Strain gauge vs Zyx 4D/Atmos

Possibly a better way to think about the SG is this: when RIAA is applied to a magnetic cutterhead, it reduces the low end,and boosts the highs. This is done for various reasons, but the result is basically a contant displacement groove modulation for a flat, swept input from 20 to 20K. Since the SG is sensitive to DISPLACEMENT ONLY, and not velocity, it reproduces a flat signal from a constant displacement groove calling it non-linear is not descriptive enough.

It is somewhat serendipitous that the RIAA curve evolved in such a manner as to cut a nearly flat displacement groove from a flat swept input signal.

As regards EQ; one has to realize that many records are mixed in such a way as to allow the engineer to EQ each instrument, not to mention the coloration for varied mics,not to mention the final EQ that ALWAYS gets done so the the losses incurred from the multi-step process in making records is compensated for, not to mention to two BAD resonant points well in the audio spectrum that cutterheads suffer badly from and are EQ'D out (mostly.....) and the list goes on and on.....So what we finally listen to can often bear little or no resemblance to the orignal EQ of the live instrument or performance.

I am always amazed that it goes so well most of the time.

What I can say is that when I cut a lacquer dub on one of my Neumann lathes, and play it back with MC or my MI carts, it is no contest when compared to the Strain Gauge. I am bringing a lacquer I cut at half speed (22) to be played at 45; those coming to RMAF can ask me to play it to hear the newest generation of Strain Gauge, compared even to the new Hyperion.- VERY revealing - This is a piano/bass duet.

Peter Ledermann/Soundsmith

Dear Dover: I respect your point of view but for me is relevant and not matters what the cutter-head angle been because this fact does not affect the RIAA eq. what we do on playback is to set the SRA according with that label recordings. Somewhere is a list where we can have that recording information for we can adjust/set that cartridge SRA according to.

About different recorded eq. cuve you already know that exist over 10+ of them other than the RIAA standard. Before RIAA standard curve almost each LP label recorded with its own eq. and that's why exist some phono stage designs with several inverse eq. curves additional to the RIAA even the ones that include the Neumann correction at high frequency.

I owned the Win and Panasonic sstrain gauge but these ones conformed according to the RIAA standard.

In the SS that is not happening this strain gauge gives its " natural response/curve " with almost no signal manipulation ( and that's why sounds and perform DIFFERENT " from any other magnetic cartridge. ) to make its response flat according to the RIAA standard and this is why shows a RIAA deviation around 2db when the RIAA deviation in a phono stage ( for magnetic cartridges. ) that deviation are around 0.2db to 0.1db as something normal ( the Atmasphere phono stage shows 0.07db and if I remember one of the Rowland's: 0.05db. ).

Now, in my case one of my main quality audio system performance level is to add and lose the less from the cartridge signal. Yes, I know that that SS 2db frequency response deviation could be maybe not so important when we can have 10+db frequency deviations on the speaker/room response but this is not my point: my target is add and lose the less from the cartridge signal.

I almost don't care what happened during the LP recording because I can't have any control about.
What I care is what is in my " hands " to preserve the cartridge signal integrity.

Now, Mr. Ledermann choosed that the ss signal instead to pass for an inverse RIAA eq. curve process ( as any magnetic cartridge signal. ) to shows its " natural response/curve " with that frequency response 2db deviation.

He made something that in his opinion could gives a better quality performance level.

As always in any audio choices/alternative exist trade-offs: he choosed what for him was and is his best trade-offs: to have that frequency deviation instead the ss signal pass through the RIAA. inverse eq. proccess.
In both cases the cartridge signal " suffer " a degradation in its " integrity " over what came in the recording.

Which is the best trade-off?, I think that this is up to any one of us.

I prefer that if the LPs I own were recorded using the RIAA standard eq. curve on playback the phono stage must apply the inverse RIAA eq. curve to achieve flat frequency response at this stage/link on the audio system chain. Other people could like a different approach and this different approach is what is the ss device.

Mosin posted something that could be the best of both " worlds " ( with almost no trade-offs. ): a strain gauge design that can performs the inverse RIAA eq. curve with out the necessity to pass to that proccess on playback and with out no frequency response deviation other that the normal 0.1db one. This could be just great! and I think that this idea could be a good challenge to Mr. Ledermann to work about because he has the knowledge.

I hope Mr.PL does not take this post as an " attack ".

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.

Hi Raul,

I must point out that the Win Labs never produced a flat frequency response-- please have a look at some magazine test reports.

