Does anyone care about tracking weight?

[dave2010]

There was a time when tracking weight seemed important, and I remember chasing new cartridges to get the tracking weight on my precious discs down to around 1 gram. Since then I think the theory and practice have been to suggest that slightly higher (not steamroller) weights are better, and maybe it causes less damage to play an LP at 2 or 3 grams with a reasonable cartridge than to use a real lightweight. Maybe even using weights just slightly above the recommended would not be unreasonable.

What do we think here now?

[StanleyB]

What I found out in the past is that 1gm tracking weight didn't go down well with loud music and wooden floorboards in council flats. The stylus either skated across the record, or there was a tendency to induce a howl in the music.

[Dominic Harper]

Tracking weight is very arm/cartridge dependant. A particular cart will work best at a specified tracking weight in one arm, but will be slightly different if moved to another arm.
If I understand the question, you are asking that increasing the tracking for any given cart is better?
Answer is no. It is important to find the sweet spot so to speak for a cartridge. This depends on the damper system and tie wire of the cantilever assembly, plus the arm static mass, and also its moving mass/ moment of innertia.
Just cranking up a carts tracking force will result in sat on dynamics, loss of speed, loss of detail and closing in of the soundstage.

Dom

[chris@panteg]

My Precept performs at its optimum at 1g or thereabouts , going up to 1.5 seems to kill it stone dead .

[YNWaN]

I would entirely agree with what Dom has written above.

[Barry]

To answer the OP question - Yes, I do care and yes, it does matter.

I start with -0.25g from the manufacturer's maximum recommended figure and work downwards.

Would agree with what Dominic says, but it does depend cartridge to cartridge.

Regarding record wear: I would be far happier using a cartridge tracking near its upper limit than one tracking near the lower limit.

[DSJR]

Sometime in the mid 80's, some research was done into the maximum tracking weight a typical record could stand when played with a given tip before permanent groove deformation occured. I seem to remember the safe limit for a .2 x .7 thou elliptical was around 2.5g, so the (by then) optimum 1.75g for many cartridges of low to medium compliance was perfectly safe and actually preferable, since dust and crunge would be pushed out of the way, rather than ridden over when played.

The whole high compliance and super low tracking weight thing was really a marketing artifact from c.1970 I think - a bit like super low THD in ss amps totally forgetting the far worse intermodulation effects that many of these old amps had in spades, coupled with the often negative sonic effects of using high levels of "global" feedback, going from output back to input rather than numerous "local" feedback loops around the particular individual gain stage which I understand is far more benign (I think I have this right).

The thing is, a Shure V15 III will collapse if tracked at 1.75g (an ADC 25/26/XLMmk1 will collapse at much over 1g in comparison), whereas an old MC type (or a G800 :)) will probably skate at 1g tracking force.

Just stick to the manufacturer's recommendation to start with - the better ones give precise instructions - and go from there...

[sq225917]

One would hope that manufacturers have the time, the ability, the equipment and the inclination to correctly advise on the ideal range for their carts. I've yet to find a cart that didn't work best within the manufacturers stated range.

[dave2010]

I thought I'd read that some broadcasters, including the BBC, tended to use higher playing weights as it was claimed this led to fewer problems. Maybe they used more robust cartridges too. Perhaps they valued robust and reliable playing over disc longevity. Maybe!

[rusty bearing]

Yep, I would agree with Dominic about the sweet spot. He very kindly spent a little time last year demonstrating the sound difference a small adjustment in the tracking weight on a 2m blue. Manufacturers figure was a little dull compared to .05 gramme less. Perhaps a good simile would be bracketing a shot with your camera.
Course it's all in the ears at t'end if day

[Jonboy]

so bluetacking a 2 pence piece onto the headshell to stop it jumping off my warped records is not a good idea then :scratch:

[freefallrob]

I tend to listen out for the 'esses' in singers voices, when these are well controlled the tracking force is normally about right, most carts noticeably dull and muddy when the tracking force is to high and sound a bit wishy washy and lacking in confidence when set to low. Probably...;-)

I use a test record (Vinyl Essentials) to check/adjust the bias, tracking etc, works well and gived you peace of mind, final adjustments by ear;-)

[TBL]

Yep, I would agree with Dominic about the sweet spot. He very kindly spent a little time last year demonstrating the sound difference a small adjustment in the tracking weight on a 2m blue. Manufacturers figure was a little dull compared to .05 gramme less. Perhaps a good simile would be bracketing a shot with your camera.
Course it's all in the ears at t'end if day


Can you really tell the difference in sound with a .05 (1/20th) of a gramme adjustment or did you mean .5? If you can I'm very impressed at such acute and accurate hearing. I can certainly tell the difference in .25 shifts but much less than that and I would be struggling.

The alternative and probably more likely scenario is that I am deafer than I thought.

[Ariaudo]

so bluetacking a 2 pence piece onto the headshell to stop it jumping off my warped records is not a good idea then :scratch:

Certainly not - a 50 pence piece is the optimum!

[rusty bearing]

Can you really tell the difference in sound with a .05 (1/20th) of a gramme adjustment or did you mean .5? If you can I'm very impressed at such acute and accurate hearing. I can certainly tell the difference in .25 shifts but much less than that and I would be struggling.

The alternative and probably more likely scenario is that I am deafer than I thought.

I suspect I might have meant .5 which is good news for your hearing :lol: