I've heard this come up hundreds of times, but quite frankly don't really know what it means or how I would even identify a cartridge that's considered to be a good tracker or a bad one for that matter. Are there particular traits I should be listening for? How would I know if a cartridge isn't a good tracker.
I have some fairly good examples of that as well, but those are exceptions, no? I'm talking more about the standards I suppose. BTW....none of my cartridges have ever had an issue as far as I can tell. Does setup have anything to do with it?
Remember you risk loosing a friend if the cantilever breaks ...
The Telarc 1812 LP is not a good check for the trackability of the cartridge in normal conditions - it is more a test for the resonance of the arm-cartridge system. I usually checked tracking ability using the Hifi-News test LP - the bands C (+14dB lateral or +8dB horizontal modulation ) were really a torture track, only a few cartridges could go through it.
That old Telarc recording has put many cartridges into hiding...
Interesting aside: I hated testing tracking because it inevitably degraded the test LP in the process. The store where I worked back then kept a stack of test LPs on hand. There were a few with much harder plastic that held up longer, and we had a metal (stainless-steel) one for a while...
I've heard this come up hundreds of times, but quite frankly don't really know what it means or how I would even identify a cartridge that's considered to be a good tracker or a bad one for that matter. Are there particular traits I should be listening for? How would I know if a cartridge isn't a good tracker.
John, a lot had to do when reviewers used the Shure Obstacle tracking test. There were if I remember five levels and cartridges were divided into good and poor tracking on the basis of this test. I think level five with its bells cut was a torture test for cartridges. Back then also, think a lot of low compliance cartridge were ID'd as poor trackers because they were mated with the wrong mass arm.
I thought that a good tracker meant a good cut diamond (elliptical perhaps), in which the careful cutting tip is ideal to follow the 'sillons' (grooves) of an album (depth & width).
And to go further; different pressings from different vinyl cutting machines would require the perfect diamond cut stylus.
...As to track perfectly the grooves.
Cartridge, azymuth, weight, counterweight, anti-skate, pitch, arm design, horizontal & vertical level, etc., are in accordance to that good tracking.
To me the stylus tip itself is only part of it; good tracking (i.e. lowest distortion with minimal force) requires an optimal balance among all the parameters you state, cartridge and arm. And probably TT suspension/isolation, speed stability, phases of the moon...
A major part of cartridge tracking is the correct matching of the weight/compliance to the arm. Otherwise the resonance point of the system can be too high eg. a high compliance cartridge develops a lot of energy and the arm better be able to deal with it! The of course cartridge alignment is a must!
LPs are similar to CDs in the way that some of them are well pressed and others not so.
With CDs the laser lens is the primary 'tracker'. ...With the right azymuth, depth, width, and color light luminosity...
...Single lens, dual lenses, holographic lens ...
And of course the speed stability, servo motor controlled (or belt drive) laser lens transport & transport (tray) mechanism, pitch, ...
* Quality LP & CD recordings against the general mass market music crap recordings out there.
___________________
Emphasis: The sylus tip is the main tracking recipient. Everything else is correlated to it.
LPs are similar to CDs in the way that some of them are well pressed and others not so.
With CDs the laser lens is the primary 'tracker'. ...With the right azymuth, depth, width, and color light luminosity...
...Single lens, dual lenses, holographic lens ...
And of course the speed stability, servo motor controlled (or belt drive) laser lens transport & transport (tray) mechanism, pitch, ...
* Quality LP & CD recordings against the general mass market music crap recordings out there.
___________________
Emphasis: The sylus tip is the main tracking recipient. Everything else is correlated to it.
I think the terms "good and bad trackers" is kind of strange. As Myles and others have noted even a notoriously "bad tracker" can track very well depending on the arm used. So I think there's two ways of thinking about it.
One way is the ease of which it is to set up a particular cart to track well e.g. simply not skip. Which really mostly means that cart can be used with a broader number of arms and settings. If I were to vote for the most idiot proof cartridges ever made, my vote would probably go to the Shure M 44-7 MM Cartridge. This sucker would track on a table tilted 45 degrees. You could needle drop, scratch and backspin all you want like those kids in those DMC competitions and do it over a pretty wide range of VTF and VTA settings while having alignment done with Cookie Monster eyed precision. I believe it's secret was its balance between weight, compliance and stylus profile.
The other way, the analog junkie way, is devoid of such abusive owner behavior. So in this light, it's the lack of distortion. The most common place folks look is behavior towards the inner grooves but also listening to particular tracks that are highly modulated. In some of these cuts (I hope dafos jumps in since he has a bunch of them torture LPs) some carts sail through and some cough up fur balls. Some carts on different arms will cease to cough up fur balls, some need miracles, those that need miracles I consider poor trackers. In MC land these are typical of designs which are tough to implement properly. The miracle is getting one that was actually built right!
