No matter what I do, I can’t get the VTA distortion readings to vary by more than a fraction of a degree around (depending on the arm I use) 12% or 14%! I can raise the VTA vernier to get a ridiculous arm angle. Virtually no change. The right and left channels are within a fraction of a degree to each other, so the “presumption” is it’s not a zenith issue. I’ve had this problem ever since Day 1 with AM. I’ve gone through 3 or 4 TT iterations over this time, with at least as many arms and carts. Single belt drive, multiple belt drive, rim drive, replacing the bearing with a high precision Silicon Nitride ball, direct drive… AM says that numbers above 5% are essentially useless as a measure. I just can’t seem to get a handle on what’s behind this. There’s no way I can begin to use this for zenith given what I’m seeing.
Yeah, I know I could use AM v2 (which I also have), but there’s just something here I have to figure out first. It will probably be useful if I should choose to use v2 later.
Right now I’m thinking of the AM v1 VTA measurement, which can also be effective for zenith. Used with respect to VTA, as I understand the instructions we want to adjust VTA to minimize the distortion readings. I won’t get into our much more recent discussions about how it is proposed that the cantilever VTA of virtually every cart is much higher than the suggested ideal of 17 degrees. Let’s not go there right now.
But before I get to that, let’s look at the AM v1 Vibration measurement. The guidance is that anything between 1.5% and 3% is considered good. In my case, unless I move into other forms of isolation, the best I can do on my solid concrete floor plus a deadening layer plus a rug underlayment plus a close pile rug, on which is my 260 pound turntable rack with columns filled with sand and lead shot, on which is a 3” thick maple shelf spiked to the rack, and finally on which is my turntable with pneumatic resonance tuned feet, is a vibration value distortion of 5%. According to the AM info, there is no tonearm or cartridge tweak I can do to make this better. Let’s for the moment consider it the baseline and move on to VTA.
My arm has what I consider to be a reasonably effective VTA on the fly adjustment capability. I normally mount cartridges initially so that - depending on whether the bottom of the cartridge has a flat edge or the face is a flat 90 degrees, I use eyeballs plus a 4 axis laser level (accurate to well with a fraction of a degree at these short distances) to make sure the bottom of the cart is flat relative to a known surface (like the SMARTractor baseplate). From there I can use VTA to do what I need to do.
After this long winded lead in I’m finally getting to my point. No matter what I do, I can’t get the VTA distortion readings to vary by more than a fraction of a degree around (depending on the arm I use) 12% or 14%! I can raise the VTA vernier to get a ridiculous arm angle. Virtually no change. The right and left channels are within a fraction of a degree to each other, so the “presumption” is it’s not a zenith issue. I’ve had this problem ever since Day 1 with AM. I’ve gone through 3 or 4 TT iterations over this time, with at least as many arms and carts. Single belt drive, multiple belt drive, rim drive, replacing the bearing with a high precision Silicon Nitride ball, direct drive… AM says that numbers above 5% are essentially useless as a measure. I just can’t seem to get a handle on what’s behind this. There’s no way I can begin to use this for zenith given what I’m seeing.
Yeah, I know I could use AM v2 (which I also have), but there’s just something here I have to figure out first. It will probably be useful if I should choose to use v2 later.
Sorry for my ignorance (I don't have AM), but what does 1.5-3% mean?
As I see it, I would not optimize zenith based on distorsion measurements but strictly to minimize phase difference between the channels.
AM expresses the Vibration in terms of a percentage of IMD.
Interesting. I wonder if using each method the end result would be the same?
Not at all. You cannot measure zenith error with IMD tracks or with harmonic distortion either as zenith error is a linear distortion, not a non-linear distortion as IMD and HD measure. If you use IMD or HD data you are only measuring cantilever angular error, not zenith error. They are only related mechanically - and chaotically, given the lack of control amongst the three manufacturers.
Your next question should be, “which distortion is more audibly offensive to us?”
See here:
Sound Bite #36: Tracking Error vs Zenith Error
Actually, J.R., my next question would be “For someone who has every tool under the sun, including scopes and analyzers, and knows how to use them, what is the most effective measurement technique to determine the outcome of cartridge adjustment for zenith?”
I can put carts under digital scopes all day long and measure stylus angle offset relative to zenith, and use WallyZenith for the initial alignment relative to each. But until someone has a better way to measure the outcome, all we have are the tools available to us.
And I’m still really trying to understand this other oddity with VTA distortion numbers being what they are.
By “zenith” do you mean zenith error (which we should be calling “stylus yaw”)? Zenith is only a perspective or a relative direction and is being very much misused in the press and amongst us audiophiles which is why there is now confusion between zenith error/stylus yaw and cantilever angular error. Wally and I started the confusion by NOT referring to it as stylus yaw. Sorry!!Actually, J.R., my next question would be “For someone who has every tool under the sun, including scopes and analyzers, and knows how to use them, what is the most effective measurement technique to determine the outcome of cartridge adjustment for zenith?”
