Analog Magik

[maxbara]

One of the issues I've always struggled with in AM is drifting readings as tracks progress. This has always been a roadblock with VTA for me, for instance, as I could never determine whether improvements were being made or not. Well, today, I found a way...

Starting at my current VTA setting I played the VTA track and watched the numbers rise over time, and noted that one channel consistently hit 5% IMD before the other after 30+ seconds or readings and I wondered whether I could use that 5% threshold as a relative comparison mark for making repeatable measurements. So I made a bunch of readings using various stepped VTA (very easy to adjust on Kuzma 4Point) changes and made notes of the value of one channel when the other hit 5%. It showed a clear "pivot" point around which readings in the other channel got better or worse (closer or further from the targetted channel's IMD%). Repeating various VTA readings confirmed this. So, I then corrected VTF and Azimuth at that pivot point and started again. This time using VTA adjustments half the size of before (the binary chop approach of homing in on a correct position) and, for the first time, I noticed much better tracking between the two channels and so was able to focus on 4% as the pivot point. Same results - a VTA pivot point was found - now much closer to the previous one than my starting position. Again, I corrected Azimuth and VTF and tried a third time. VTA adjustments were now half again and only needed one change after which the numbers tracked very closely in both channels across the duration of the VTA track and further changes in VTA increased errors both ways, so I settled on this as the final position. Checking Azimuth I found it hadn't changed this time and VTF had changed slightly, but I left it alone so as not to upset VTA.

Final results were VTA IMD% hovering around 4% after 30-45 seconds and within a 0.15% difference between both channels for the duration (I'm assuming Zenith error is present and this number could be lower), down from 6%+ in one and differences of up to 1%, and azimuth was within 0.1dB in both channels and VTF was in my nominal preferred position.

I seem to have finally found a way to work with VTA in AM...

1. Ensure azimuth and VTF are correctly set
2. Watch a reading over 30-45 seconds and watch for which channel is highest, reaching an integer value after that duration, eg 4%, 5% whatever
3. Choose that % reading and use this as the target point for readings.
4. Now take some VTA readings, with adjustments being half the size of the previous round, and make note of what each reading is when the target channel hits the target IMD%
5. Hopefully you find a pivot point around which numbers get worse in both directions. That pivot point becomes the new VTA position.
6. Go to 1

At some point you should notice that changing VTA either way causes a swing away from the current pivot and that it's time to stop. The binary chop approach should get you to that position in the fewest iterations. Always double check azimuth and VTF - hopefully they don't need changing after the final position is found. If they do, then there's probably more work to do, depending on how precise you want to be, but at some point you need to stop!

My hope is that v2 of AM has some sort of rolling averaging window or something similar to help make readings quicker and more consistent but I'm happy I seem to have found a method for working with a drifting VTA reading.

My assumption with the above approach is that balanced numbers in each channel is a superior result to one channel being as low as possible at the expense of the other channel.

Anybody see any problems with the approach I outlined, with regards AnalogMagik?

Hi,
being not English I have problems totally understand your procedure,
could you explain fool proof?
in point 4 are you using one channel for reference and the other one to measure?
Thanks
Max

 

[rDin]

Hi,
being not English I have problems totally understand your procedure,
could you explain fool proof?
in point 4 are you using one channel for reference and the other one to measure?
Thanks
Max

Yes. In step 3 you choose your target % for one channel based on what you see in step 2 when you let the readings run for 30-45 seconds, eg if 5% IMD. In step 4 you take readings watching for the chosen channel to reach the target, eg 5% - when that target is reached you take the reading from the other channel. Now you can make adjustments to VTA and take another reading in the same way - this method should clearly reveal whether your adjustment is making things better (closer to the target channel) or worse (further from the target channel). Each time you go through the steps and come back to step 4 you then make smaller adjustments than the previous time to dial in to the best result. So, you start making big adjustments just to see which direction things change (better/worse) and then smaller and smaller adjustments to dial things in.

I'm still not convinced what I'm doing is a valid approach, but at least it's an objective and repeatable approach. Listening since using this approach certainly sounds very good.

 

[kodomo]

I have spent a good part of my Sunday with analog magik.

I have found out that if the alignment is at its very best, the numbers do not vary too much. However, when I say at its best, I mean at its best! If you do not have something as good as smartractor forget it. Thank god I have one.

