High or low-mass record weights/clamps: which is best?

"Thank Fuck For That" (an acronym - I won't be adding to the Library's list of abbreviations :lol:)

Lol...!

Marco.

WaWoMFT

I'm in complete agreement, but could I have chips with mine? :)

Marco.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Barry

"Thank Fuck For That" (an acronym - I won't be adding to the Library's list of abbreviations :lol:)

---

Now no longer called 'The Library'! ;)

Marco.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by YNWaN

WaWoMFT

---

Ant wasting mine either

Or mine. Circular arguments are always pointless :)

Marco.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Marco

Therefore, allow me to put it this way:

If, from the use of a high-mass record weight, on a specific turntable (not mine), I hear greater vocal intelligibility, superior detail retrieval, and overall the music is rendered as sounding more realistic and enjoyable (as it did when I tried it, compared with no weight, or using a lighter weight), do I forget about all that, and instead worry about some measured rumble, the effects of which I can't hear? ;)

No, what I do is choose the best compromise, simply because the negative effect of the noise measured, caused by the increased (but inaudible) rumble, is significantly outweighed by the sonic improvement gained by using the high-mass record weight.



Marco.

---

Actually what one probably should do is look for an even better potential solution that offers the benefits of the high mass, but without the added rumble. A couple of db of rumble is significant, particularly if your system is resolving enough. It's not such an obvious effect as tilting the FR might be, or improving the speed stability of your deck so it can actually hold a note without wavering, but it's a worthwhile gain never the less. Maybe owners of rumbly idlers and noisy valve amps just don't notice some extra noise like the rest of us might ;-)

Quote:

---

Actually what one probably should do is look for an even better potential solution that offers the benefits of the high mass, but without the added rumble.

---

Yes, provided that it's an overall better solution, with no other discernible downsides, which may not be the case! We're going round in circles again... :doh:

Quote:

---

A couple of db of rumble is significant, particularly if your system is resolving enough. It's not such an obvious effect as tilting the FR might be, or improving the speed stability of your deck so it can actually hold a note without wavering, but it's a worthwhile gain never the less. Maybe owners of rumbly idlers and noisy valve amps just don't notice some extra noise like the rest of us might

---

Aye, very good! :D

Then, why has Martin, who owns a very high-end, immaculately set-up, highly revealing all solid-state system, not noticed this supposed increased rumble, when he moved from using a medium-mass record weight, to a high-mass one, on his modded SL-1210??

Marco.

We have analysis paralysis here. Let the ears decide. Try both and whichever sounds better becomes the preferred option. Specs are great if you're measuring ALL the pertinent parameters; maybe there's more going on than just rumble. It could be that extra mass has unforeseen benefits and that an important metric has been overlooked.