How to achieve Audio Heaven

[Infinitely Baffled]

Ha! That title pulled you in didn't it ... !

At this point, then, I can tell you that it was a question, not a statement. This thread is really a transfer or a continuation of a discussion that was half-started in my introductory post last week over on the Welcome forum. In it, I was bellyaching about having got "lost in hi-fi", and I received this kind invitation from Barry:

"Welcome to AoS Gary,

We seem to be of a similar age, have had a similar start in hi fi and similar tastes in music (I still have my copy of 'Five Bridges' ).

If you can give us an idea of the "sound you like", then we might be able to help. Or alternatively, list the cartridges/phonostages you have tried, which obviously haven't done it for you. By the way what arm are you using with your Garrard? That might have a bearing on your choice of cartridge."

It all started with an intended upgrade (how many times have we heard that?). I was taken with a desire to replace my Notts Analogue turntable with a Garrard 401 - I have a liking for things that are a bit funky and backward-looking. That was the easy bit - a nice 401 was located, purchased and installed. I also decided to treat myself to a new arm to go with it. The SME M2-R (the pretty "J"-shaped one) looked like the right sort of aesthetic for a 401, and gets highly positive reviews. so that was acquisition no.2. All good so far - looks wonderful. Imagine my horror, though, when I fitted my much-loved Music Maker III cartridge and lowered the needle on my first record, to find that they just wouldn't work together! The cartridge was furiously agitated and unstable; you could see it wobbling fast from side to side as soon as the needle touched the grooves, and it would mis-track badly at every opportunity. So out it came and was replaced by my Decca Gold. Both these cartridges had lived and worked very happily for years in a Hadcock arm on my NA turntable. The Decca fared a bit better in the new arm than the Music Maker, but not much. Certainly not stable or happy enough to stay like that. So the hunt was on for a new cartridge. Being a moving magnet loyalist I bought a second-hand Nagaoka MP500 with low hours on it. Well, that's a lovely cartridge - sumptuously rich, detailed and so civilised, plus it tracks like a tank. But I thought it was lacking a bit of top-end "bite", so where next? Well, all the smart advice would say "don't complicate things! don't change anything else in the system until you have sorted this out!". So what did I do? I bought an Audio Note phono stage, thinking I would retire my Croft Epoch and just go for a direct-coupled source-to-power amp set-up like I used to have years ago. The thinking was OK, but unfortunately the phono stage didn't sound right to me when it arrived and I set it up - too much hum and valve roar. I tried it this way and I tried it that way and with every cartridge I possessed, but it still didn't seem right, so in disgust I ordered an NVA Phono 2, which hasn't arrived yet. Meanwhile the Croft has been re-installed in the system and sounds fab, like it always does. (Why do we do this to ourselves?) Meanwhile, on the cartridge front - remember that - I acquired an Audio Technica AT33, with an inexpensive AT step-up transformer, to try and find out what the magic of moving coils is all about. Crikey! If I thought that the Nagaoka lacked a little bit of top end bite, this fellow nearly took my head off! To be fair, after fifteen hours or so playing it sweetened up a lot and sounds really good. It does however really let you know if the quality of the recording or pressing is a bit toppy. I would say this one is a keeper (hooray!), but I suppose my really ideal sound would be somewhere pitched between the Nag and the AT. Back in the land of phono stages, the Dutch dealer who sold me the Audio Note is refusing to answer my emails or phone calls, so it looks like the chances of returning that to him are slim. So I have determined to persevere with it (which is no too much of a hardship as it sounds absolutely sublime once the needle hit the groove and music drowns out the hum). I have arranged to send it to Jez (Arkless, of this parish) who will be able to sort it out for me, I'm sure. Then I'll just have three phono stages and four cartridges to juggle. Honestly - it was never meant to be like this. I know I have been a very silly boy by breaking the first law of upgrades: "one component at a time"! But I think I can see light at the end of the tunnel. I'll most likely stick with the AT cartridge, and assuming Jez can sort out the Audio Note phono stage, I'll be set up! But it will be a long time before I go in for any more upgrades ( ... honest!). Cheers. Infinitely Baffled.

[Firebottle]

Great stuff Gary, you have the right idea.

