Thank you Atmasphere for posting that Link to a paper presented 43 years ago.
I presume you infer that nothing has changed in the intervening period?
As I do with most Reports and Papers......I go firstly to the Conclusions 🙃
In this paper we have pointed out
that traditional specifications like
rumble, wow and flutter and required tracking force are both unreliable and inadequate. Furthermore,
they are strongly influenced by the
actual combination of motor, arm,
cartridge and record, all of which
are often left to random decisions
by the Hi-Fi consumer. By the use
of modern test equipment we have
tried to throw a little light on the
causes and influence of the interface problems between the elements in a turntable. Assisted by listening tests one can conclude that
the fundamental problem creating
parameter is the frequency response of the turntable below
20 Hz. Most modern turntables
ieave much to be desired, typically
they have resonance peaks of 5 —
10dB at 5 — 7 Hz. The first thing
to do is to raise the frequency to 1 5
— 1 8 Hz and then ideally damp the
system to a Q of 0,5, letting response roli off at preferably
1 2 dB/oct.
In pursuit of this goal one should
not make trade offs with respect to
rigidity of the tonearm tube and fixture. Flexing in the arm and other
spurious resonances could then be
the result and destroy the stability
of the stereo image.
Finally in Part 2 we have focused
on a type of distortion that is most
clearly seen in the time domain:
Early reflections. Our investigation
tells us that here is an area which,
at present, has rather poor correlation between the measurement
methods available and the impact
on the sound quality.
POOR CORRELATION BETWEEN THE MEASUREMENT METHODS AVAILABLE AND THE IMPACT ON SOUND QUALITY
This Resonant Frequency has ZERO affect on the sound quality of a particular tonearm/cartridge combination
That's what I said in my opening to this Thread 🧐
But this Link is not primarily concerned with the Arm/Cartridge Resonant Frequency (despite Atmasphere's attempt to suggest it is).
It is....as its Title suggests....a Paper on
Audible Effects of Mechanical Resonances in Turntables
Turntables.....turntables.....TURNTABLES.....?? 🤣
Now to the nitty but not so gritty.....
This Paper....although prepared by respected engineers and scientists in good faith in 1957....is NOT a Peer-Reviewed White Paper accepted as SCIENCE.
For that to occur......the Testing Procedures and Results need to be independently replicated and consistently duplicated.
None of these Tests and Results has been replicated.....nor can they be for the results are entirely dependent on the turntable used, the isolation employed, the tonearms used and the cartridges and headshells selected.
This Paper is NOT SCIENCE and I would have expected a qualified Electrical Engineer to recognise this 🤔
The perception of wow and flutter, as well as rumble all affect the 'SOUND'. Rumble goobles up amplifier power and you can bet that increases IMD, which affects the 'SOUND'
"and you can BET that increases IMD which affects the SOUND"
Hmmm.....sounds like a real scientific argument to me 🤣
So now we have Atmasphere introducing 'Wow and Flutter', 'Rumble' and 'IMD' all of which are mentioned in the Paper he introduced on TURNTABLES.....and none of which has been mentioned before by REAL scientists (like Kirkus and Tonywin) in relation to Tonearm Resonant Frequency.
Why don't you point out the audible effects of all these artefacts in my YouTube Videos so that people actually have some 'baseline' for the horrors that you continue to warn us about.....?
The whole premise of this thread is patently ridiculous! knock it off.
Nothing to see here Atmasphere says....
Don't listen for yourselves (which will cost you nothing).....
Believe me and what I say because I know what you should listen to 🤥
