[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [ARSCLIST] ELP Turntable (was historical stylus rake angles)
You made a mistake. I feel reckless.
Let me take this opportunity to throw caution to the wind and offer to
trade you a 1950 RCA-Victor 45EY2 model 45 player with an automatic
changer OR the or their 45J2 model (YOUR choice!)
[http://www.linkline.com/personal/edsel/rca.htm...
a visual reference aid] for your "extremely sensitive" ELP turntable.
AND, if you act today, you can enjoy the hi-fi surface noise and
restoration challenge of a handful of (let's say six) well-used James
Brown singles on King and Federal (paper sleeves not included)!
Steven Austin :)
-----Original Message-----
From: Association for Recorded Sound Discussion List
[mailto:ARSCLIST@xxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Jeffrey Kane
Sent: Friday, January 07, 2005 4:41 PM
To: ARSCLIST@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [ARSCLIST] ELP Turntable (was historical stylus rake angles)
My apologies, I should know to be more specific, especially with you
lot. :)
By noise, I'm referring to pops and clicks seemingly caused by dust,
sediment and other contaminants. The player seems to be extremely
sensitive.
Despite the noise blanking feature pops and clicks still seem amplified
far
more than a conventional player, to the point of being intrusive. I
don't
find this to be as much of an issue with 78s (perhaps due to the larger
groove dimensions?), it's primarily an issue with "micro-grooved"
material.
As for surface noise, I originally thought it wouldn't be an issue as
there's no stylus tracing the surface and no contact, thus, no noise. My
understanding was faulty in the extreme, surface noise is as evident as
it
is on conventional playback equipment. It does deal with some surface
defects much better than a conventional player and will play right
through
gouges in the vinyl that would likely tear a stylus from a conventional
cartridge.
The pop/click can be taken care of with external processing; I only wish
it
weren't there in the first place! I made the mistake of purchasing the
player as a replacement for a conventional 'table without researching it
properly. It's a useful tool but its scope of usefulness is
significantly
more limited than I'd thought.
-----Original Message-----
From: Association for Recorded Sound Discussion List
[mailto:ARSCLIST@xxxxxxx] On Behalf Of steven austin
Sent: Friday, January 07, 2005 5:18 PM
To: ARSCLIST@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] Subject: RE: [ARSCLIST] historical stylus rake
angles (SRA)
By "noise," do you mean surface noise? Does the laser read the damage or
sediments in the grooves as noise? I would think an algorithm could get
around that.
Also, wouldn't the zero disc wear be the first concern of archivists,
before sound optimization? I know we have two Grails here, but a
friction-less player would let me invest all my worries into the
reproduction quality challenge.
Steven Austin
-----Original Message-----
From: Association for Recorded Sound Discussion List
[mailto:ARSCLIST@xxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Jeffrey Kane
Sent: Friday, January 07, 2005 2:52 PM
To: ARSCLIST@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] Subject: RE: [ARSCLIST] historical stylus rake
angles (SRA)
RE: The sound; wouldn't say better or worse just... different. If (big
if)
you can get the vinyl clean enough it's a unique listening experience...
I'd
describe it as the difference between film and video. Both will
reproduce
the same image but will do it with quite different subjective results.
IMO, ELP would be video, if you will. It's very very 'fast', almost TOO
fast. The sonic presentation is dry and the dynamics are somewhat
compressed
when the going gets *really* serious. It does have some neat tricks up
its
sleeve but overall I find that it reproduces MORE noise than a given
'table/cartridge combo. It also doesn't seem to do soundstaging as well.
I do wonder what an all out cost no object player would sound like but I
would think they need to address the noise issue first (I cannot
overstate
how noisy playback is).
-----Original Message-----
From: Association for Recorded Sound Discussion List
[mailto:ARSCLIST@xxxxxxx] On Behalf Of steven austin
Sent: Friday, January 07, 2005 4:35 PM
To: ARSCLIST@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] Subject: RE: [ARSCLIST] historical stylus rake
angles (SRA)
But Keith Jarrett has one! (snicker)
Is it really not special? If they could work out the fidelity challenge,
wouldn't it be great to have a no-friction player?
Steven Austin
-----Original Message-----
From: Association for Recorded Sound Discussion List
[mailto:ARSCLIST@xxxxxxx] On Behalf Of James L Wolf
Sent: Friday, January 07, 2005 2:21 PM
To: ARSCLIST@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [ARSCLIST] Subject: RE: [ARSCLIST] historical stylus rake
angles (SRA)
Contary to what some say, the ELP is not a high-fidelity instrument.
It'll track most ordinary discs, but don't ask for much more from it.
Pretty much any needle/cartridge combo sounds better.
James
>>> stevena@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 1/7/2005 3:42:27 PM >>>
Just wondering, along these lines...has anyone ever used an ELP laser
turntable (www.laserturntable.com)?
I wonder if it wouldn't make rake angles a moot point.
Steven Austin
(sorry Eric, for the flub to your email address)
-----Original Message-----
From: Association for Recorded Sound Discussion List
[mailto:ARSCLIST@xxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Eric Jacobs
Sent: Friday, January 07, 2005 11:50 AM
To: ARSCLIST@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [ARSCLIST] historical stylus rake angles (SRA)
Does anyone know of a reference where I might find historical stylus
rake
angles? Even some rough guidance on this list would be useful.
Note that SRA (the angle the stylus makes with the record surface) is
not to
be confused with the Vertical Tracking Angle (VTA) which is the angle
the
cantilever makes with the record surface. Of course, VTA and SRA are
directly related by the angle at which the stylus is mounted to the
cantilever.
Modern cartridges and tonearms are designed for SRA values of zero
(ie.
a
vertical stylus, perpendicular to the record surface) or slightly
positive
to about 3 degrees or so. I realize that SRA values, like VTA, will
vary by
record label and need to be adjusted for each record for optimal
playback if
you are a perfectionist. SRA and VTA are primarily affected by record
thickness and cartridge height.
Variations in SRA (fractions of degrees) are most audible on LPs with
their
lower noise, wider frequency response and narrower grooves making VTA
an
important adjustment for each LP.
How critical is SRA for accurate playback on acoustic or electric 78s
or
transcription discs? Am I making a mountain out of a mole hill?
The reason behind my question is that the 1-2 inches of VTA adjustment
on a
tonearm will only compensate the SRA by a few degrees. In fact,
tonearm
VTA
adjustment is best suited to compensate for variations in cartridge
height
and record thickness since it is assumed that the cartridge SRA is
correct
when the tonearm is level. If historical SRAs used rakes of 5 degees
or
greater, some sort of custom cartridge mount would need to be devised
(a
wedge shaped block or shim) to achieve the correct SRA.
Because of the limitations of tonearm VTA adjustment, it is not
possible
for
me to experiment with large variations in SRA and listen for
differences.
Optical measurements of SRA are not possible with my 150x microscope
with
0.01 mm measurement reticle.
Thanks in advance to anyone who can shed some light on this question.
Eric Jacobs
The Audio Archive
San Jose, California