Surround yourself with oodles of kit and then wonder where all the living space went to :eyebrows:

You should have just stuck to the Croft (like we all stick to things :doh:), but I'm sure Jez can sort the Audio Note for you. Will be interesting to know where it is wanting in performance, sound rather like too much gain to me possibly.

Anyway, good post, keep 'em coming.

:cool:

[walpurgis]

If you are using an AT-630 transformer with the AT-33, you will not be hearing the cartridge at its best by any means. The sound from the AT-630 is crude and two dimensional compared to a decent SUT. I have compared this unit with several good SUTs and it falls short.

[Jimbo]

Just can't go wrong with Croft and Deccas!

[Infinitely Baffled]

Just can't go wrong with Croft and Deccas!

I'm beginning to think that this is right! It could be all you need. IB.

[Infinitely Baffled]

If you are using an AT-630 transformer with the AT-33, you will not be hearing the cartridge at its best by any means. The sound from the AT-630 is crude and two dimensional compared to a decent SUT. I have compared this unit with several good SUTs and it falls short.

That's interesting, Geoff! It was a quick fix really, to enable me to dip a toe in the water, as it were. I did have a snoop around the web at SUTs, though, and was confronted with a bewildering array of different devices ranging from svelte anodised-finish boxes at 2 grand (no thanks!) to things on Ebay that resembled old baked-bean cans for 60 squid. I plumped for the AT partly for price, but also because I reckoned that it would probably be "voiced" appropriately for the cartridge, coming from the same manufacturer. I'd be interested to hear what you found worked well, and with what cartridges, though. Cheers. Gary.

[walpurgis]

The Fidelity Research FRT-3 is very good at the lower end of the price spectrum.

I've had three of them and they've worked with every MC I've tried, Including Ortofon, ZYX, Technics and of course Fidelity Research amongst others. The FRT-3 offers selection of 10ohm, 30ohm and bypass. I tend to leave it on 30ohms though. I have more exotic SUTs, but the FRT-3 is a sweet sounding unit. You'd find the improvement over the AT-630 a bit of a shock I think. I've done the comparison, having had a few AT-630s come my way.

SUTs are not 'voiced', they just transform. The AT-630 works with a wide range of MCs, but I wouldn't keep one.

[helma]

The Fidelity Research FRT-3 is very good at the lower end of the price spectrum.

I've had three of them and they've worked with every MC I've tried, Including Ortofon, ZYX, Technics and of course Fidelity Research amongst others. The FRT-3 offers selection of 10ohm, 30ohm and bypass. I tend to leave it on 30ohms though. I have more exotic SUTs, but the FRT-3 is a sweet sounding unit. You'd find the improvement over the AT-630 a bit of a shock I think. I've done the comparison, having had a few AT-630s come my way.

SUTs are not 'voiced', they just transform. The AT-630 works with a wide range of MCs, but I wouldn't keep one.

I second this, The FRT-3 is a wonderful little unit. Sometimes you can also find DIY units utilizing some old microphone transformers for pretty cheap on eBay etc. - some of these can be surprisingly nice but it obviously depends on the transformers used and can be a bit hit or miss... I've got one I made using some peanut sized Beyer Dynamic transformers, it's surprisingly good though can't touch the FRT-3. But I don't feel it sounds bad at all, it just doesn't sound quite as good :)

Regards the AT-630, it was their cheap effort, I think it was originally made to compliment the AT30E, but back in the day that whole package including the cartridge, SUT & a headshell probably retailed for less than the AT33E cartridge alone.

If possible, getting the loading right with the MP-500 might help. Here's a graph what different capacitive loads do to MP-11 - http://www.tnt-audio.com/jpeg/nagaoka_mp11_fr_response.gif - I think the body is of higher inductance than the MP-500 and stylus is obviously very different, but it gives you an idea what happens to the freq response when you adjust loading.

[Arkless Electronics]

As you are sending your Audionote phono stage to me for repair anyway, I could put the head amp I make in the package when it goes back to you and you can try that if you like:)

[Infinitely Baffled]

As you are sending your Audionote phono stage to me for repair anyway, I could put the head amp I make in the package when it goes back to you and you can try that if you like:)

The AN is on its way to you now, Jez. And yes, good idea to include your head amp. It might be a solution I prefer to faffing around with transformers. Actually as I write this I am listening to the AT33 playing through the (universally disliked) AT630 and the NVA phono stage which arrived in the post this afternoon. It's very good, actually - really nice - and of course it's as quiet as can be. But then solid state, you would expect it to be wouldn't you? Cheers. Gary.

