State of the industry - Roy Gregory Editorial

[andromedaaudio]

There is much better gear available , where talking SOTA designs here .
What does the manufacturer state ?
Let me say something else then has there ever been a study as to how much of a tolerance is allowed for it being detectable by ear .
Just making things run at a more accurate speed , seems kinda overkill if i look at some of the designs and how they sound

 

[Audiophile Bill]

eerr, apps measuring health data for diagnosing have been registered so I'm not sure what the issue is unless you compare specificity and sensitivity between the app using measurement protocol and whatever the gold standard is (if there is one since a lot of measurements are being used out of want for a better one and not because the method use is the best available)

Absolutely correct. There is merit in the app if the test / retest reliability is high within sample and you apply averaging too.

I have used these apps and get *very* similar outputs every single time I repeat the test on the same TT.

 

[MarcelNL]

There is much better gear available , where talking SOTA designs here .
What does the manufacturer state ?
Let me say something else then has there ever been a study as to how much of a tolerance is allowed for it being detectable by ear .
Just making things run at a more accurate speed , seems kinda overkill if i look at some of the designs and how they sound

I've heard the effects of optimizing a three phase TT motor for vibration and the numbers correlated spot on, I suggest you talk to Jaap @hanzehifi or look up what they do. TT speed is likely a no brainer, 33.3333 RPM WILL sound different then 45RPM you don't need to measure that with any precision ;-)

 

[Audiophile Bill]

There is much better gear available , where talking SOTA designs here .
What does the manufacturer state ?
Let me say something else then has there ever been a study as to how much of a tolerance is allowed for it being detectable by ear .
Just making things run at a more accurate speed , seems kinda overkill if i look at some of the designs and how they sound

A few comments if I may:

> There are better means of measuring audio gear (TTs here) accurately as employed by hifi news for example (and others)
> A study to examine how much tolerance on w/f is acceptable would require a very large sample size to have any meaning. You will find that some “tone deaf” people will lie on a fairly wide low end of the 95% CI for this
> People are more sensitive to W/f than to absolute speed stability unless you have perfect pitch
> The apps are to be used cautiously as a data point not to say product x has speed stability y but measuring an entire cohort of TTs using such a tool provides a ranking and this ranking just so happens to tally closely with scientifically measured rankings (note rankings not values)
> Industry published data on their own products are rarely accurate and indeed misleading. Only have to look at how often hifi news demonstrate the manufacturer specs are out. They are conveniently never out in the direction of desire (too accurate, too sensitive, too speed stable, too powerful)

 

[bonzo75]

@Mike Lavigne do you know at what point can you distinguish changes in sound due to change in speed, or change in wow flutte? Did you do any such tests on NVS when they were designing/building it? What variance was minimum acceptable?

 

[andromedaaudio]

Does 33,337 sound worse then 33,332 ?



I have seen some of the most monstrous TT designs in munich with mediocre sound

 

[Audiophile Bill]

Does 33,337 sound worse then 33,332 ?



If seen some of most monstrous TT designs in munich with mediocre sound

Nope because you and 99.99% of population don’t have perfect pitch

Wrong parameter. W/F is where we are more sensitive.

 

[Mike Lavigne]

@Mike Lavigne do you know at what point can you distinguish changes in sound due to change in speed, or change in wow flutte?

not really. none of my tt's have audible issues with wow or flutter. more degrees of ease and degrees of grip as the tt's warm up.

Did you do any such tests on NVS when they were designing/building it?

i was not directly involved. not much i can tell about it. the NVS designers did compare it to my Rockport as a reference.

What variance was minimum acceptable?

don't know.

when i first had the prototype NVS, and then the first production version, my speed references were the Rockport Sirius III, the Dobbins Technics SP-10 Mk2, and Dobbins SP-10 Mk3, and Dobbins 'The Beat'. none of which were speed stability (or accuracy) challenged. i was not then, and never have been, a measurer. at that time i felt that the NVS was equivalent to the Rockport, and i preferred it those others, so i sold those others and kept the NVS.

at that time, i also had a Dobbins Garrard 301 with the Loricraft Power Supply. that was clearly (speed/drive) colored in a wonderful way which played to certain music and got in the way with others. not exactly sure if it was the noise or speed of the 301 that was the problem....if there was a problem.

