conical versus ellipticals

[flavio81]

So now, back on topic.

Yesterday i was listening to a record i bought some days ago in pristine condition. The record is "Queen - Greatest Hits (1981)", canadian pressing. It is a record which has far too many songs per side, so the grooves are narrow and the sound level is low. Typical mass-market record.

On playing the record, with my HE (HyperElliptical) stylus, i heard horrible distortion (of the harmonic type). I examined the grooves with a microscope. They were pretty much OK, so then i used my brain (for a change) and thought:

"Aha, since this is a mass market record, it was intended to be played on crappy turntables with cheap spherical stylii; so the cutting engineer turned on the tracing simulator (mistracking compensator, see Dynagroove, etc)... Then i'm hearing the distortion that was added intentionally!!"

So i took out the HE stylus and put on the conical; played the record again. The result, less distortion!! The record was listenable again. The distortion was reduced but not completely canceled. Also, the sibilance was high.

So yes, i think conicals are useful when playing records cut by profane cutting engineers that had the "bright" idea of turning on the eff-ing tracing simulator (Neumann TS-66, etc).

Fortunately most of my records are Classical Music, and have been cut the ortodox way, so they sound much better with the HE stylus.

[flavio81]

Just to be sure we are in the same page, here are some shots of the different stylus profiles:



(Image from JICO). From left to right:

1. Spherical
2. Elliptical (although is not so evident on the pic)
3. Shibata
4. Hyper Elliptical (Jico HE, identical to Shure HE)
5. Jico SAS (Their flavor of Micro Ridge stylus). This last one is cut by laser AFAIK.

Not all line-contact profiles are the same. HE stylus is line-contact, Shibata is more or less line-contact too, but for example Ortofon & other manufacturers uses this kind of line contact:


(From Ortofon MC15)
Beautiful, isn't it?

For comparison here's the JICO HE stylus:

[/img]

[1200y3]

Pivot: The 300b example was to back up desktop's point about radio stations using narrower bandwidth.

The sarcasm is quite humerous, but my point was that the cantilever design will always come between the stylus tip and the cartridge. The MR contacts the groove exactly the same as the cutter, that is to say it is a cutting stylus. A MR will cut cantilever noise down. Stylus noise? You never put your ear up close to a needle while playing? And yes the less stylus to record pickup area the quieter and the better detail.

Most of the distortion heard with larger tip sizes is from poor cartridges that can't damp the vibrations. The smaller tips need less resonance control attention paid to the structures. To understand one would have to hear the Decca Marron compared with the Decca London Reference. One is an MR and one is a conical, but zero (0) cantilever mass, and solid body. The sound does not travel through a rod or cantilever to get to the pickup coils.

Your 70's records will playback OK on a system without resonances, but if you have to use MRs you are hiding the fact that the system is poorly engineered. The records were designed to be played back with an elliptical, and the shape of the elliptical has the highest strength to weight ratio and balance.

If you rang a bell with a tiny handle versus holding the whole bell tightly in your hand, you will know the difference between a fractured stylus and a solid stylus. (cantilever is the handle)

Grado uses a stylus that can be from 2 to 5 pieces.

We have the world's largest supply of diamonds and diamond tooling. It takes five hours to carve an MR. Love ya!

[pivot]

Pivot: The 300b example was to back up desktop's point about radio stations using narrower bandwdth.

Having mucked about with some Bottlehead kits I find they are pretty technically savy.

Bottlehead rates the bandwidth of their current production 300B based kit as:

Bandwidth: 16Hz to 34kHz at -3dB

I have no reason to believe they are lying to me/us.

So what about the 300B is limited bandwidth? You tested one?

[1200y3]

The bandwidth of the amps is dependent on the transformer. I only stated that a narrow bandwidth (in the case of the radio station) still needs very low distortion so the stylus manufacturers were not cutting corners with conical designs. Workers in the radio stations are still hearing the sound the stations are transmitting 24 hours a day, so quality is a concern.

The 300b example was that they used the highest quality possible for telephone use, but wide bandwidth was not the reason. Have I tested one? I can tell you that out of 50 you will not find one that isn't unequal to the rest.

[flavio81]

The MR contacts the groove exactly the same as the cutter, that is to say it is a cutting stylus.

False. Flawed logic. Please read the above line again and realize the logical mistake. In fact it is so wrong it can be used as a funny signature.