[Infinitely Baffled]

If possible, getting the loading right with the MP-500 might help. Here's a graph what different capacitive loads do to MP-11 - http://www.tnt-audio.com/jpeg/nagaoka_mp11_fr_response.gif - I think the body is of higher inductance than the MP-500 and stylus is obviously very different, but it gives you an idea what happens to the freq response when you adjust loading.

Thanks for this, Kai. How do you adjust the capacitative loading of a MM phono stage. As far as I can see, both the Audio Note and NVA items come built with 47kOhm resistive loading, but for capacitative loading, you get what you are given. Regards. Gary.

[Arkless Electronics]

The AN is on its way to you now, Jez. And yes, good idea to include your head amp. It might be a solution I prefer to faffing around with transformers. Actually as I write this I am listening to the AT33 playing through the (universally disliked) AT630 and the NVA phono stage which arrived in the post this afternoon. It's very good, actually - really nice - and of course it's as quiet as can be. But then solid state, you would expect it to be wouldn't you? Cheers. Gary.

Solid state is indeed quieter than valves in a phono stage, but, in the case of MM only phono stages (most valve ones are MM only) valves can be quiet enough for background noise to be no more intrusive in practice than that of a SS design.

[Barry]

Apropos SUTs, microphone transformers can be used with success since the output voltage from a microphone is of a similar order to that of a moving-coil cartridge. However the source impedance of some MC cartridges can be very low (1 Ohm for the Transfiguration 'Orpheus', and 2 Ohm for most Ortofon SPUs), whereas moving-coil microphones tend to have higher impedance. So if your chosen MC has a very low impedance, you really need to use a microphone transformer designed for use with ribbon microphones, as these do have a low resistance.

I have used Haufe transformers successfully with the Denon 103, but the Haufe unit (T7883) was designed to work with the 40Ohm coil resistance of the Denon. EMT cartridges have a coil impedance of 22Ohm, and for these I have successfully used a 10:1 transformer made by Partridge. Many of the SUTs you see for sale on eBay use audio transformers that have been cannibalised from professional studio or broadcast equipment, without any thought that the transformer might not be suitable for use as a cartridge SUT.


Regarding the disappointing performance of your Decca Gold in the SME M2 - 9R arm, well you have moved from a very desirable combination of Decca with a damped unipivot (the Hadcock) to using an undamped arm.

The “wobble” you refer to suggests the cartridge/arm resonance is excessively high. I don’t know about the Cartridge Man’s ‘Music Maker’, but I do have a fair amount of experience with using Decca cartridges in a variety of arms, including SME.

The SME M2-9R arm has an effective mass of 9.5g. The Decca Gold has a mass of 6.7g and a dynamic compliance of 12cu in the horizontal plane and 5cu in the vertical plane. The calculated arm/cartridge resonant frequencies are 11.4Hz and 14.9Hz respectively. These are on the high side but not disastrous. Ideally you would want the two resonance frequencies to ‘straddle’ 10Hz. This means you would need to increase the total mass to ~ 30g, an increase of 13.6g.

In my system I have a Decca Gold mounted in a GB block and the two fitted into a Sumiko headshell. The whole assembly weighs 24.1g. In an SME 3009 arm, the calculated frequencies are 8.6Hz (horizontal) and 13.4Hz (vertical), and the whole is completely stable.

[Infinitely Baffled]

"The SME M2-9R arm has an effective mass of 9.5g. The Decca Gold has a mass of 6.7g and a dynamic compliance of 12cu in the horizontal plane and 5cu in the vertical plane. The calculated arm/cartridge resonant frequencies are 11.4Hz and 14.9Hz respectively. These are on the high side but not disastrous. Ideally you would want the two resonance frequencies to ‘straddle’ 10Hz. This means you would need to increase the total mass to ~ 30g, an increase of 13.6g."

Nifty calculating! Thanks for this, Barry. I am thrilled to bits with the prospect of getting the Decca cartridge working right in the SME arm. Sometimes on certain kinds of music it hits the spot so well that you could swear it's the only cartridge you'll ever need. But then, of course, curiosity takes over ...