I own(ed) the Panasonic, and in the Jeff Rowland strain gauge preamp for it, Jeff applied a very mild amount of mid-band EQ to make the output 'flat'. And it was. I owned the stock cartridge, but my favorite was the boron cantilever version with a vandenHul stylus.

And then there is the Soundsmith Strain Gauge-- it also employs a touch of midband EQ, and definitely measures flat in my experience.

Raul, can you please show us what information or test that you found to show this 2dB frequency-response irregularity please?

Everyone should know that the frequency response of any cartridge depends on the brand of test record used-- CBS, and JVC being the most common. There is quite a difference in their highs. Have a look at USA magazine tests from the 1970's to see the difference, as some publications used both test records.

Obviously both CBS's and JVC's top engineers believe they each produce a reference-standard test LP. Yet this means only that there is no ABSOLUTE standard for which to MEASURE any cartridges using a test LP.

However, there is a way to measure the response of a test disc itself without playing it, by looking at how each modulated groove reflects white light, as the sine-wave signal is slowly swept from 20 to 20k Hz. This is pictured and described in my 1978 copy of the Audio Cyclopedia. I do not remember the mathematics involved, but this was a very useful and accurate technique according to that text.

Of course, it helps that Peter at Soundsmith has his own disc cutting machine. I know he has created his own test records containing impulses and other test-signals not available on commercial test discs.

And why would an already-renowned cartridge designer create his flagship cartridge with such a frequency-response error, one which anyone would discover? Makes no sense.

Best regards,
Roy Johnson
Green Mountain Audio

Dear Royj: This can shows you that the SS does not mimic the RIAA as you are assuming ( see those magazyne pictures. ):

http://www.sound-smith.com/cartridges/article.pdf

and here MR. Lendermann told us about that deviation level:

+++++ " I have measured the SG in many arms, and recently in my Schroder Reference SG, the new SG design (which you did not hear) it was +/- 1dB from 50 Hz to 12K " +++++

weird on the frequency range, he does not given how the ss performs between 20hz to 50hz and between 12khz and 20khz.

Royj, I'm not against the SS device and obviously not against Mr. Ledermann: I'm only share my findings about, that's all. Why that so " big distress ", that's not my opinion ( I reserve to me that opinion. ) are only facts coming from other " sources " ( SS site and Mr. Ledermann. ) but me.

Why Mr. Ledermann and other persons try to blame me for something that's not my opinion?, makes no sense.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.

Raul,

I appreciate your concern. That magazine test gave no scale at all to their Figure 4. Also, on their page four, their author states, "We can now state, with an excellent accuracy level, that the natural frequency response curve of the SOUNDSMITH cartridge is equal to the RIAA curve,"

I think it will help if I share some facts that make more sense of this whole issue:

-- Top-line cartridges producing a +/- 1dB deviation between 50 and 12kHz are not uncommon (note how few manufacturers even publish response curves anymore).

-- Measurements below 50Hz change with a turntable's construction and its tonearm's effective mass.

-- Measurements above 12kHz depend on the test disc chosen. Which test LP is accurate? How about none.

-- 50 to 12kHz is exactly the range in which Stanton 'calibrated' their 681EEE. So did Empire and Pickering as I recall.

-- A cartridge claiming +/- 0.5 dB variation cannot be verified nor duplicated outside the factory because of the different turntable, tonearm, headshell, platter mat, cables, cartridge alignment, and test record employed.

-- These test records use steady sine waves, which indicate little about the dynamic response of the cartridge and nothing about phase accuracy- both far more important in my and many other's professional opinions. Example, how many times do we comment on the "lighter sound" of certain phono cartridges which we know to 'measure flat'? Heck, they even come with a graph.

In summary, all of the above certainly shows simple measurements/tests are at best only a guide, especially when the test signals do not simulate much about music. Furthermore, we lack the ability to reproduce any +/-0.5dB variation claimed.

Finally, in my experience also as a transducer-design specialist, a smooth +/- 1dB variation in response from 50Hz to 12kHz is never the reason someone "doesn't like the sound". That sound is not being enjoyed for many other reasons-- not from that cartridge having a +/- 1dB spec in that range instead of +/- 0.5dB.

By the way, I don't know which commercial music-LP could be chosen for someone to say "I can hear this phono cartridge has a perfectly flat frequency response."

If you did not like the Soundsmith Strain Gauge, either it was not well-setup or its sound was just not your cup of tea, as Peter wrote does happen. What you heard cannot be laid at the feet of a +/-1dB response in my professional experience.

As a side note, I hope we all can agree that passing the 1812 LP's torture track is no indication of a cartridge's musicality.

Best regards,
Roy