Anyway, I have developed a routine for azymuth, vta etc. I take notes at 5, 10, 15, 20 frames (I do not know what to call it, it is the counter on the windows) then do the same for the second channel. I look for the lowest and highest corresponding differences. By doing this I have reached 0,02db to 0,1db matching between channels. I have also taken the vta distortion from %1,4 to %2,3, R and L has different results but within this margins. Fo anti skating it is below %1, one channel rises while one drops and they meet around 0,6. For vtf I choose my manufacturers recommended exact number and did everything based upon that, checking every time I changed vta or as. My wow and flutter is 0,06 which is good. To note, the 45rpm has every parameter better! So, another addition as to why a 45rpm pressing sounds better.

All in all I do not know any other setup tool that does this. I had feickart adjust+ too. Analog magik has very good potential but needs refining and a good reporting system rather than having only live feedback and taking notes. This was a trial on Sunday thanks to my local dealer and I decided to get it to get the next version for a better price.

 

[tima]

Analog magik has very good potential but needs refining and a good reporting system rather than having only live feedback and taking notes.

exactly - hopefully next version has mean or average or something more than streaming numbers.

 

[mtemur]

I have spent a good part of my Sunday with analog magik.

I have found out that if the alignment is at its very best, the numbers do not vary too much. However, when I say at its best, I mean at its best! If you do not have something as good as smartractor forget it. Thank god I have one.

Anyway, I have developed a routine for azymuth, vta etc. I take notes at 5, 10, 15, 20 frames (I do not know what to call it, it is the counter on the windows) then do the same for the second channel. I look for the lowest and highest corresponding differences. By doing this I have reached 0,02db to 0,1db matching between channels. I have also taken the vta distortion from %1,4 to %2,3, R and L has different results but within this margins. Fo anti skating it is below %1, one channel rises while one drops and they meet around 0,6. For vtf I choose my manufacturers recommended exact number and did everything based upon that, checking every time I changed vta or as. My wow and flutter is 0,06 which is good. To note, the 45rpm has every parameter better! So, another addition as to why a 45rpm pressing sounds better.

All in all I do not know any other setup tool that does this. I had feickart adjust+ too. Analog magik has very good potential but needs refining and a good reporting system rather than having only live feedback and taking notes. This was a trial on Sunday thanks to my local dealer and I decided to get it to get the next version for a better price.

Congratulations. Thank you for sharing your experience with AM. Unfortunately we users can maximize our benefits by only relying on each other’s experience cause manual is not helping.

Additionally you may want to check Resonance track IOT measure tonearm-cartridge resonance frequency and more importantly cartridge’s suspension. If everything is in order, that track can give you a hint about the health of suspension.

 

[mtemur]

exactly - hopefully next version has mean or average or something more than streaming numbers.

My way of solving confusion imposed by constantly changing numbers is always using the beginning of vta, azimuth, vtf and end of anti skating track. I note numbers than compare during alignment process.

 

[kodomo]

My way of solving confusion imposed by constantly changing numbers is always using the beginning of vta, azimuth, vtf and end of anti skating track. I note numbers than compare during alignment process.

I found the beginning point a little unreliable for a few reasons, like it may be the start of the groove or it may be needle just landing etc., that is why I wait until frame 5 and get 10, 15 and 20. I actually have also tried keeping 25 and 30 but in total it showed the same correlation with my 4 other frames so I did not continue to do so and saved some time.

 

[mtemur]

I found the beginning point a little unreliable for a few reasons, like it may be the start of the groove or it may be needle just landing etc., that is why I wait until frame 5 and get 10, 15 and 20. I actually have also tried keeping 25 and 30 but in total it showed the same correlation with my 4 other frames so I did not continue to do so and saved some time.

It’s very reliable and exact. All you need to do land the stylus on silence before the track and hit the start button as soon as you see signal coming through on art phono (green light). but also it’s better to stick whichever procedure works best for you.

 

[bazelio]

Some of the parameters already are reported as a real time running average. It makes sense in some cases to report running average, but not in others. The user *should* be capable of taking simple notes. The tool should not dumb things down. That's why Adjust+ is rather ineffective.

 

[bazelio]

My way of solving confusion imposed by constantly changing numbers is always using the beginning of vta, azimuth, vtf and end of anti skating track. I note numbers than compare during alignment process.

I follow roughly the same approach. But I don't just use beginning of track. I try to use the same track segments for the same duration repetitively in order to achieve correlation.

 

[kodomo]

Some of the parameters already are reported as a real time running average. It makes sense in some cases to report running average, but not in others. The user *should* be capable of taking simple notes. The tool should not dumb things down. That's why Adjust+ is rather ineffective.

I am talking about reports at the end of measurements, there is no dumbing down with that. You can still see all the data as it is being accumulated. In the end, reports are very helpful to interpret data further. As you can see, you choose some frames, MTemur chose others. If one wants to see all the instances of data as text you can just get it as a report and choose whichever you like afterwards. You can also have different types of graphs drawn based upon this data and superimpose them on top of each other. These would help interpret the data better if nothing else. Actually, it is a waste accumulating all that data but not saving it whole and be able to have reports of them.