The MR is NOT a cutting stylus. Not only is not but it applies the tracking force over a surface 3x bigger than an elliptical. In other words, it is MUCH GENTLER on the record than other stylii. This is a FACT. I have the PDFs with the figures on other PC, and will try to post them this week.

The records were designed to be played back with an elliptical.

The records were designed to be played with the stylus that can read the cutting stylus in the most accurate way, unless a tracing simulator was used. In that case, they were designed to be played with a 5um spherical tip.

We have the world's largest supply of diamonds and diamond tooling. It takes five hours to carve an MR. Love ya!

As far as i have read, MR styluses are not carved but laser-cut.
We love you too.

[pivot]

The bandwidth of the amps is dependent on the transformer.

So then the answer to the question "So what about the 300B is limited bandwidth?" is "nothing at all".

Which somehow explains why "300B" backs up the notion of radio stations having limited bandwidth.

What passes for logic in your writting leaves me slack jawed.

[1200y3]

Desktop had stated that the conical was used by radio stations so the bandwidth was not important. I guess you didn't read that part.

The smaller the stylus tip, the more pounds per square inch (PSI) it has on the vinyl, which could be 5000 lbs. This is very elementary stuff. That is one sharp point. It is a diamond shaped like a chissel. Everyone knew the dangers of the MR. The compliance was the most expensive part in the research department.

Shure used masers to shape their diamond. They are not cut in one slice, thet are carved in a lengthy, time consuming, and expensive process.

[flavio81]

The smaller the stylus tip, the more pounds per square inch (PSI) it has on the vinyl, which could be 5000 lbs. (...) Everyone knew the dangers of the MR.

The smaller the CONTACT AREA, the more pounds per square inch on the vinyl. Contact area.

Again you ignored or misread my last post. The CONTACT AREA is much broader on the MR stylus, thus the pressure excerted on the vinyl is less. Pressure is defined as force over area. So if the force stays the same (let's say 2g tracking force) and the area is 3+ times larger, the pressure becomes 1/3 or smaller.

Why the contact area is larger on the micro-ridge? Again, you ignored one of my last posts with the stylus profiles, so here we go again:



Note these images are not at the same scale. Look only at the TIP surface. 1=spherical 5uM all around. The side radius is also 5uM.

#5 is the Micro Ridge-like (actually the SAS profile); it has 5uM front-to back, BUT the side radius is more than 40uM. The MR has more contact-area and this is a widely known fact.

SO, conclusion, MR has more contact area thus MR has less force on the vinyl thus MR is more gentle on your records THAN the conical and elliptical. So, what are the dangers of the MR?

The compliance was the most expensive part in the research department.

Please elaborate.

We have the world's largest supply of diamonds and diamond tooling. It takes five hours to carve an MR. Love ya!

As far as i have read, MR styluses are not carved but laser-cut.

Shure used masers to shape their diamond. They are not cut in one slice, thet are carved in a lengthy, time consuming, and expensive process.

Still the JICO SAS micro-ridge is affordable enough.

[rayr0683]

Hello All,

Yes, this is what the SHURE Designer, Les Watts was telling me about. He said he has a few labs with lasers, and that the cost of beryllium was expensive, but he can still get it, and use his lasers to cut, either it, or the stylus. I did post this stuff before from him, just dont remember it all without looking back. However, Shure had the lowest tracking forces in the business, so I dont know how the MR is so dangerous. I have never heard this before. The Shure V15VMR seems to be a favorite in all the Vinyl Forums that I have been reading, and many are extremely well experienced with all Shure cartridges, they still love the V-MR. Ray

Desktop had stated that the conical was used by radio stations so the bandwidth was not important. I guess you didn't read that part.

The smaller the stylus tip, the more pounds per square inch (PSI) it has on the vinyl, which could be 5000 lbs. This is very elementary stuff. That is one sharp point. It is a diamond shaped like a chissel. Everyone knew the dangers of the MR. The compliance was the most expensive part in the research department.

Shure used masers to shape their diamond. They are not cut in one slice, thet are carved in a lengthy, time consuming, and expensive process.

[Thomas_A]

Desktop had stated that the conical was used by radio stations so the bandwidth was not important. I guess you didn't read that part.