4 years ago i did sell my NVS, intending to switch tt's, decided not to switch, and ended up with a different brand new NVS. this one had a more recent algorithm for it's motor controller. it does sound a bit sexier than my original NVS. not a big change, but better.

now 11-12 years later i've added the CS Port string drive, and the Saskia idler, and i get to enjoy different drive types. both without servo's. i especially observe how the CS Port speed changes and stabilizes over the first 90 minutes, then the next couple of hours, and appreciate what goes on there. but honestly even after 10 minutes, and observing the strobe speed info and that it's still running slow, the CS Port sound is still amazing, so speed is not so big a deal to enjoy the music. more solidity and tonal continuousness. same with the Saskia, but much less a change.

the NVS does sound better after about 30 minutes too, but it's not as significant as the other 2.

maybe if i had a K3 sitting here to compare directly, i would have an opinion on what i heard. it might bring an 'ah-ha'.....but might not.

i appreciate that tt speed is important, but "obviously' don't worry too much about it. i do appreciate the different drive types and how that plays to optimizing the musical experience.

 

[tima]

@Mike Lavigne do you know at what point can you distinguish changes in sound due to change in speed, or change in wow flutte? Did you do any such tests on NVS when they were designing/building it? What variance was minimum acceptable?

Are you looking for a measurement? How would you want your questions answered?

 

[bonzo75]

Are you looking for a measurement? How would you want your questions answered?

No am looking for videos - just kidding.

I just wanted examples that someone while deigning heard a table at 33.3333, and when it went to 3X.XXXX, they could hear the sound difference on the piano or violin or whatever. Until then it did not matter. I would prefer this done across DD, Belts, and Idlers. Similarly for W&F.

I know you had a positive experience going from the Monaco 1.5 to the 2, but not sure how we can attribute all, or a certain %age, of that to improved performance to the speed front.

Mike kind of answers it. He has had a lot of experience with DDs, idlers, and belts. And LTs. Designers will obviously answer what suits their design the best. I do remember doing an experiment once at Art Audio's in the UK, as he had a table he had made himself and he was able to vary speed on the go while listening, but we tested only extremes and not the breaking point. and we did not do any W/F

I never looked at measurements, but Vienna did measure a lot of tables while making his purchase decision, and while I was suggesting him the Brinkmann Balance on a subjective basis, he largely factored in measurements in his decision. I think it was the first or second best in the ones that he researched.

 

[tima]

I just wanted examples that someone while deigning heard a table at 33.3333, and when it went to 3X.XXXX, they could hear the sound difference on the piano or violin or whatever. Until then it did not matter. I would prefer this done across DD, Belts, and Idlers. Similarly for W&F.

I know you had a positive experience going from the Monaco 1.5 to the 2, but not sure how we can attribute all, or a certain %age, of that to improved performance to the speed front.

Okay. Alot has to do with what is measured, how it is measured and the level of accuracy. Better to have the platter itself measured than use a recording of a 3150Hz sine wave. Records vary, phones vary. The Phoenix Engineering Falcon PSU and Roadrunner Tach may have the broadest reach - doesn't work with everytable (doesn't work with the Monaco because of plinth shape) but it does read the actual platter.

The interesting part of your question is at what point do you hear a difference? On a gross level there is wow and flutter, sure - we should be able to detect that. I believe that's where the vast majority look to hear something, but that is, imo, not where a real sonic difference happens.

Wow and flutter were unmeasureable on both Monaco 1.5 and 2.0 yet the 2.0 is easily better and easily truer to 33.3... I can find the measurement numbers for both. They won'tl tell us a specific crossover frequency beyond which a difference is obvious but they will some idea measurement wise.

The question of what percentage of speed control accounts for improvement is a legitimate question - Monaco engineers also asked it. The newer table is also quieter due to its new motor. I will comment on what Monaco said when I dig out the performance numbers.

 

[bonzo75]

Okay. Alot has to do with what is measured, how it is measured and the level of accuracy. Better to have the platter itself measured than use a recording of a 3150Hz sine wave. Records vary, phones vary. The Phoenix Engineering Falcon PSU and Roadrunner Tach may have the broadest reach - doesn't work with everytable (doesn't work with the Monaco because of plinth shape) but it does read the actual platter.

The interesting part of your question is at what point do you hear a difference? On a gross level there is wow and flutter, sure - we should be able to detect that. I believe that's where the vast majority look to hear something, but that is, imo, not where a real sonic difference happens.

Wow and flutter were unmeasureable on both Monaco 1.5 and 2.0 yet the 2.0 is easily better and easily truer to 33.3... I can find the measurement numbers for both. They won'tl tell us a specific crossover frequency beyond which a difference is obvious but they will some idea measurement wise.

The question of what percentage of speed control accounts for improvement is a legitimate question - Monaco engineers also asked it. The newer table is also quieter due to its new motor. I will comment on what Monaco said when I dig out the performance numbers.

I think you must have the figures here https://www.whatsbestforum.com/threads/review-grand-prix-audio-•-monaco-2-0-turntable.25046/

 

[Audiophile Bill]

As I keep telling folks, absolute speed accuracy isn’t very relevant because having perfect pitch is extremely rare thus it will make little difference if, and only if, the wow and flutter are very low even if the speed is running at 33.334 or even 33.34. Our brains are much more susceptible to wow and flutter.