I can put carts under digital scopes all day long and measure stylus angle offset relative to zenith, and use WallyZenith for the initial alignment relative to each. But until someone has a better way to measure the outcome, all we have are the tools available to us.
And I’m still really trying to understand this other oddity with VTA distortion numbers being what they are.
You can use your oscilloscope but it will give you VERY coarse and confusing readings. We tried that years ago and quickly gave up on it. You then have to trust the record cut. We’ve cut enough of our own lacquers and analyzed enough laboratory test records to know we should be about ~40% as suspicious about the cut as we should be of the mounting of the stylus.
There is another way. You will have to wait. Sorry.
As for your VTA question: Those aren’t VTA distortions that you are seeing either. You are chasing a chimera. VTA distortions ONLY show up on vertically modulated tracks, not horizontally modulated tracks. SRA distortion can hypothetically manifest on horizontally modulated tracks but the devil on that is very deeply ensconced in the details. There are many more variables with rake than vertical modulation angle. I remain doubtful that rake is even very audible, but I can’t prove that YET as there has been zero science performed on the question.
Are we confusing Zenith error with HTA horizontal tracking angle error?
By Zenith I think of the diamond tip pointing correctly forward tangential to the groove at the HTA null point , and the cantilever point in the same direction if properly set up. Correct HTA would have minimal both Harmonic and IMD distortion on a mono track( horisontal mod) . Just as VTA error affect distortion both IMD and HD ? in the vertical modulation. I can see that a zenith error gives a phase ( left right time ) difference , but not how it gives distortion- my geometric intuition is bad,
From what I have read and understood VTA analyse need vertical modulation only, and HTA horizontal mod. Stereo 45/45 modulation that AM and Analog Production Ultimate Test record use, mess it all up.
Her is my idea: do the mid-side M-S conversion from a Stereo L and R , and we should get the pure Verical (S) signal and horisontal (M) , maybe those can be used for IMD check?
@tony22 , maybe a eccentric record or wow is screwing up your results.I du not use AnalogMagik to set up my cartridge, only as a verification..
I use Analog Production Ultimate Test record and Ortofon to set Azimuth , and antiskate, and CA TRS-1007 to check frequency response
For VTA I use e DIN test record, with different VTA engraved in a vertically modulated IMD track. HTA I di with a protractor and USB camera/microscope to make the cantilever tangential at the null points. For Zenith I did so a phase check, I think it was @Calle_jr that said my number were fine
By Zenith I think of the diamond tip pointing correctly forward tangential to the groove at the HTA null point , and the cantilever point in the same direction if properly set up. Correct HTA would have minimal both Harmonic and IMD distortion on a mono track( horisontal mod) . Just as VTA error affect distortion both IMD and HD ? in the vertical modulation. I can see that a zenith error gives a phase ( left right time ) difference , but not how it gives distortion- my geometric intuition is bad,
From what I have read and understood VTA analyse need vertical modulation only, and HTA horizontal mod. Stereo 45/45 modulation that AM and Analog Production Ultimate Test record use, mess it all up.
Her is my idea: do the mid-side M-S conversion from a Stereo L and R , and we should get the pure Verical (S) signal and horisontal (M) , maybe those can be used for IMD check?
@tony22 , maybe a eccentric record or wow is screwing up your results.I du not use AnalogMagik to set up my cartridge, only as a verification..
I use Analog Production Ultimate Test record and Ortofon to set Azimuth , and antiskate, and CA TRS-1007 to check frequency response
For VTA I use e DIN test record, with different VTA engraved in a vertically modulated IMD track. HTA I di with a protractor and USB camera/microscope to make the cantilever tangential at the null points. For Zenith I did so a phase check, I think it was @Calle_jr that said my number were fine
Last edited:
What is unknown is what (as an example) the Vibration IMD numbers (using the VTA track) mean if they appear to be ridiculously high. Even if a record were out of round, how does the degree of “out of roundness” affect the numbers? Without floating my turntable in a static warp field, I’d say it’s pretty well immune to air and structure borne vibration. How am I getting double digit IMD numbers and have that not show itself in any audible way by any audiophile who’s heard my system during record playback? I’m surrounded by other vinyl enthusiasts who have been at this game as long as me, if not longer, many with systems far more costly than mine. To a person they consider my vinyl playback among the best they’ve heard.
I just don’t get it.
2MM diffrence in VTA and 1.7g VTF to 1.5 VTF. AnalogMagik V1 records and software
My AM V1 vibration data looks like this
The
The Vibration numbers I do not bother about,they are not influenced by any vibration or isolation efforts
My AM V1 vibration data looks like this
The
The Vibration numbers I do not bother about,they are not influenced by any vibration or isolation efforts
Last edited:
Similar threads
 | Steve Williams Site Founder | Site Owner | Administrator |  | Ron Resnick Site Owner | Administrator |  | Julian (The Fixer) Website Build | Marketing Managersing |