2. analog
  3. 1140620085

Does size really matter? :-

I've seen stylus size discussed in regards to 78s and mono records, but never as it pertains to our good old stereo LPs. I was recently looking at cartridge specs, and was astonished by the difference in the size of the styli. Let's take, for example, 3 cartridges I'm considering:

Sumiko Blackbird Elliptical 0.3 x 0.7 mm

Dynavector 17D2MKll Karat Square .06 x .06 mm

Zyx Bloom Line Contact 6 x 35 um

Converting the first two to um from mm, we get this:

Sumiko 300 x 700

Dynavector 60 x 60

Zyx 6 x 35

This indicates the Sumiko is 50x wider and 20x longer than the Zyx! The Dynavector is between them. Even allowing for the different stylus profiles, this seems like an enormous difference in stylus size. Am I missing something?

I've read in other threads that the Zyx owners talk about the Zyx getting deeper into the groove, retrieving more info and, more importantly, contacting a section of the groove that, in the case of used records, previous styli haven't touched. Considering the above figures, these statements now make much more sense.

My big question is, why don't more manufacturers use the smaller styli? Are there advantages to larger styli that I'm missing? It doesn't seem like cost should be a factor, as the Zyx above is a US$490 cartridge. Do the smaller styli wear quicker? Easier to break? Harder to align?

Just wanting to get A'goner's thoughts. If there's a previous thread, please point me to it - I did a search, but didn't come up with anything relevant. Thanks.

David
armstrod
nsgarch's avatar
nsgarch
2,524 posts
 
David, it's really nice to see someone else who is willing to crunch the numbers and make comparisons. I haven't yet done it with styli the way you have.

However, it has always been my understanding that the dimensional specicfications for styli pertain to what's going on (the radius) at the very tip, and don't tell a lot about (in the case of line contact designs for instance) what the actual contact length/area of the diamond with the groove wall might be. In the case of the ZYX, with such a small radius tip, that line of contact winds up being longer than most, I guess.

The business about new stylus designs contacting previously "unplayed" parts of the groove dates back to van den Hul's (and I guess Shibata's) line contact styli designs. These types of styli contact the groove wall on each side in a line, that runs from the top of the groove wall to however far down the stylus goes. About halfway down the groove wall of old records (played with spherical or elliptical styli) there's a sort of (horizontal) wear line, or "gouge" in the groove wall. The contact line of the newer styli can (in theory) actually skip over this wear point, meaning that it not only contacts new vinyl, but that it might not contact the (noisy) part of the groove on older records.
dougdeacon
3,338 posts
 
The differences in size are truly astounding, especially if you compare them under magnification. A friend once photographed four styli at 200x and printed them out for me. IIRC it was a Grado (forget the model), a Denon 103, a Shelter 901 and a ZYX R100 Fuji.

The photos made it difficult to believe these four objects were even made for the same purpose. The Grado looked like a jackhammer bit and the Denon like a chisel. The Shelter was more like a chef's knife. The ZYX was a surgeon's scalpel. Truly incredible when seen side-by-side.

I presume styli like ZYX uses are harder to make accurately. Styli like the Grado's are so huge that accuracy at the ZYX level would be, um, pointless.

In addition to the benefits already discussed, a small, line contact stylus obviously can "see" smaller groove modulations than a large, conical stylus. Large styli slide ride over high frequencies that fine styli can trace.

I don't know about wear, but advanced styli are certainly more sensitive to alignment. A large conical doesn't care much about SRA. A small line contact needs perfect SRA to reproduce its timbre, imaging and soundstaging magic. Once you've heard that however, it's very hard to go back.
armstrod OP
610 posts
 
Nsgarch,

Occasionally my accounting education proves useful. :-)

Thanks for the info on different stylus profiles. I guess then the question is how comparable the stylus dimensions are when the styli have varying profiles. Dougdeacon has seen clear differences with his own (microscopically enhanced) eyes, so the absolute size difference is undeniable. How that translates at the point of groove contact carries far more variables.

Dougdeacon, I'm sure the stylus size and profile is part of what makes a Zyx different, and logic says a stylus that much smaller would be more difficult to manufacture. As I pointed out, though, Zyx seems to be using that same size stylus on the Bloom at $490, so it's clearly possible to do it on an affordable cartridge. Are there any other cartridges you know of, affordable or not, that use a stylus as small as the Zyx? I did a quick check through cartridgedb.com and didn't find anything even close.
dougdeacon
3,338 posts
 
Are there any other cartridges you know of, affordable or not, that use a stylus as small as the Zyx?
The Lyra Olympos (discontinued) stylus was longer but it looked similarly narrow to my naked eye, but I never saw the specs. Current top Lyra's like the Titan might use something similar. Check VdH and Dynavector too.

The ZYX stylus is measured in a somewhat odd way because it's shaped in an odd way. If you cut a horizontal cross-section through the stylus at groove contact height, it would look something like an ellipse with a little ridge sticking straight out from each of the narrow ends. The end of this ridge is all that contacts the groove wall.

In the booklet that comes with the Airy 2, Airy 3 and UNIverse ZYX quotes the radius of these ridge ends as 3um, so 6um in diameter. The radii of the main part of the ellipse would be much larger, but it doesn't touch anything and the size isn't quoted AFAIK.
More to discover