GRADO SIG. TLZ LOADING HELP????

[neobop]

Raul,
I must admit that I haven't heard all the cartridges on your list or even tried more than the AT-15SS at 100K. It was unlistenable to me, on my system at 100K, and too bright at 75K. I was under the impression that you load all MM/MIs at 100K. The bit about the ultrasonic filter was copied from an Audiogon post about what I thought was your preamp. If that was an error, I apologize.

What bothers me about loading everything at 100K, is that the frequency response of most of the cartridges not only gets very bright, it also gets jagged and erratic. I obviously have not heard your system and unable to comment further. On my last post, I said that if you have that sounding good, more power to you. You have some very good equipment. I still think it is irrelevant for most users with most MM/MI carts.

I remember when the guys at TAS were loading LOMCs at 47K, going straight into a high gain stage. I tried that too, although I didn't keep it set there. The sound of most (as far as I know) MCs does not change the way the sound of a MM does when the load is changed like that. The frequency response does not change much at all.

I don't doubt what you say about your results. I don't think that it's universally applicable. I appreciate your becoming a member here and addressing concerns about this loading issue. There are different ways to get to the music, and it's all too easy to get hung up in the technicalities.
You're about listening to music, and I appreciate that. Please continue to post here, if you feel like it.
Good listening,
Frank

P.S. I noticed that you have a Stanton 981 LZS on your list. I'm curious how you loaded that.
_________________
Anyone who says he can see through women is missing a lot.
Groucho Marx

[rayr0683]

Raul,
I give you credit. You do your homework......you now have checked out previous statements of all of these heavy hitters. Im glad that I stated I really am a novice as compared to most of these guys on the loading subject. I do know that Letitroll has firm beliefs, and stands behind them. So, your not gonna get him retreating. It appears that you have Neobop against the ropes, but from what I know he was always my go to guy on these matters. Maybe we need to start looking into your past posts, to see how they vary from what you are posting here and now....the not married to bit, that was not stated very often in the past. Ray

[silviajulieta]

Dear Frank: I run my Stanton in the MC stage on my Phonolinepreamp loaded at 100 or 500 ohms, there is not much difference on either value.

Btw, that Essential reference was not mine, no problem about.

Frank and Letitroll98, any time you can please be my guest here in México city I promise you that you will have a lot of fun through a " new and different " audio experience. Please let me know and we can put/shedule a date.

Now, I want to say thank's to almost all of you for your mature hospitality for a new member, I appreciate that.

Unfortunately for me I don't have the time to be in another important forum like this, the day has only 24 hours that are not enough .

That's why I have to leave this thread, see you all next time. My pleasure to be here.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
_________________
Be truer to the recording: loosing and adding the less to the audio signal.

[neobop]

[rayr0683]

Neo,
My TLZ was sounding ok, at 47K with the main rig, VPI/ZETA.....but would get muddy at times in the bass dept. With the nice Harmon Kardan T65c Table, and the ITO Tonearm, which is 9.5 Effective Mass, I believe, close anyway, but its a carbon Fiber tonearm, and seems pretty nice. I have used this Table/Arm with the TLZ and left the 32K Loading on it, with a VTF of 1.65g and it seems to sound pretty nice. I didn't do a whole lotta tweaking. But yeah, Id try the 100K Loading, just to give it a fair open minded shot, so if you do have the resistors, I could use them, for my SP9 Preamp.

I know a guy from another forum, who seems alot like you in his tastes of cartridges, and knowledge of tables, cartridges, loading, etc...he is from Phila,PA and goes by the name HA KAPLAN, or Howard Kaplan. He seems to know alot about the AT series we have been talking about, the AT15SS and the AT20SS, and yes, he does refer to them as 4 channel, or Quad, so I have no reason to doubt him, as he is very well respected in these other forums, and most of the interested members in these AT cartridges, also knew about them being 4 channel. I forget which forum he often posts in, but he is very knowledgeable about what stylii can be used with various cartridges...especially with Shure Cartridges. He knows alot about them, and his favorite Shure, as is just about everyone else in the Forum, is the Shure V15VMR...all were waiting to see how the JICO SAS version of this stylus would sound. I dont know, I see its now available, but have not tried it.
Did you ever do anything with that Shure cartridge that you were going to give to me, that needed a new stylus? I know that you didnt find the plastic top piece, but it looks like it could work without it. If you still want to send it this way, Im interested. along with the resistors.
Thanks, I appreciate it, Ray

[silviajulieta]

Dear Frank: I have come back sooner that I think but I would like to be more " precise " on the whole impedance subject.

First I have to say that at 100K mainly are the highs ( where we almost already loose sensitivity. ) that are " altered " maybe 2-3 db maybe a little more.

