Telarc 1812 revisited


I've posted several threads about the trackability of this record and have received many scholarly answers, with emphasis on physics, geometry, compliance, weight, angles,price and all sorts of scientific explanations about tonearms, cartridges, VTA, etc, etc. Let's cut to the chase: I have a 1970's Pioneer 540 in the garage I bought for $5 at a thrift store plus an Audio Technica cartridge for which I paid $30 This combo. tracks the Telarc 1812 perfectly without problems while my $4000 Rega and $1200 Project bounce out of the grooves.. I'd really finally like to get some explanation and resolution as to this discrepanccy
boofer
Hi Raul: The Audioquest is a very, very old design that has little to do with the Lyra cartridges of today. The mechanical concepts are different, the magnetic concepts are different, the suspension concepts are different, the stylus design is different...

The Akiva's weight, compliance, key dimensions etc. were designed to optimally match the Linn Ekos tonearm. And unlike our "Lyra" branded designs, it had a plastic body. However, the core design of the Akiva (including the cantilever and suspension sections) is not so different from other cartridges that I designed around that period, such as the Argo and Titan.

I repeat that to track the 1812 has never been my goal - not even remotely - so for me personally this entire thread is a non-issue. The only major statement that I dispute is that extreme tracking ability is the key parameter that should be used in general to distinguish OK cartridges from not OK cartridges. This is like claiming that the ability to take a certain corner at 455mph at one particular race track in the entire world is what distinguishes an excellent motorcar from a so-so one, even though the legal limit for public roads in every country is 60mph or 80mph.

But Raul, if the Akiva is the cartridge that pushes your buttons, I am happy for you. Enjoy, and perhaps consider picking up a spare (prices of low-hour Akivas have dropped somewhat now that the Kandid has replaced it as Linn's top model).

Regarding tonearm resonance and tracking performance, a tonearm acts as a high-pass mechanical filter to relieve the cartridge of reproducing low frequencies that are below the tonearm resonant frequency. The resonant frequency is normally placed between 8-12 Hz because this filters out pressing defects such as warp wow components while leaving the music mostly intact. If the resonant frequency is set higher than 12Hz, the tonearm will start to respond to bass signals rather than the cartridge, which is good for tracking, but may attenuate what the cartridge reproduces of the LP's lowermost frequencies.

Hi Dover:

>have you tried a FR64S on your Final Audio TT?

Certainly. It's not bad, although outclassed by modern tonearms such as the Graham Phantom Supreme, and vintage arms such as the Technics EPA100MkII (caveat - my EPA-100 has been completely rebuilt with ceramic ball-bearings rather than the original rubies, and rewired with flying-lead signal outputs instead of the original 5-pin connector).

>I do not get any upper midrange coloration in my system.

In my applications, adding constrained-layer damping to the armtube made it considerably more neutral to my ears, and made the dynamics more linear.

>I use static balance only with this arm which opened the soundstage and improved resolution considerably compared with the use of dynamic balance when using a LOMC.

After trying dynamic, static, and combining the two, I found that a combination worked best.

I have a spare FR-64S that I am planning to rebuild with an alternative armtube of different geometry and more sophisticated construction. The FR64S is a nice tonearm for experimentation.

BTW, Dover, are you aware of the original Kitamura generation Final Audio Labs, or are you only familiar with the brand post-Takai?

kind regards, jonathan carr
Dear friends: Maybe you can think that I'm in love with bass frequency range because some of the LP's that are in my overall evaluation process shows it.

The original Telarc 1812 is a great recording, and not because the cannon shots, by any standards. Yes, it's an old full digital recording ( Soundstream system. ) and way better than several full analog recordings.
Other than the cannon shots the recording has several bass passages with timpany and big drum along explosive cymbals with a dynamic power no other recording I heard ( elsewhere ) can even, it's the nearest sounds ( on that regards. ) to a live music experience.

Do you want to know how good is your system? do you want to know how higher or lower are the distortions generated by your audio system?