However, for the moment, I will aim for a way of adding thirteen and a half gms of weight to the headshell. The GB clamp is handy in this regard, but what a price to buy one new! And the suppliers insist on fitting it themselves, possibly to justify the hefty cost. I have a slotted headshell on its way to me in the post which weighs more than the SME item, so that's a start. (By the way, how come SME think it is possible to set up an arm/cartridge without a slotted headshell or sliding carrier of some description? With fixed holes for the cartridge bolts there is no way of setting the stylus overhang without also changing the spindle-to-pivot distance. Very odd!) Many thanks for help. Cheers. Gary.

[Barry]

"The SME M2-9R arm has an effective mass of 9.5g. The Decca Gold has a mass of 6.7g and a dynamic compliance of 12cu in the horizontal plane and 5cu in the vertical plane. The calculated arm/cartridge resonant frequencies are 11.4Hz and 14.9Hz respectively. These are on the high side but not disastrous. Ideally you would want the two resonance frequencies to ‘straddle’ 10Hz. This means you would need to increase the total mass to ~ 30g, an increase of 13.6g."

Nifty calculating! Thanks for this, Barry. I am thrilled to bits with the prospect of getting the Decca cartridge working right in the SME arm. Sometimes on certain kinds of music it hits the spot so well that you could swear it's the only cartridge you'll ever need. But then, of course, curiosity takes over ...

However, for the moment, I will aim for a way of adding thirteen and a half gms of weight to the headshell. The GB clamp is handy in this regard, but what a price to buy one new! And the suppliers insist on fitting it themselves, possibly to justify the hefty cost. I have a slotted headshell on its way to me in the post which weighs more than the SME item, so that's a start. (By the way, how come SME think it is possible to set up an arm/cartridge without a slotted headshell or sliding carrier of some description? With fixed holes for the cartridge bolts there is no way of setting the stylus overhang without also changing the spindle-to-pivot distance. Very odd!) Many thanks for help. Cheers. Gary.

Are they still available? And if so, how much are they?

Apropos the fixed cartridge fixing holes in the S2 headshell, all SME arms use a sliding bedplate to achieve correct overhang.

[Infinitely Baffled]

Are they still available? And if so, how much are they?

Apropos the fixed cartridge fixing holes in the S2 headshell, all SME arms use a sliding bedplate to achieve correct overhang.

Apologies. I made my statement about the cost of the GB clamp from memory, but when I checked back on the Internet, I found it was the Deccapod I was remembering, not the GB clamp. The Deccapod - you probably know this - appears to function as a housing that sits between the cartridge and the headshell. As far as I can see it does not allow you to do away with that iffy-looking red plastic bracket that most folks use to mount the cartridge if they are not using a Decca tone-arm. The Deccapod is indeed still available from Divine Audio for £179 (!), the price includes fitting the pod to the cartridge and "recalibration" of the cartridge - whatever that is. Looks like the GB clamp is second-hand availability only. Do you find it an advantage?

Regarding the method of achieving cartridge alignment on an SME arm: the problem with using the sliding base plate to achieve the correct stylus overhang is that it moves the whole of the arm either closer to, or further away from, the platter so it changes the spindle-to-pivot distance at the same time. What is needed is a way of setting the two parameters independently of each other, so a sliding base plate AND a slotted headshell (or a headshell with a sliding carrier).
Cheers. Gary.

[paulf-2007]

What is a GB clamp

[struth]

Gardner Bender clamp ? Seems they are talking about rock tts so it may be something to do with the damping on that. Only ones i know are the gb cable type ones

[Barry]

Apologies. I made my statement about the cost of the GB clamp from memory, but when I checked back on the Internet, I found it was the Deccapod I was remembering, not the GB clamp. The Deccapod - you probably know this - appears to function as a housing that sits between the cartridge and the headshell. As far as I can see it does not allow you to do away with that iffy-looking red plastic bracket that most folks use to mount the cartridge if they are not using a Decca tone-arm. The Deccapod is indeed still available from Divine Audio for £179 (!), the price includes fitting the pod to the cartridge and "recalibration" of the cartridge - whatever that is. Looks like the GB clamp is second-hand availability only. Do you find it an advantage?

