2. analog
  3. 1313770444

Who tweaks VTF too?

I can't say why it took many years for me to suddenly arrive at this point -- although I can identify the precipitating occurance as actually being mistake I made (as I suppose is often the case with many discoveries, large and small) -- but I've recently opened my ears to the practice of tweaking VTF for each record played, to very worthwhile effect. Generally within a range of up to about +.15 above the upper limit of the cartridge manufacturer's recommended setting of 1.35g-1.5g for my medium-compliance, line-contact MC cart -- i.e., up to 1.65g or anywhere in between, depending on the record being played, in about .025g increments.

Tracking a bit heavier accentuates the lower frequencies and tames the higher ones, for records that could use more weight or solidity and/or a reduction in gleam or glare or airy-fairyness, while tracking lighter does the opposite for records that sound overly thick or could use some opening-up (within the bounds of maintaining good groovewall contact, of course -- I never even run in the bottom half of the recommended range, much less below it). This minor revelation has helped significantly to increase my listening satisfaction with records I formerly would've just chalked-up as being slightly but irretrievably problematic, whether that problem might have been a subtly annoying touch of glassiness or peakiness or lightness in the loafers.

Each recording seems to have its own sweet spot balancing control, tonality, timbre and texture (within my system context), and after doing this individual fine-tuning procedure for a few weeks I've now started to intuit appropriate setting adjustments as needed, based on a record's initial sound and my growing experience with the outcomes. So I've definitely crossed over the proverbial Rubicon regarding tracking force and no longer regard the recommended range as inviolable, or VTF generally as a set-and-forget, one-size-fits-all proposition whose 'correct' value is predetermined, to be temporarily increased only in the event that dynamic-trackability difficulties are encountered. It's another thing to be tweaked! But also one of the easiest and quickest to do (at least with my tonearm -- I guess with some others maybe not so much). Anybody out there with me on this?
zaikesman
zaikesman OP
3,017 posts
 
Hi D, I suspected that this factor might be brought up. It does seem obvious that it should be true in theory. However, I can't help but noting that virtually all cartridge manufacturers specify a recommended range for VTF that's wider -- oftentimes very much wider -- than the relatively narrow range I'm playing around within.

My takeaway is this: Even if the coil may not be perfectly centered in the magnetic gap, this fact in itself would pose no physical threat to record replay (as all manufacturers' specified ranges implicitly acknowledge). Since the 'perfect' setting is something I lack the tools to determine, and as you say is likely to change somewhat with conditions anyway, I can see no reason not to just go with the best or 'correct' setting being the one that sounds the best for any given record under the prevailing conditions (to me, in my system).
dertonarm
1,042 posts
 
Hi Z, no argument from me here. However - the range given for recommended VTF by the cartridge manufacturers is given because of individual variations between samples of the same cartridge as well as variations in climate conditions.
You may "fine tune" VTF to your personal liking, but I would rather look to fine-adjust VTA/SRA to get the best sound from a given record.
Cheers,
D.
onetwothreego
54 posts
 
I would fully agree with Dertonarm on this topic. The correct VTF is the point where the cart internals align and produce the best signal and performance. This varies from cart sample to cart sample so a range is given.

Yes, changing VTF changes the sound and if that floats your boat, then more power to you. I find running at the upper limits of the range kills the sound (and you say you are above that, even) so I doubt we would agree on what the best sound is anyway. :)
zaikesman OP
3,017 posts
 
I was looking at one cartridge manufacturer's website specs the other day where the allowable VTF range equalled 2.5g (obviously this was for a low-compliance design).

As I stipulated, there can be no debate about whether there exists some precise VTF at which a cart's internals will be best aligned. It is certainly open to question however, given the necessarily micro-variable nature of the beast, whether that force will also equal the best match to the compliance of the suspension, which I suspect is more consequential for the sound.

Onetwothreego: I wouldn't assume that just because your cart sounds best in the lower region of its range, that mine (or any other) would too, or that because yours sounds dead in its upper region, that me running mine in its upper region (and above) means I prefer dead sound that you wouldn't like.
onetwothreego
54 posts
 
I didn't say I run my cart in the lower region of VTF. More often than not, when the arm is performing up to spec, the sweet spot is pretty much in the middle of the suggested range, as one might expect.

With all the carts and arms I have used over the years, increasing the VTF to the upper range squashes the music, as far as my ears hear it. Bass loses its bounce and become a thud. The highs become almost forced down into themselves instead of breaking away free. All the musicians lose their timing finesse.

The biggest factor in the equation of all this VTF stuff is not the cart but rather the arm and how well it is doing it's job.
More to discover