RB300 maintainance...

Make the following arm test:

Place the stylus guard in place, and put the arm in perfect balance at zero grams, the anti-skating at zero too. Then slighly tap with your finger the arm to slide it towards the spindle and to the back, to rest position. The arm should be travel free as a feather. If you noted hesitation or any anomalies, unfortunally the bearings were damaged in a degree accordingly to the anomallly.

I hope this is not your case, because there no more could be done to fix it, only the manufacturer.

Listen to cds or just the middle of lps. Another reason to hail the lps as the "superior medium", I guess. BTW, is it "analog" qua analog that sounds better or the lp storage/retrieval medium itself? Put another way: has anyone (aside from people in the biz which don't seem to bother with Agon and such) ever heard analog master tapes to determine whether the lack of impact noise lets the touted analog liquidity shine through? Insofar as your problem goes: once properly set-up, any tonearm describing an arc can only be optimized at two points on the record, the tracking error will always be greater towards the inner grooves. That's life I guess, although I am sure some wise guy/gal out there will have some new audio-gibberish explanation to set up the arm voodoo tweaking so that the laws of physics (and geometry in this instance) cease to apply and that their golden ear has assured them that they are on to something that no one, hitherto, believed possible. People have tried radial tracking arms to avoid this problem, causing other gremlins I understand,. The other solution is the use of a longer, or broadcast-type tonearm; these have not caught on have they. Like I said, tonearms can only do so much. Don't try to transcend the limits of those things, you'll only end-up feeling dejected and sad.

I've used protractor that alignes the cartridge to the middle grove and to the edge groove.
What is the price of Denessen Cartridge Protractor?
Now I'm staying tuned to check the bearings.

I have, in fact, listened to master tapes and done a direct A/B comparison with the same recordings on vinyl as Pbb asks. I don't want to fuss over playback software because it really is the music that counts but let me expand. This opportunity was provided to a few lucky folks in Omaha at The Sound Environment and was (as you might guess) sponsored by Linn. Since I already had an LP12 and accidentally dropped by I paid careful attention to the way things were set up. The huge tape machine was connected to the preamplifier just like you would do at home. The turntable was normally connected to the same preamplifier. I was trying to determine the legitimacy of the comparison and found this to be an honest attempt with no apparent tom-foolery. I'm certainly not a reviewer nor am I an audio technical person but I was blessed with very good hearing and a deep love for good music. I will try to give my best shot at describing what I heard under very close to perfect conditions.

The master tape was dead silent between passages. The LP12 provided a slight sense of pressure between tracks. This was at a very high volume level. The tape allowed detail, overtones and recording room acoustics that actually made the listening room disappear. I have never heard anything that realistic since. The LP12 came so close to recreating the tape that I vividly recall chills running up and down my spine. To be honest, the vinyl source confined the listener to the physical confines of the listening room. It seemed to me that perhaps some of the recording room acoustics were lost in the vinyl playback but let me say that the difference was very, very small.

While I admittedly know very little about electronics I do know quite a bit about mechanics. If the lathe cutter head is fed all the information while making a master disc, then all the information is in the groove. Extracting all that information is difficult and costly and is perhaps impossible. At least it is there waiting for someone to conquer the extraction. The same cannot be said in the digital domain as yet. A thousand years from now it will still be impossible to extract all of the original recording room sounds from early cd releases. The information is simply not there. The same criticism cannot be leveled against vinyl examples made at the same time.

Please don't take this as a condemnation of the digital format. At this point in time digital can be exceptionally good and it will only get better. I believe digital will one day become the best software format. For now and well into the future their is room for both formats in this hoby.

I have some really great examples of the analog recording process as it has evolved. First patented in 1892, the Edison gold molded records were cylinders. The original recording was on wire. The first commercial stereo recordings were made by Bell Labs in 1931. Analog has evolved and so will digital. It's doubtful that the shiny little discs used today will still be the software of tomorrow. When the mechanics of spinning the cd and the movement of the laser are found to be the biggest source of audible degradation, a new software format will emerge.

Thanks to Gary and Cindy at The Audio Gallery in Lake Oswego, Oregon I have heard a CDP that sounds perhaps better than my turntable. Problem is, it won't play any of my records. So, after over 35 years of accumulating vinyl I have embraced both formats. If something new that I like is available on vinyl I buy that. If it isn't, I by the CD. I don't feel snobbish about being a vinyl junky but I bristle when insults are lobbed at my favorite playback medium. It's like telling me my wife is ugly. That has nothing to do with whether she is a good wife. Marakanetz has a mechanical problem with a turntable. Once the problem is resolved, and while listening to the entire side of an lp, there will be no audible difference from the first note to the last.

Happy listening,
Patrick