Telarc 1812 revisited

Dear Jcarr: +++ " backed up my position with measurements supplied by neutral, independent organizations ++++ " ++++

unfortunatelly not direct related measures: that in precise way showed the direct relationship between tracking abilities and distoriton levels.

you posted somewhere:

+++++ " distortion in a cartridge is caused by physical issues (such as tracking resolution) as well as magnetic, and the better the physical aspects (styli with longer and narrower contact patch, more linear dampers, less body resonances, more complete energy evacuation from the cartridge structure),........ for lower moving mass and reduced tracking distortion. " ++++++

your today position already changed because a few months ago tracking distortion was something more important to you.

Now, you posted this too ( I'm still surprised when I read it due that you are a cartridge designer. ):

++++++ " Lyra's markets has been that to go below 0.5mV (5cm/sec) means that many phono stages will be less than happy. The user may hear problems like noise, grain, insufficient bass response, or in less problematic situations, they may simply not hear the improvement in resolution that the lower-output cartridge should be giving them.................

As far as the cartridge is concerned, lower output is more ideal. Lower output means less metal in the coil windings (copper has a specific gravity of 8-9, which is greater than iron!) for lower moving mass and reduced tracking distortion. Lower output also means fewer coil winding layers, which enables the coils to be of cleaner shape and will improve crosstalk, phase response, and channel matching (cleaner-made coils also look much better).

As a cartridge manufacturer, our problem is that the user may not be happy with the sound, but in most cases they will blame it on the cartridge rather than the phono stage or that they have excessive electrical contact points in the signal cabling system (which seems to work OK with MMs, MIs and high-output MCs), but will impair the sound of low-output MCs. Since no manufacturer likes to hear that users are unhappy, we've shifted our cartridges away from where they were some years ago (0.22-25mV, single-layer coils) to our present level (0.5mV, double-layer coils,..... "+++++

I'm surprised that you knowing that the best quality sound can comes from lower output MC cartridges you shift to higher output even against that knowledge. Seems to me that marketing is more important.

Anyway, sooner or latter we will see more and more better LOMC cartridges with higher tracking abilities and I think you will not be an exception. Time is the best judge.

++++ " any worthwhile rebuttals so far... " +++++

well I think " both sides " because you prove nothing, at least not yet.

Anyway, for me this " discussion " was a learning one in several audio and non-audio subjects.

Stay with your today success and be prepared for the future.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.

Dear Peterayer: Here I come again because seems to me that both of you still don't understand why my analogy against the audio subject we are discussing. I posted:

++++++" did you read it somewhere that some car tires give you not only better tracking abilities ( on plane and winding road. ) under any condition but at the same time helps to reduce your gasoline consume?, think about. " +++++

well, think about and when you understand why the gasoline consume is reduced you will understand the audio subject I'm talking about.

The Stereoplay measures means and proves almost nothing in the whole audio subject and seems to me that for the posts here and elsewhere the cartridge tracking abilities and its direct relationship with distortion levels were almost never analized even by JC.

Peter: remember Columbus when said: " the Earth is round ", everybody laughing for say the least. Why everybody laugh?

Years ago here on Agon at audiophile level I remember what happened in each ocasion when I " introduce " the DD turntable as a serious alternative or the MM/MI alternative or the active high gain phonolinepreamp ( instead SUTs ) or the naked alternative on DD turntables or subwoofers or tonearm/cartridge relationship or, or, or,...etc, etc:

everybody laugh of me ( including Dougdeacon that in those times was the " oficial " defender of SUTs ( he was using one. ) and todauy all those very well regarded audiophiles speaks the same language I was talking in those times.

So, I know for sure that in the future times and in favor of the MUSIC enjoyment we will see better LOMC cartridges with higher/top tracking ailities including the ones coming from JC.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.

Hi Raul,
20 years from now, maybe you and I will still be playing our copies of the 1812 Overture and maybe a couple of kids that are just being born today will have gotten the vinyl bug and will be playing it too. There is something to be said to seeing the spinning disc as music pours out of the speakers. The cost of vinyl playback equipment however, is way out of proportion to the availablity of new music on vinyl. Today, it's already down to those dedicated few who want to hear the old music how it was once heard by the masses decades ago. In the meantime, today's populace enjoys their music digitally through either headphones or high dollar hifi systems.

It is getting harder for me to find that perfect overhang point when adjusting my tonearm. I need more light and taller legs. After hearing HD Audio last year on a top end hifi system, I imagine one day going that route. To my ears that had all the advantages of vinyl with none of the noise and set-up work. It made CDs sound flat and lifeless in comparison- on the same system! When it comes down to me deciding on a HD DAC or a new cartridge- for the same amount of money- well, I'm kind of not looking forward to that day.

Raul,

I was never a defender of SUTs, still less the "official" one, whatever that means. Please don't put words in my mouth.

It's true I once used them (as have you). In using them, I learned something of their strengths and weaknesses. I posted what I'd learned when it seemed helpful.

I campaigned neither for nor against them because, as in most things audio, they have their pluses and minuses. SUTs are useful in some systems, less so in others. Those fortunate enough to own $12K+ preamps like your Essential or my Alaap probably do not need them. OTOH, those eager to explore LOMCs on a more limited budget may find that an SUT suits their needs... as I once did. I do not defend SUTs, I defend reasonableness.

As you continue to willfully misconstrue other people's statements, my participation in this thread is no longer indicated.

Dear Toniwinsc: I agree with you. There is no single doubt that digital for we audiophiles ( music lovers. ) is here to stay and with a lot of " land " to improve in the near future.

Even, exist several " old " CD's that are great to listen it and where its analog counterpart ( original or today reissues. ) can't compete with.

For example, take Foreigner 4 ( in both formats. ) or The Wall or Gladiator: in all these sampels and several other ones digital outperforms the analog LPs ( I just bought the today " audiophile " Foreigner 4 just to compare it. ).

I have a modest today/latest digital universal Denon player ( 32/192 DAVCs ) and if you paly a DVDA on it you just can't beleive you are hearing digital, you missed nothing about analog recordings and win sveral improvements on different areas.

Even old digital recorded LPs ( like the Telarc ones. ) outperform the best analog samples.
Of course that not all the Telarc LPs are first rate some are " so so " but the ones that shines are a glorious experience through LP format. Same I can say for the old digital recordings made it by Denon ( first rate. ) but there are other digital labels really bad as: Teldec, some Deutshe Gramaphone or Philips ( I own hundreds of digital recordings on LP. ).

The best analog recording that can compete against the best digital LPs are the D2D and not all these, by-passing the R2R normal tape recording is a huge improvement on the music sound reproduction ( digital permit this. ) of course that LP manufacturers always disagree with those statements and IMHO they do because they are biased through: $$$$$$ and not because really have facts.

There are several areas where digital outperform analog and one of them is in the bass frequency range where lives the music home reproduction foundation.

I think that one of my firsts posts where I said that digital outperforms analog was 4-5 years ago ( maybe more ) and as always when people don't understand the why's just laughed of those posts and I need not to listen trough a dSc digital combo ( 150 K ) but trough a simple units as my today Denon.

+++++ " After hearing HD Audio last year on a top end hifi system, I imagine one day going that route. To my ears that had all the advantages of vinyl with none of the noise and set-up work. It made CDs sound flat and lifeless in comparison- on the same system! +++++ "

I don't have experience with the HD but I know exactly what you mean and agree.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.