Anyone notice different amounts of surface noise with different arms?


Using the same cartridge, I just went from an SME 3012R to a Bokrand AB309 and while the Bokrand is no doubt a better sounding arm in my system, I’m definitely hearing more surface noise. Records are cleaned with a Degritter so it’s not dirt... but the arm picks up more of the noise from my older records.

dhcod

I had to he same thought as Raul, after reading that you hear no difference between analog and digital RIAA filtering, because you’re signal is in the digital domain AFTER RIAA correction. That added processing might obliterate differences that would otherwise be audible. Of course there’s also the possibility that there is no audible difference between analog and digital RIAA correction. Quien sabe?

- tonearms do not sound exactly the same

- setup is critical. Deviations measured in .0001 (I’m pulling a number outa my tuchus, but you get the idea) will make a difference

- it has been my experience that less expensive cartridges are livelier - maaaaybe to mask inferior quality? - and pick up more surface noise, but the liveliness often masks it. The more expensive cartridges have less surface noise, but you can hear it better. Could be for the reason someone on this thread alluded to. Milage may vary: I don’t expect everyone will have the same experience.

theaudioatticvinylsundays.com

Does the way a certain design for a Tonearm, create an interface with a Cartridge that improves the environment for the Cartridge to function in?

Hence, the Cartridge being mounted on a Tonearm that has a focus for the design, which is to create an interface that seen to be much improved for the Cart' to function in will create a difference for how the Cart's end sound is perceived.

If the Cart' is set up correctly at all interfaces, in numerous cases of listening, the TA>Cart' in use will be perceived by most who experienced the pairing as a change to the end sound, that is strongly suggested as being a betterment. 

Similar outcomes are also able to produced when other interfaces that are needed to replay a Vinyl LP are adequately addressed.

Mechanical interfaces are very capable of creating sound that is mix from assessments made, whether it is deemed an attractor or a repellent.

An end sound produced using a Vinyl LP's Modulation as the source for the Signal or a Digital Code used as the Source for the Signal, will also produce an end sound that is mixed in assessments of whether it is perceived as an attractor or as a  repellent. 

From my point of view today, my experience of Digital is proving fine for my needs. A Digital Code as a Source from my CDT >DAC, produces an end sound that I am classing as an attractor. The same method of producing an end sound, extends Cartridge Life as well.

If listening to less end sound produced from a Vinyl LP is the trade off, I am contented with such a outcome. I no longer want a one source system, but do like the mechanical and geometrical disciplines that using Vinyl has taught me. Does these disciplines leant, really have anything to do with listening to music? Music is being produced and enjoyed by multiples who use Vinyl LP's, where the multiples of users do not put too much emphasis on the mechanical and geometrical concerns that can be searched out and learnt about. 

As for the Surface noise, there are not too many causes, revisiting Cart' Alignment might help. Cleaning the Vinyl LP to the standard advised by Neil Antin in the PAVCR Educational Document, in my experience has done wonders for quietness of a Vinyl replay.