 

[PeterA]

As I keep telling folks, absolute speed accuracy isn’t very relevant because having perfect pitch is extremely rare thus it will make little difference if, and only if, the wow and flutter are very low even if the speed is running at 33.334 or even 33.34. Our brains are much more susceptible to wow and flutter.

Some tables have displays that have three digits: XX.X. Perhaps the designer does not think beyond 33.3 is audible. Personally, I don’t think I hear the difference between 33.32 and 33.34, but I do hear the difference between 33.2 and 33.4 with some music. I have not done careful experiments. And it likely varies from listener to listener. I suspect the implementation and how accuracy and consistency are achieved is what matters.

 

[Rensselaer]

This is an interesting thread. What about that which is not measurable?

In the case of digital; an analogue musical event occurs, what can be measured is and those measurements recorded to a digital storage device. For playback, those measurements recorded onto the digital storage device are converted back to analogue. Those who enjoy digital will defend its' use by comparing the values of what was measured before digitalisation with the values resulting after conversion back to analogue. If the measurements match, "perfect sound reproduction" is claimed. But, does the finished product sound exactly like the analogue event recorded? If not, was it perfect sound reproduction or perfect measurement reproduction?

Consider comparing MC cartridges of the same impedance, the same output voltage, same compliance on the same turntable, tonearm, SUT's and electronics, speakers and test recording. How can they possible sound different, all measurements being the same, test equipment and conditions being the same? Yet, they do sound different (as do digital recordings from analogue recordings).

Perhaps we have been measuring the wrong things? Perhaps "measurements" is the wrong approach? What do you think?

 

[Mike Lavigne]

As I keep telling folks, absolute speed accuracy isn’t very relevant because having perfect pitch is extremely rare thus it will make little difference if, and only if, the wow and flutter are very low even if the speed is running at 33.334 or even 33.34. Our brains are much more susceptible to wow and flutter.

and i think our brains are sensitive to degrees of continuousness (lack of servo feedback.....no matter how fine the level).

i've posted this before, and i know it tweaks @tima (sorry ), but i do think it speaks to what i am referring to. not claiming it's exactly spot on, but it does express what i mean by continuousness, and why our brains/senses prefer it. i know mine does. whatever the CS Port and Saskia are doing not correcting speed, my body likes it alot. maybe tt's need to be at a particular level of execution to get the full measure of benefit of lack of speed correction? so maybe not any absolute. but possible.

In order to pick up sound accurately from the analog disc, the rotation of the platter must be rotated at a constant speed without any “fluctuation”. In general, accurate rotation is obtained by servo control by negative feedback, but at the micro level, if it rotates or becomes faster, it detects it and slows it, and repeats the operation to make it faster if it gets slower. Although this level and cycle are determined by the gain of the control system and the loop speed, the period of the speed control of the platter which is the mechanical system surely comes into the audio band. In general, accurate rotation is obtained by servo control by negative feedback, but at the micro level, if it rotates or becomes faster, it detects it and slows it, and repeats the operation to make it faster if it gets slower. If you try to measure a period with a small level, you can not measure the instantaneous state, so you measure the average value. Therefore, fine vibration generated by servo control can not be measured by the measuring instrument, it depends on the human ear.

recalling my years with the Rockport Sirius III, maybe it is the only servo speed tt that was also able to achieve this continuousness to my ears. but it's level of execution is maybe still not fully matched by anything else i have heard.

 

[bonzo75]

and i think our brains are sensitive to degrees of continuousness (lack of servo feedback.....no matter how fine the levetry

Continuousness is primary importance, I call it flow, though I have never experimented on the same TT for servo on/off. Also hence my quest to check if anyone has done speed and W/F tests on DD and non - DD.

Also recently I compared PX25 amps done by a DIY guy, and I found one to have better continuity the other to have tighter bass control. He said I preferred the continuity due to lack of feedback. The other amp had feedback. Your point on servo might be similar..

 

[spiritofmusic]

I'm not sure what I "hear" or "think" I hear. But my less than SOTA rim drive sounds "better" without RoadRunner speed tach feedback once TT up to speed. My preference seems to be for some greater variability +/- 33.333, then for stricter adherence to this, by switching off the RoadRunner once music starts playing.

 

[PeterA]

I'm not sure what I "hear" or "think" I hear. But my less than SOTA rim drive sounds "better" without RoadRunner speed tach feedback once TT up to speed. My preference seems to be for some greater variability +/- 33.333, then for stricter adherence to this, by switching off the RoadRunner once music starts playing.

Marc, what does the RR tachometer without the feedback show you about speed accuracy and consistency?

 

[spiritofmusic]

Varies btwn 33.330-33.339 every few revolutions, +/-0.002 w RoadRunner in tow.