Second, no my system is far far away to be on the dark side ( my invitation is open! ) of anything.

Third, all the recordings were made according the RIAA eq where in the recording process ( in simple words. ), as you all know, both frequency extremes are altered/eq. around -20 db on bass and +20 db on highs ( more or less, this is not the subject. ) then when that signal comes through a phono stage in our systems that signal pass for an inverse RIAA eq. curve to achieve a flat frequency, this means that the highs goes down through the infinite in the RIAA curve and this fact is out of reality because during the recording process the boost on the highs was cut/stop at around 50Khz due that if not the cutting head will burn.

In a normal phono stage this fact is not compensated and this affect the frequency response on highs.

Other factors are that normally the phono stages has a higher than 0.1db on the RIAA eq deviation and that this RIAA eq deviation is different on each channel. The same happen in line stages where the frequency response in each channel is different even its gain level and in amplifiers there is no exception and the cables that we use add distortions and colorations to the whole system figure/performance.

To this in-accuracies we have to add the inherent distortions and noises that each electronic item/link generate and that normally are higher that what you or me imagine.

What happen when in an audio system with these normal characteristics you add 2-4 db in the highs: instantly an overbright performance for say the least. Btw, those 2-4 db is a manner to compensate what happen in the RIAA recording in the highs when in the phono stage the signal is processed by the inverse RIAA eq.

Now, take another audio system where the RIAA deviation is almost 100% accurate, where both channels measure the same in the RIAA/gain/, impedance/, noise/, distortion level/, etc etc, where the distortion level is almost unmeasurable, where the noise is lower that in the other " normal " systems, etc, etc

In this system that 100K impedance you hear it not like an overbrigth or shrill sound but like an added transparency and open frame in the music sound reproduction.

Yes, I'm saying that my system is different in all those aspects than yours and than the majority of audio systems out there.

It is not easy to understand till you hear it. I don't want to convince you of anything I'm only sharing my experiences through dozens of audio systems I heard ranging from 10K to 500K. In many of them it happen what you experienced in your system. But it is not only what I posted here that contribute to the system performance, I already posted the critical relationship between the cartridge and the tonearm/headshell.

Same cartridge with a different build material headshell performs in different way even if the headshells have the same weight, its distortions generated in each one are different and at different levels.

The load impedance ( as important as is ). in a cartridge is not the only factor that define the cartridge quality performance, things are more complex due to so many factors that contribute to the final performance.

I own more than 20 tonearms and more than 80 headshells and not because I'm a collector item but because I need all these tools to help that each cartridge shows its best.

We make our own design and build our Phonolinepreamp and right now we are finishing our self tonearm design where our main target is that any single cartridge performs at its best in this " universal " tonearm. Through this very long tonearm design process I learn and still doing many many aspects that I was unaware of its importance in the audio quality performace equation for an audio system .

Hearing is believing, as I posted is difficult to understand the whole subject through a simple post where we can't hear nothing to confirm what we are saying.

Don't loose the opportunity to hear it, this is relevant and part of our daily learning audio curve.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
_________________
Be truer to the recording: loosing and adding the less to the audio signal.

[neobop]

[Alec124c41]

Raul, that is an impressive system. I do notice that the room seems quite well damped, from what is visible. This makes the sound system sound just what it is.
My living room is not nearly as well damped. This means that I have to control the higher frequencies much more than you do, and this alone might account for our differing preferences in cartridge loading. Your system, with no adjustments, would probably fry my ears in my living room, but I'd love to hear it in yours.
Like so much in life, there is no single "right" answer. A system should be tweaked to suit in situ.

Cheers,
Alec

[neobop]

Raul,
20 tonearms and more than 80 headshells? That's pretty wild. To be honest, I prefer moving coils, but your approach is fascinating.

There are many things I could say to refute your assertion about HF response vs the recording process, but it seems pointless now. I think that objections and preferences have been adequately stated. It must be your preamp that is somehow different from most others, and possibly other set-up factors like Alec has pointed out.

As far as the preamp is concerned, I doubt if it is quieter or more accurate than my American Hybrid Technology prototype. Some might prefer the colorations of other phono stages, but in the accuracy dept it's still untouchable. The one reviewed in Stereophile was the budget version, and was still more accurate than the Cat Reference. Mine has teflon boards w/silver traces, teflon caps, etc. So that aspect of your post left me unimpressed, although still fascinated.
http://www.soundstage.com/revequip/frank02.htm

Other than those aspects of playback, I don't know how you get acceptable performance from cartridges that weren't specifically designed for 100K. It certainly doesn't work for me, even with that AT that apparently was a 4 ch cart. Maybe I'll give it another try on a different arm and put some grill cloth over my tweeters.