 

[bazelio]

I am talking about reports at the end of measurements, there is no dumbing down with that. You can still see all the data as it is being accumulated. In the end, reports are very helpful to interpret data further. As you can see, you choose some frames, MTemur chose others. If one wants to see all the instances of data as text you can just get it as a report and choose whichever you like afterwards. You can also have different types graphs drawn based upon this data and superimpose them on top of each other. These would help interpret the data better if nothing else. Actually, it is a waste accumulating all that data but not saving it whole and be able to have reports of them.

Yes, that would be a nice enhancement. A post-run analysis with graphs, statistics (mean, std. dev, etc, min/max, etc). That'd be fantastic. Heck, I want a single track on an entire side of a test record to allow the tool to plot tracking distortion across the entire surface of a record. Let's see what we get. It's a small operation. What I don't want is a general purpose analysis tool turned into a dummy-proof push-button "here's the result" toy.

 

[scot]

Hi all

Does anyone have any idea when Audio Magik plans on releasing their newest version? Thank you.

Beat regards
Scot

 

[tima]

exactly - hopefully next version has mean or average or something more than streaming numbers.

No one is asking AM to 'dumb down'.
Graphing is an excellent idea. The computer is an excellent note taker.
This can be a better product.

 

[Kcin]

Yes, that would be a nice enhancement. A post-run analysis with graphs, statistics (mean, std. dev, etc, min/max, etc). That'd be fantastic. Heck, I want a single track on an entire side of a test record to allow the tool to plot tracking distortion across the entire surface of a record. Let's see what we get. It's a small operation. What I don't want is a general purpose analysis tool turned into a dummy-proof push-button "here's the result" toy.

Richard Mak is a founding member of our audio club.

Rick designed this tool for himself- it subsequently turned into a commercial project. The discussions I have with Rick - no one is getting rich on this tool, I think there will be some good enhancements but it is an evolution- it will continue to be so. The expense to re-code , test and in this new up-coming version, re- press is substantial.

So it will be an evolutionary improvement for certain, will it have everything we picky audiophiles want?- probably not. I am sure it will offer some new enhancements that will make it more intuitive and useful. Rick is tight lipped until it goes out of beta and into production.

The other thing about Rick is - he is one of the kindest and sincere people I have ever met in this hobby. He is doing all of this for passion -the rest of us benefit from his devotion.

We will see it soon enough, I'm sure.

 

[bazelio]

@Kcin
That all makes sense. This is a tool that was incidentally productized. A number of users have called for what essentially amounts to a dilution of capabilities in the name of usability in the past. But it sounds like (and based on beta screenshots) it'll remain the same tool with enhancement to certain measurement or analysis techniques along with the addition of direct measurements for things like zenith that were not available in version 1. Since AM is what showed me that Zenith is a big, big deal and also hyper-sensitive, new capabilities in this area are exciting. Taking the next step towards guiding setup through the inter-dependencies of seemingly disparate alignment parameters especially by highlighting the first order problems is going to help a lot of people. Just how much I'd left on the table prior to AM by relying solely upon mirrors and magnifiers for zenith is fairly astounding.

 

[kodomo]

These screenshots are taken from Richard Mak's facebook page. It is good to see the graphs showing trends for azymuth and vta. It is also good to have a practical print screen button. New additions are certainly welcome and gives me hope.

@Kcin please say hello and give my regards to Mr. Mak, I thank him for his efforts.

 

[dennis h]

Congratulations. Thank you for sharing your experience with AM. Unfortunately we users can maximize our benefits by only relying on each other’s experience cause manual is not helping.

Additionally you may want to check Resonance track IOT measure tonearm-cartridge resonance frequency and more importantly cartridge’s suspension. If everything is in order, that track can give you a hint about the health of suspension.

Could you expand on this kind sir ?
Any examples ?

 

[mtemur]

Could you expand on this kind sir ?
Any examples ?

I don’t have pictures for a better description but the peak frequency reading on AM should be very close or equal to calculated tonearm cartridge resonance frequency. It should rise to a point close to calculated and should remain unchanged till the end of the track (30Hz).

If it (peak frequency) continues to change, rise together with the current frequency, channels don’t follow each other, one or both channels’ volume momentarily hits all the way up or if your cartridge can not track the whole track then there is a problem with suspension/damper. Please remember this is only true if your cartridge, tonearm, alignment, rear weight and cartridge screws -shortly everything- is properly set and working fine.

 

[kodomo]

Are there any updated news on when the 2nd version will be out?