The smaller the stylus tip, the more pounds per square inch (PSI) it has on the vinyl, which could be 5000 lbs. This is very elementary stuff. That is one sharp point. It is a diamond shaped like a chissel. Everyone knew the dangers of the MR. The compliance was the most expensive part in the research department.

Shure used masers to shape their diamond. They are not cut in one slice, thet are carved in a lengthy, time consuming, and expensive process.

Do you have any references or measurements (your own?) that support your claims? E.g.

1) What is the contact area and pressure for each stylus type?
2) Wear patterns after using different stylus types?

[1200y3]

I never stated that I disliked the MR. Just the price, and an odd safety factor. I also tried to state that the some things can be done to conicals and ellipticals to improve them. The designer's goal is to have an audibly invisible cantilever. The original V15 4 MR had a 7 piece stylus assembly consisting of thin rod, thick rod, stylus tip, compliance#1, compliance#2, magnet, suspension wire. Very difficult to mass produce. Then the knob had enough pieces. The stylus had a two piece bearing assembly for a compliance and a two piece cantilever. The later versions had a single piece extremely fine cantilever, but had a difficult two piece compliance. The 5 never came close to the 4, but came with a beautiful alignment tool. I had them all, 3,4,5,MRs and HE. The cartridge itself is a major factor in the V15's performance, and I use it on standard size Shure styli. The smaller stylus shaft had less mass on the original V15's and made the stylus that much better than the other ones. There are so many design factors in a Shure, it would almost be cheaper than berrillium. I use a cactus needle on my own DIY styli and it outdoes the berryllium.

The wear pattern of an MR stylus is nearly linear untill it is completely worn. That was its greatest selling feature.

The contact areas are printed on the stylus data sheets, and the New Audio Cyclopedia has information on stylus pressure and PSI.

As far as it goes with contact areas, that is the major limitation to detailed tracking, but cantilever mass is the strongest limitation to the stylus. The cantilever haze rises exponentially as we approach higher stylus tip contact and size. So it is a two way struggle, we need less mass for haze reduction, and less mass on an MR because it is more prcise. That would be why Audio Technica used carbon fiber on their conicals. It is neutral.

[rayr0683]

In your opinion the 5 never came close to the 4. The VMR happens to have a way larger Shure following, in each and every Shure Forum I have seen than the 4. In fact, aside from the VMR, many fans prefer the III as their second choice. Ray

I never stated that I disliked the MR. Just the price, and an odd safety factor. I also tried to state that the some things can be done to conicals and ellipticals to improve them. The designer's goal is to have an audibly invisible cantilever. The original V15 4 MR had a 7 piece stylus assembly consisting of thin rod, thick rod, stylus tip, compliance#1, compliance#2, magnet, suspension wire. Very difficult to mass produce. Then the knob had enough pieces. The stylus had a two piece bearing assembly for a compliance and a two piece cantilever. The later versions had a single piece extremely fine cantilever, but had a difficult two piece compliance. The 5 never came close to the 4, but came with a beautiful alignment tool. I had them all, 3,4,5,MRs and HE. The cartridge itself is a major factor in the V15's performance, and I use it on standard size Shure styli. The smaller stylus shaft had less mass on the original V15's and made the stylus that much better than the other ones. There are so many design factors in a Shure, it would almost be cheaper than berrillium. I use a cactus needle on my own DIY styli and it outdoes the berryllium.

The wear pattern of an MR stylus is nearly linear untill it is completely worn. That was its greatest selling feature.

The contact areas are printed on the stylus data sheets, and the New Audio Cyclopedia has information on stylus pressure and PSI.

[pivot]

The "dangerous" fineline/line contact/Micro-Ridge:


From Ortofon literature:

"There are three commonly-used shapes for styli. The spherical (also called conical) shape is the least expensive to manufacture, and is commonly used in low cost cartridges. Unfortunately the spherical stylus can not trace the highest musical tones accurately.

The more expensive elliptical stylus, has a narrow profile enabling it to follow the petite undulations of the groove with greater precision. It is used in the majority of high quality cartridges. A third stylus shape, which Ortofon calls the Fine-Line, provides more faithful tracking of the groove. It has an even narrower profile than the elliptical shape. It makes contact with a wider area of the groove, reducing the tremendous pressure the stylus exerts on the delicate record surface. Thus, the Fine-Line shape reduces record wear."

Read the last sentence in particular.

You decide who knows more about styli - Ortofon.....or....