Ortofon OM20 lousy tracking

[Stryder5]

I did suggest some ideas quite early on in this post, including the orientation of the tonearm relative to the record surface. Didn't get a response though.

Default
I would check tonearm settings, take record off, put stylus guard on, turn bias to zero. Assuming you have a turntable mat, lower the stylus guard onto the mat and gently using the headshell arm nudge the tonearm towards the centre of the turntable. It should glide easily towards the centre, note where you feel resistance, this should be, at minimum, where the record label should be.

If the tonearm tries to return outward turn the bias a little. Whatever your tracking weight is, the bias as a rough guide should be the same.

Check the vertical tracking angle if you have a small vial spirit level try setting the arm horizontal. If you don't have a tiny spirit level, do this by eye.

If all the above are ok you need a set up alignment protractor, this sets the cartridge and stylus overhang and cartridge angle relative to the record grooves.

The dealer should have done all this if he had the turntable!

Measure the VTA with a ruler or marked card; the arm-tube should be the same height at the back as at the front, or even marginally up at the back. Best done with the cart. placed on the record at the inner grooves. If the VTA IS tail down (unless specified for that cart.), raise it, because this alters the S.R.A. (stylus rake angle). I've never had a cart. that sounds better with the tail down.

The same record? Must be getting a bit knackered by now. Random is really frustrating, and, from what you say, does point to bearings, assuming no other impediment. There's no point in setting a lower VTF; it's likely to bugger up your records more quickly as it mistracks.

[Scooby]

Any chance you would consider another cartridge? The OM series aren't hard to better and it might well solve the issue.

[magiccarpetride]

Any chance you would consider another cartridge? The OM series aren't hard to better and it might well solve the issue.

Always open to improving my system. What cartridge do you recommend to upgrade from OM20? Keeping in mind that I prefer hefty, weighty, greasy sound with a lot of body, slam, and bloom. I'm not a big fan of ultra polite airy-fairy oh-so-delicate sound.

[walpurgis]

Vintage Shure M55E with Jico stylus?

[Scooby]

Good call, Geoff.

I guess this is where it gets subjective but I would never have picked an OM20 for weight and bloom. In fact I'd pick just about any other cartridge ahead of the OM series, including an AT95e. They have come on a few decks I have owned over the years and I've always found them lightweight, confused and poor trackers.

[hifi_dave]

Why did Alex swap his Denon DL103 for the Ortofon, as that would give him a lot more of what he is seeking than the OM20.

[magiccarpetride]

Good call, Geoff.

I guess this is where it gets subjective but I would never have picked an OM20 for weight and bloom. In fact I'd pick just about any other cartridge ahead of the OM series, including an AT95e. They have come on a few decks I have owned over the years and I've always found them lightweight, confused and poor trackers.

Interesting. OM20 was recommended to me as a good step up from Denon DL-103. I must say it does retain quite a lot of DL-103's mid bass slam (the low piano notes on Santana's "Incident at Neshabur" are always a good test for that mid bass slam; when listening to it with OM20, it really rocks the house!)

And possibly because I was using DL-103 on RB300, OM20 is now giving me stunningly better tracking and tiny detail resolution. The decay is now noticeably better.

[magiccarpetride]

Why did Alex swap his Denon DL103 for the Ortofon, as that would give him a lot more of what he is seeking than the OM20.

I wasn't happy with the DL-103/RB300 combo. While the mid bass bloom is awesome with DL-103, the tracking was poor and it wasn't resolving enough. As soon as I put OM20 in, the tracking improved tremendously, and gone was that unpleasant hardening in the high register that DL-103 was giving me each time there is any sort of a crescendo passage. Overall, the sound is now much more pleasant with OM20. I'm not saying it cannot get way more pleasant than that, but hey, for $250.00 I cannot complain

I will, of course, put DL-103 back in when my 10" Jelco arrives and gets installed. Curious to hear if Jelco will fix DL-103 problems on my turntable.

[struth]

103 set up right will blow an om20 away imo. but it needs a lot of care and right arm/headshell

[Stryder5]

I wasn't happy with the DL-103/RB300 combo. While the mid bass bloom is awesome with DL-103, the tracking was poor and it wasn't resolving enough. As soon as I put OM20 in, the tracking improved tremendously, and gone was that unpleasant hardening in the high register that DL-103 was giving me each time there is any sort of a crescendo passage. Overall, the sound is now much more pleasant with OM20. I'm not saying it cannot get way more pleasant than that, but hey, for $250.00 I cannot complain

I will, of course, put DL-103 back in when my 10" Jelco arrives and gets installed. Curious to hear if Jelco will fix DL-103 problems on my turntable.

I seem to be lost here the OP was complaining originally as tracking issues with the OM20, unless I'm missing something it appears it tracks better than DL-103?