Well, you need this recording to know it for sure. In the other side the Telarc 1812 is a very good tool to be sure about the VTA/SRA and LOMC load impedance set up, the recording can tell you how good is your set up on these and other regards.

the recording has 2-3 passages where you can hear at the rear of the stage the sound of a triangle and tambourine instruments. Well, the first time that appears is after the first timpany/big drum/cymbals grooves followed by a passage with chords, horns and wood instruments: here on the left side must be appears first the triangle sound where you need to identify ( clearly/precise ) the triangle full melody identifiying not only the fundamental notes but the triangle distinctive harmonics.
Depending on the VTA/SRA set up accuracy you will hear it complete or only the fundamental notes or can't listen the triangle melody or even you can't hear the triangle sounds.
When you can't hear it even with changes in VTA/SRA then you want to try a different load impedance and for sure it will appears. The quality level you achieve on this triangle tell you a lot of your system set up and kind of resolution and distortion levels.
In this same first triangle passage comes a short passage ( last recording soundstage layer too. ) with the tambourine in the same left side that you must heard if exist the right cartridge overall sxet up.

As I said the 1812 is not only a good digital recording but a useful set up tool.

+++++ " And that was no trick. " ++++

the Telarc 1812 is in no way a " trick ".

Btw, the bass " jump " ( as you said ) factor means more about system higher distortions than real low bass with full power dynamic.

If your system has a " pristine " bass management that " jump " doe's not exist ( I know because I had in my system when I thought that that were the right deep bass performancve but I learned to confirm I was wrong. ) not even " bass flor-shaking ". What makes that flor shacking performance in that low frequency range normally are more high distortions than an accurate and neutral quality performance to achieve this we always need a pair ( at least ) of powered subwoofers with a system integration in a true stereo fashion not using it as system bass reinforcement.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear Dover: +++++ " Most of your cartridges are very old, up to 30 yrs old, ...... your test results are irrelevant and cannot be used to provide conclusive evidence of a particular cartridges tracking ability. " +++++

you can't be more wrong with that.

The Akiva is not a 30 years old or the Dynavector XV-1s or the Denon DS1 or the Wilson Benesh or the Lyra Helikon or the Lyra Titan i or the Clearaudio Goldfinger or the Koetsu Coralstone or the AT Supreme or Allaerts F1 or Allaerts Gold or the Audioquest or the Colibri or or or or .... I own or heard in my system all those " modern " cartridges ( and many more ) along 30+ cartridges and with all I runned my evaluation process that include the Telarc 1812.

If you have no evidence today first hand evidence/facts with original Telarc 1812 then IMHO what's irrelevant is what you posted against any of my posts here.

I know that you are accustomed to higher distortions that I'm that's why you are in love with tube technology or FR64/66 or even the 13D ( I own two samples on this. ) that can't track the Telarc 1812.

Of course that I respect your opinion but you are talking of a " no-sense " subject.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear J.Carr: ++++ " However, the core design of the Akiva (including the cantilever and suspension sections) is not so different from other cartridges that I designed around that period, such as the Argo and Titan. " +++++

I don't have a second sample of the Akiva so I don't know for sure if my sample kind of performance is a Linn characteristic or my sample is a " faulty " one with that great characteristic and great quality level sound.

+++++ " The only major statement that I dispute is that extreme tracking ability is the key parameter that should be used in general to distinguish OK cartridges from not OK cartridges. " +++++

of course that I can't argue your opinion: you are the expert here you are a cartridge designer where I'm only an audiophile that likes to make tests and time to time think " out of the box ".

J.Carr, I'm " absolutely sure that the Titan i or the Atlas or the Ortofon Anna or any other today cartridge would/could ( ? ) performs at way better quality if the cartridge tracking abilities ( by design ) were better were improved.

Please forgeret about any other related cartridge subject ( are so many. ): IMHO a better intrinsic cartridge tracking abilities means lower distortions and if your goal is a better sound then try to lower distortions ( by design ) at all cartridge stages is a main target ( I think??? ).

As I said I'm not an expert but if today I want to start a cartridge design enterprise my first target is to design a cartridge with the lower distortions I can. A lower distortion audio item means: accuracy and neutral performance. Of course that there are several characteristics/parameters on the cartridge design that we have to acomplish for the cartridge sounds good and at the same time with the lower distortions we can.

The main audio system enemy are: distortions in all its forms.

Thank's for your patience and if you can: think about.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
The triangle/tambourine passage I named start 7 minutes after the begin the first note on the 1812 LP.

Btw, is important that when you are evaluating the quality performance of an audio system t do it at different SPL's especially in the high level that can tell you more than at low levels.

When I make this kind of system distortion evaluations the acid test is at: 95-97 continuous SPL at seat position with peaks in the 105-107 SPL.

R.