Thanks again for the invite. There's a PM in your inbox.
Frank
_________________
Anyone who says he can see through women is missing a lot.
Groucho Marx

[silviajulieta]

Dear Frank: As I told you : till you hear it till you understand and I'm not saying if you like it or not when you hear it.

AHT?, I know it very well and I respect its design ( btw, the today Walker comes from that AHD. ) but is different from the Essential 3160. Btw, our dialog and my posts are not do it to impress you or any one, I'm only give information for you and any one can have a better overall perspective: that's all.

I think that here is not the place to make a " controversy " which one is better bvecause you are in disadvantage not knowing the Essential.
I not only know the AHT one but almost any single top phono stage out there and I can tell you that no one could give or achieve/cope with all my audio analog targets with the right and precise performance I was looking for and that's why I have to go for our own design.
If you can please read carefully on my system the Essential 3160 description.

Anyway, I like MC too and own many of the MC alternative cartridges but right now IMHO the best MM/MI alternative cartridges are and have a little better overall quality performance.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
_________________
Be truer to the recording: loosing and adding the less to the audio signal.

[silviajulieta]

Dear Frank: As you know specs can't tell us the whole " history " especially specs from commercial audio items that sometimes are un-truer or made for marketing purpose more than to reflect a real audio device spec.

We can take your AHT unit like a sample with its signal to noise specs that means almost nothing because has no foundation or refered according a standard norm.
The valid standard norm for MC/MM signal to noise ratio is the EIA where the perfect phono stage measure 86 db.

IMHO any figure/spec out of the EIA standard means almost nothing. If you want to be sure in your unit send it to analyze according the EIA standard or ask to Dan that he can give you those measures.

Today, normally an audio device that measure good according standard norms usually souns good too but there are a wide range level of good sound and it is here where the audio device design is the important key and the one that makes the difference in quality performance.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
_________________
Be truer to the recording: loosing and adding the less to the audio signal.

[neobop]

[rayr0683]

LOL.....as Jack Nicholson would say....I warned em......you gotta watch. Ray

[silviajulieta]

Dear Frank: I think that you don't understand my post or have a big misunderstood about EIA standards, the precise EIA standards I'm talking about is: EIA/CEA-490-A, not a test instrument measure with out a regulated norm/standards.

The measures that were made in your unit were made with a self and free criterion of one person. I respect this person but his numbers can't compare against other units.
Frank the measures of any electronic device must have its foundation in official standards like the EIA to have real value ( not in a free way ), if not: how can you compare two differents electronic devices?. Every Industry has its own official standards/norms and it happen that in the audio industry the EIA is one of them. You can't play in this audio industry with your own rules: like it or not, period.

The limit according with this protocol by EIA is 86 db, there is no way to exeeded. This is not something that you, Dan me or any one else can cross over: we can't, that's the norm and I repeat there is no way to exeeded it in any circumstances, the Laws of physics are untouchable by any one.

We can have figures of 95-100 db with short-circuit status and the like but not according that oficial EIA norm.

So that AHT figure on your unit means almost nothing about quality performance because has no oficial norm/standards foundation and because one sole spec can't say the whole and complex history.

Now, if you tell us according with which norm/protocol comes those specs then the spec could be telling something but not with out it. With out it is only: marketing, as a fact that unit was designed and build for make money, right?

I think that you know that the phono cartridge is a natural balanced design and the common sense tell you that a phono stage that is the one that process that balanced cartridge signal must be balanced. IMHO an unbalanced design like the one in the AHT is out of order, I know why the 95% of phono stages take the unbalanced " road " instead the " natural " balanced one but this fact is out of discuss in this thread.

About IC the only advantage is that it is more easy to make and build a phono stage design, a discrete circuit is a better way to go if you have the know-how and skills to do it but if you have not then IC's are far superior, well we are of those people that have the right and precise know-how/skills to do it and NO we are not genius like Dan, we are simple persons that made our design for us it is not a busine$$ product, our Phonolinepreamp ( as I told you ) was designed to cope our near perfect targets where no commercial unit can do it including your unit.
Btw, do you know that IC's works with very high figures of feedback?

We don't have to sale nothing to the people because the Essential 3160 was made thinking in our self not in you or any one else. Our Phonolinepreamp was made by we customers that happen that we not only know what we need but how to achieve it. Btw we are extreme perfeccionist people.

I would like to go on in the whole subject but IMHO is useless. I don't have to prove nothing and like I already told you: as good as your unit can be our Phonolinepreamp is a different way different electronic device design, there is no comparison.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
_________________
Be truer to the recording: loosing and adding the less to the audio signal.

[neobop]