Lyra Atlas experiences

Dear @downunder :  ""  you can hear the difference in clarity and purity of the lower % tracking error. ""

there is no doubt about because lower tracking error means at least two things: lower distortions and higher music information.

As always and your tonearm included the name in the tonearm/cartridge set up is accuracy behind that set up. The differences we can hear between Baerwald and Löfgren B are not because one alignment been superior to the other but because differences, minute differences, on each alignment set up.

I can remember when appeared the MINT LP protractor where every single gentleman that use it was and is totally satisfied and where all of them heard more or les what you stated and why is that: because the MINT LP is really outstanding?, no because for the almost very first time some one took in count tne meaning of ACCURACY. It's a bargain of protractor ( I think around 150.00 ) an unbeatable till today, it's dedicated protractor for the TT/tonearm/cartridge of the owner. We don't need nothing else.

But your tonearm is in a different league and my " hat off " for the manufacturer.

In the other side you are not hearing only the improvement of the tangential tracking in your tonearm but its overall construction and blend material building, bearing and many other things. Good.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.

@downunder : That has a name: tonearm true engeenering !!!!!

R.

Downunder - I remember, trying to tweak the Souther arm, we got the feeling, although it looked nice in theory, it was hard to achieve in practice, whatever we did, the cart scated around in the groove (and as you can imagine my rather over-controlled SME V cured that). Happy for you, if the new Thales design works well.
Oystein

I use a kuzma 4pt for my Atlas. Have had a range of carts in the Kuzma, Benz, airtight, vdh etc. The Atlas is the best sounding, excellent dynamics, tonality and tracking.

I did have a sme 20 with the the smeV arm, but this was previous to me obtaining the Lyra. Obivously I found the  Kuzma TT (and ref313 arm I had initially) preferable  to the sme,  the 313 also tracked better than the sme with the same cartridge.

I use a mini oscilloscope with the set up to adjust azimuth. 

Have tried various phono stages with the Lyra, eg. Dartzeel, Thoress - I use the Ypsilon with Lyra's Erodition MC step up. I found the Erodition suits the Lyra better than the Ypsilon MC20 step up.

Dctom - Thanks for interesting information. I also enjoy the Atlas. For me, each step up in the Lyra line over the last twenty years - Clavis, Clavis DC, Titan, Titan i, Atlas - has been worth it. The Atlas shines through even when some components aren't optimal.

I used the SME V on a (modded) VPI-HW19 player for several years, and although it worked ok, the arm matches better with the Hanss T30 player I use now. It gives the arm a more rigid platform, more in line with the philosophy behind the SME V. I can compare since I have DSD recordings from vinyl using the two players with the same arm and Lyra cart. There is no doubt that the Hanss benefits the music (although the tonality is good in the HW19, pitch and stability is better in the Hanss, music seems to get a higher resolution with a greater level of detail). So, getting the Hanss player in a sense was the biggest "tweak" I did to the Atlas (and is much recommended if one can get it for a reasonable price). The T30 has two motors, six thin drive belts, heavy sandwich construction, magnetic bearing, 10 kg aluminium platter - and I think all of these contribute to the result.

Some people don't like the sound in this type of heavy platter, including Paul Seydor in the Absolute sound (2012), reviewing the T-60, a bigger version of the T-30. Seydor had a lot of nice things to say, and only one critique - he heard a certain metallic coloration or glare, and preferred using the player with a platter mat on top. He used a Graham Phantom II arm with an Ortofon Windfield. (Review here: http://www.theabsolutesound.com/articles/hanss-t-60-turntable-and-graham-phantom-ii-supreme-tonearm/ )

I understand what Seymour was writing about. I can hear a bit of this glare too. Yet I mainly prefer the T-30 (with the SME V and Atlas) without a mat.

Since this may of be interest to others, and to be sure, I did a new test, over a week, trying out the best platter mats I have tried so far, the Japanese fo.Q rs-912 (recommended by Seymour - a set of two mats, thin and thick).

However, my conclusion is: I like the sound better without a mat - even with some "glare". This goes for most of my records. Sometimes, however, the LP is so hard-sounding (and engaging platter resonances, I imagine) that the music sounds better with one of the rs-912 mats.

Like Seymour, I find that the thin mat (with holes) works best; the thick (or the two combined) is too much.  So for example, when I want to play my worn mono copy of Dave Clark 5 In Session, the mat makes it more bearable. It functions a bit like a filter, and also goes some way into refining the sound. However, listening more closely, I find that I lose information. This is a no-no for me. So - even with a bit of glare, I prefer the "full" sound from the record directly on the platter.

I use a heavy (1kg) TT brass record weight rather than the light-weight clamp that came with the Hanss. This, also, is a bit of plus and minus (I miss the screw-down clamp design on the VPI), but mainly, it gives the music more body, it sounds fuller, and also reduces the glare a bit.

For a period, I tried damping the platter on the bottom, using Gladen Aero-Butyl, but the Hanss distributor warned me against this, since even if I applied the damping material evenly, it would still interfere with optimal balancing of the platter. So I took it off, again (quite some work). It did help the metallic resonance, but not so much - I don't hear a big difference without it. Maybe a sandwhich or composite construction would cure it better. With the VPI, I had the heavy (HW-19 version 3 or so) lead platter, but even if it was stable and gave deeper bass than the ones before it, I liked the sound better in the (hw-19 v 4) Black Knight platter.

It seems typical for the Atlas that kind of problem is less prominent than with earlier Lyra's like the Titan. At least, this is my experience. The Clavis was much "harder" than the Titan, and the Titan was harder than the Atlas. Hard in both senses - sounding hard, and hard to get right, to adjust to optimal sound. It feels like the Atlas is more "forgiving" of resonances, sibilances, etc. along with almost no mistracking - even as it is extracting more information from the groove. This is impressive. Even when using a "lowly" phono stage like I do now, the cartridge gives me clear informattion, what sounds best.