Regarding the method of achieving cartridge alignment on an SME arm: the problem with using the sliding base plate to achieve the correct stylus overhang is that it moves the whole of the arm either closer to, or further away from, the platter so it changes the spindle-to-pivot distance at the same time. What is needed is a way of setting the two parameters independently of each other, so a sliding base plate AND a slotted headshell (or a headshell with a sliding carrier).
Cheers. Gary.

There is nothing sacrosanct about the platter-spindle to arm-bearing distance. If you examine the theory of arm geometry, the minimisation of tangential tracking error depends upon two variables: the overhang and the offset angle. Overhang = effective arm length (stylus to pivot) - spindle to arm pivot distance.

With SME arms and the few others using a sliding bed plate, the effective arm length is kept constant and the spindle to arm pivot distance is changed to establish the corect overhang. The offset angle is also fixed.

With arms having a slotted cartridge fixing holes in the headshell, the spindle to arm pivot distance is fixed and both the effective arm length and the offset angle are changed when establishing the correct overhang.

Both methods are correct: the SME method makes it easier to achieve the best geometry; using a slotted headshell, is more difficult but is useful if you change cartridges frequently.

http://theartofsound.net/forum/showthread.php?20109-Tonearm-alignment

[Jimbo]

Gary I am using my Decca with the standard plastic mounting. All other mountings ie Deccapod, GB clamp will change the sound. Can't tell you if for better or worse but I have had it on very good authority the plastic bracket works best as it takes out some of resonance of the tin can.

I run mine like this with blue tac and it sounds absolutely stunning.

[Infinitely Baffled]

Wow! That article is quite some tour de force, Barry. Well done! Looks like I have been worrying needlessly about maintaining all three parameters as per the arm's published spec. That will make things easier. That said, I have to confess that I have never succeeded in using an arm manufacturer's supplied card protractor so as to achieve truly parallel sides at both null points. I generally have to choose a compromise. Have you come across any proprietary protectors that you think do the job well?
Cheers
Gary

[Infinitely Baffled]

Gary I am using my Decca with the standard plastic mounting.
I run mine like this with blue tac and it sounds absolutely stunning.

Hello, James. Yes, I'm inclined to stick with the cheapo red plastic block, despite its imperfections (mine has a built-in slant which makes setting azimuth trickier than it needs to be). I think I heard elsewhere too that it has worthwhile damping properties. Never tried the blu-tack trick, though. Does it fill the entire gap between the top of the gold tin box and the underside of the headshell?
Cheers
Gary

[walpurgis]

I have to confess that I have never succeeded in using an arm manufacturer's supplied card protractor so as to achieve truly parallel sides at both null points.

Neither have I.

But I don't worry too much :).

[walpurgis]

Never tried the blu-tack trick, though. Does it fill the entire gap between the top of the gold tin box and the underside of the headshell?

No. Not when I use it. I just use a blob big enough to comfortably bridge the gap. BluTak is slightly springy and if you use too much it tends to push the cartridge slightly off its mount.

[Barry]

You could always try Plasticine.

[walpurgis]

You could always try Plasticine.

I have. It tends to dry out a bit after a while and shrink a little, so not as good. Tried that on a Decca Blue back around 1973 :).

[Arkless Electronics]

Now what we need here is a double blind ABX test of plasticine V Playdoh V Blutak :sofa:

[Barry]

I have. It tends to dry out a bit after a while and shrink a little, so not as good. Tried that on a Decca Blue back around 1973 :).

Blutack will also dry out with time and become hard, so negating any dampening properties it once had.

[walpurgis]

Blutack will also dry out with time and become hard, so negating any dampening properties it once had.

True. Takes a while though. The lump of BluTak on my Maroon was OK after a year.

[walpurgis]

This talk of Deccas has me pondering.

I have two Mk.III ellipticals, but another Export Grey London would be good. Mine was very nice indeed.

[Infinitely Baffled]

Infinitely Baffled :-

Never tried the blu-tack trick, though. Does it fill the entire gap between the top of the gold tin box and the underside of the headshell?


No. Not when I use it. I just use a blob big enough to comfortably bridge the gap. BluTak is slightly springy and if you use too much it tends to push the cartridge slightly off its mount.

Hmm ... tried the dodge with the Blu Tack. I can't say I heard any difference in sound. But it did pull all the gold paint off the lid of the cartridge!:(
Gary.