Would Like To Hear From Strain Gauge Owners


I would like to hear from owners of Strain Gauge cartridges (particularly Soundsmith owners)as to how you like the strain gauge system compared to previous cartridges you have owned. Is there any drawbacks to the Soundsmith Strain Gauge system?

I am located in the Cincinnati, Ohio area. Is there any Soundsmith Strain Gauge owners in the Ohio, Kentucky, Indiana area?

I read the review of the Strain Gauge system on Audiogon by Vac man. It was a very good review and answered many questions for me. I would like to hear from others who also own strain gauge cartridges.

Thanks in advance for any info that you can give me.
slowhand

Dear Peter: With al respect to you and IMHO when any device has a good design that conforms with the standards of the audio industry ( in this case the RIAA eq. ) it does not needs any kind of excuses/explanation like the ones that you are given here.

That is not the main subject from my point of view:

my main subject is that in today status the SG response does not conforms according to the RIAA standard eq., I'm sure that you understand perfectly the term/word STANDARD and the whys the RIAA give the precise conformation of the RIAA curve eq.

From my point of view, and please correct me about, your SG design is out of that RIAA standards and is not a device to hear recordings ( LPs ) that were recorded under the RIAA standard eq. Of course that you can hear it in the same manner that we can add an equalizer to our systems but that is not the point.

Peter, I think that all of us really appreciate if you give the answer to this question: could you tell us if the SG was designed to conform with the RIAA standard eq. with which all the LPs were recorded?, please a simple answer: yes or no.

Thank you in advance.

Regards and enjoy the music.
Raul.
Raul, why does it always sound like you are justifying/defending your own marketing brochure? And, you use no disclaimers? ;-)
Dear Dan: I'm not and I don't need to justifying/defending any own marketing brochure, period.

Seems to me that you don't understand almost nothing about the RIAA standard eq and its several whys on the recording process and why about its existence.

First than all you have to understand what does means STANDARD ( a norm/rule/method ) and second who or whom are the RIAA that are the ones that puts the RIAA eq standard in the recording process, you have to understand too that exist and it is proved only one RIAA eq standard and imho the SG from Soundsmith does not conform according to that STANDARD, that's all: well not so simple you have to understand all the implications that means to play an LP out of the RIAA standard eq., it does not sense to me: make sense to you?

I'm not an owner ( and in its current status operation/design I never be one of them. ) of that SG device but IMHO I think that is fair that the owners/customers know what kind of SG response are they hearing, I'm not saying bad or good response this is not the subject.

What they are hearing is not what was recorded because the SG device does not performs with the standard RIAA eq., it has its own eq. out of the STANDARD.

Now, if you agree that it is better to hear your own LPs with a device that it is out of the RIAA Standards then buy it and put on sale what you own for that purpose at this moment, nothing wrong with that.

Regards and enjoy the music.
Raul.
Dear Peter: I don't want that you can/could think that my posts on your SG device are because I'm against you or against your device,no I'm not and I'm not questioning the SG device by it self design and has nothing to do with 0.1db figures elsewhere.

You fix at least two of my cartridges where you made an excellent work and I support you about here an elsewhere on your re-tipping very high quality " performance ", no doubt about.

The SG subject is really simple: I'm not saying that it is a bad device ( I don't like what I heard in the same manner that are people that like it, it is only a priorities subject. ) or that your design work is bad too: NO, what I'm saying is that IMHO and from what I heard and read your SG does not conforms according to the RIAA eq standard and there is nothing wrong with that because you or any one else can/could design anything you want.

Subject is that almost all the people ( including some of the SG owners. ) have questions about and these questions needs answers and the best source about is you.

Maybe you don't want to give us ( or to me ) a precise answer but IMHO it will be healthy to do it: there is nothing to hide about, or is it? why to leave to the controversy your very well made SG design? don't you think that your today and future customers deserve to know what is happening " around "?

Again, thank you in advance.

Regards and enjoy the music.
Raul.
Raul, I know and appreciate that you are offering your honest and knowledgeable opinion.

However, this whole .1 dB is your interpretation of what is necessary. This subject has been discussed here several times. Your opinions on this as well as the valuable opinions of other phonostage designers on this issue can be found in the archives with a quick search. I think most of us who have even the slightest knowledge of Paul's strain guage know about the RIAA thing.

When you get on this RIAA kick I think it would be more ethical of you to add that you are a designer/manufacturer of a commercial preamp that has a built-in phonostage that competes against Paul's SG.