2. analog
  3. 1325141286

Using Test LP - curious observations

I've been tremendously enjoying my Lyra Delos with the Classic for about 1.5 yrs now, and just recently remembered I had the Hi-Fi News Analogue Test LP and got the urge to test my setup.
Here are some of my observations that came as a surprise to me:
1) Anti-skate (Bands 6,7,8,9 on side one) - the cartridge "passed" the test on Band 6 without any anti-skate, but there was audible buzzing coming from the right channel at higher amplitudes. Applying anti-skate made NO difference whatsoever to the results, whether on setting 1, 2 or 3 (most anti-skate). I prefer the sound without anti-skate so this only seemed to confirm that applying anti-skate arguably does nothing to improve the sound and likely makes it worse. It also seems to shed some light on why Harry doesn't like anti-skate.
2) Azimuth (Band 5 on side two) - My preamp has a mono switch so this seemed pretty straightforward. According to the instructions, there should be minimal (if any) mono output if the cartridge was aligned perfectly. Well, there was certainly some output, which immediately worried me, but what really left me scratching my head was the fact that no adjustment appeared to correct it, or make a significant difference. I use the Soundsmith's Counter Intuitive to fine-adjust VTF and azimuth, and after about 2 hours of a wide range of adjustments in azimuth through the CI, it was virtually impossible to determine the optimal azimuth setting, i.e., the output seemed consistently the same regardless of adjustments.

Please free to comment, share your experiences or explain my curious results. Or are they not curious?
actusreus
moonglum
619 posts
 
Dear Actus....For information, to get the described benefits of zero antiskate are you currently using the recommended downforce of ~1.76g with the Delos?
One practice is to maximise the downforce or even go beyond the Manufacturers recommended range to persuade the cart to track. (I've never been convinced about the need to do this, despite persuasive arguments to the contrary, but the Delos is a rare case in which downforce overload is particularly not recommended - while I acknowledge that in theory such restraint should really apply to ALL cartridges :)
Sometimes you feel downforce overload may be correcting other problems e.g. wrong SRA. However this is only my opinion.

If indeed 1.76g, are you certain there is no bias i.e. when you balance your tonearm does it remain stationary or does it sign to one side or the other?
If it does remain stationary this can also be because friction in the bearing/s can be enough to overcome any residual bias.(Noticeable with old gimballed arms)
Best regards...
lewm
13,321 posts
 
Actusreus,
This idea may be erroneous from the get-go, but I believe (without searching for a photo) that the VPI tonearm is one of those that has the wiring sticking up from the arm tube near the pivot. If so, it may well be that the added "force" required to move the wiring along as the cartridge traverses the LP may be just enough to serve as adequate anti-skate force with your cartridge at your chosen tracking weight. Likewise for many tonearms (e.g., Reed, Talea, Grandezza) that are similarly designed.

But make no mistake, there is a skating force generated with any pivoted tonearm where the stylus does not remain constantly tangent to the groove walls (meaning head-shell offset angle is also a factor, IMO).
nanbil's avatar
nanbil
40 posts
 
I didn't mean to suggest that a better phono pre-amp would fix anti-skating issues-sorry if that was the impression I left. I was just passing along my observation that the distortion produced by the tone generated on bands 6-9 were mostly caused by my phono section and not problems generated by incorrect anti-skating numbers. With the better phono section in place getting a clearer picture as to proper anti-skating values was much easier. I was surprised at how much my previous phono section added to the buzzing heard in bands 7-9.
dougdeacon
3,338 posts
 
A degree of anti-skate is essential.
Recordings such as soprano with piano accompaniment can be useful. The soprano is usually well centred and will produce sustained notes not dissimilar to a test tone. In this way you adjust against any "edginess" on the most intense signals.
The idea is that it should barely handle these real world signals and no more.
Wholeheartedly agree with all of the above EXCEPT the first sentence, which deduces a general principle from a single example while ignoring multiple contrary examples already posted on this thread.

Moonglum's rig requires A/S to eliminate edginess on the most intense signals. My rig does not (with most cartridges). Five of Audiofeil's six rigs do not but one does (with some cartridges). CONCLUSION: some rigs require A/S for clean play, some do not. Any absolute statement one way or the other is demonstrably false.

I do use Moonglum's recommended recording types and listen for exactly what he described. The sound tells me how much A/S I need... if any.

Doug

P. S. I do not play with excessive VTF to compensate for low/zero A/S. In fact, I play my reference cartridge well below the midpoint of its recommended range, just barely above its mistracking point, exactly as Moonglum recommended.
dougdeacon
3,338 posts
 
I was surprised at how much my previous phono section added to the buzzing heard in bands 7-9.
Nanbil, that makes perfect sense and is consistent with the observations made by Atmasphere and myself on this thread . The noise source being discussed there was record surface noise (clicks and pops) but the mechanism applies equally to the high velocity/high amplitude transients on some test records (including, most definitely, tracks 6-9 on side 1 of the HFN&RR record). Read Atmasphere's last post for a technical explanation.

As your new phono stage reduced the distortion of buzzing from this stupid test record, I'd wager that it also reduced the distortion of record surface noises... right?
More to discover