Ron, I never tried my Stacores under my tubed monos, but on the basis of how impressive Stacore has been under my tt, cdp and balanced transformer, you're in for a treat.
Sublime Sound
- Thread starter PeterA
- Start date
Yeah, OK, I'd forgotten you were running mono blocks, so that's where the 3 comes from... Good feedback on the differences with them inactive. I'd actually be interested if you could deactivate just the 30/12 while leaving the monos active, and vice versa. Just for another datapoint as to whether or not the amp vs the table isolation is a bigger contributor.
Bazelio, I may get around to doing that comparison. Right now my system is dismantled so that I can do my semi-annual cleaning with DeoXit of all connections. It will be back up and running in a day or two. It's too hot right now to listen to my amps anyway. And my Pass pre and phono need a couple days of being powered on after shut off to sound good again.
Two days ago Peter and I enjoyed an evening of Beethoven string quartets on his system. The Quartetto Italiano gave wonderful performances of the Razumovsky quartets op. 59, written by Beethoven soon after his revolutionary Symphony No. 3, op. 55, the 'Eroica', and the Appassionata piano sonata op. 57. We listened to all three quartets in this series.
It was an immensely engaging musical experience. The dynamic sweep of the music was extraordinarily well portrayed, with each dynamic inflection vividly being carved out. The separation of instruments was spectacular, you could follow each musical line with ease. The cello sound had a beguiling, well defined corporeality. The system was a great communicator of the architecture and emotion of these string quartets.
Thank you, Peter, for a wonderful evening of music!
It was an immensely engaging musical experience. The dynamic sweep of the music was extraordinarily well portrayed, with each dynamic inflection vividly being carved out. The separation of instruments was spectacular, you could follow each musical line with ease. The cello sound had a beguiling, well defined corporeality. The system was a great communicator of the architecture and emotion of these string quartets.
Thank you, Peter, for a wonderful evening of music!
You are very welcome, Al. Thank you for your beautifully written post. We often discuss the sound of components and sometimes the sound of systems in rooms. Rarely do we discuss the emotional impact of listening to music through our systems. I'm glad you enjoyed the evening.
Al came over two times last week. The first time to simply hear my system and a couple of particular recordings that I wanted to share with him. We have been discussing amongst our Boston audio group the impression of speed and whether or not a particular component, in this case my Pass XP25, was "slowing" down the sound of transients relative to the sound from other digital components in other systems. That is a hard thing to judge, in my opinion, not having digital in my own system, and trying to assess such things across formats and recordings with possibly different masterings in other systems.
Anyway, on the first night, Al and I did hear a slightly veiled sound on the Beethoven quartets which restricted transparency. I raised the arm height by 0.5mm and that did the trick. The sound became more open and clean sounding. The sound was not at all slow and the speed was quite convincing. Perhaps it is not precisely as fast as live, but there is no sense that it is slow or that the speed detracts from the enjoyment of the music. That was the first night.
Al then asked if he could come over the next evening to simply listen to Beethoven's Middle String quartets, Op. 59 in its entirety on my system. Al does not have this recording on digital, so impressed with the VTA change from the night before, he wanted to hear more and came over the following evening. We had a nice dinner and then came back and simply listened and enjoyed the emersion in the beautiful music. This, for me, is what the hobby is all about. We have to work on our systems to get them to the point where we can then just listen and enjoy.
Last edited:
This is very beautifully written, Al! Your enthusiasm for, and appreciation of, Peter’s system shines through clearly!
+1 on the writing Al, I agree enjoyment is what it’s all about
String quartets are a fearsome test for a Hifi system, I myself both enjoy and use them
The timbres are hard to get correct
I am not surprised by PeterA careful writing and passion for classical, that his system passed with flying colours
From what I have read of PeterA system, the magico and Pass are a great combo , accuracy with timbral colour
Congratulations, Peter! You have achieved natural and convincing sound with an amazing system!
The question of whether your solid-state and analog preamplifier is "slowing" down the sound of transients in your analog-source system compared to the sound of transients in other, digital-source systems seems to me so convoluted on its face that the inquirer should go back to the drawing board and formulate a logical question. I also find in the question an inherently pro-digital bias: perhaps the digital component is unnaturally accentuating transients in the system of which this digital component is a part?
I continue to be puzzled that small VTA adjustments make seemingly significant sonic differences in your system. That a small VTA adjustment elevates the sound from “slightly veiled” to “more open and clear” is puzzling to me. What is your theory as to why other turntable operators don’t report such significant differences in sound from small changes in VTA?
Thank you Ron.
I don't really want to get into the "speed" issue with my XP25 here as we have extensively discussed this within our Boston group. I will say that the issue came up when a member of our group noticed that his digital, in his system, sounded faster on a number of recordings through his digital source than they did through his analog source. He too has the XP25 and suspected that the phono stage was the culprit. He asked me and Al to report back about the "speed" in my system as heard through my XP25. We found no issue in my system with respect to the "speed" of the XP25. Of course, not every system is the same.
Regarding arm height adjustments affecting the overall sonic performance of one's vinyl playback, all I can say is that anyone to whom I demonstrate this in my system hears the difference. They even hear it in their systems when I have offered to adjust their arm height. And they notice it when they are setting up their own vinyl front ends. Even though people hear the difference that slight adjustments to arm height can make, that does not mean that they are willing to spend the time to make the adjustments for each of their records. This topic is discussed a bit more on AudioNirvana where a few members do adjust for individual records. There are a couple of active threads discussing it now. (see this: https://www.audionirvana.org/forum/...858-what-is-the-most-effective-way-to-set-sra). One thing that people listen for is the relationship between fundamentals and their harmonics. This relationship effects the perception of transparency, speed, and all sorts of other sonic attributes, IME.
You can refer back to David fine tuning Tang's arm/cartridge. He went back and forth many times to get the VTA and VTF set up to his satisfaction. I assume it was for the specific records he was using for his set up procedure. I just happen to do it for each record because I hear a difference and it matters to me. I want to be clear that I am not suggesting everyone do this. I will demonstrate this process to you when you come to visit and then you can assess for yourself if it "elevates the sound from 'slightly veiled' to 'more open and clear'." That will be fun.
I do not have a theory as to why other vinyl guys don't discuss this so much. Perhaps it is too boring a topic. Perhaps many people assume that once the arm/cartridge is properly set up, the job is done. Jim Smith told me that he never once entered a client's listening room and heard a fully optimized vinyl front end. I have no idea why that is. However, I will say that people do care about this because some are buying set up tools to try to squeeze more performance from their vinyl. Tang is discussing the fine tuning of his arm/cartridges based on the process that he learned from David. It seems to matter to him, though I don't know if he adjusts for different records. Christian discussed briefly that he adjusts when changing his various cartridges. They are both using David's "card" trick to repeat previous settings, so on some level it must matter. David told me that he has one setting for the majority of standard vinyl, and that he only adjusts arm height for 180-200 gram pressings. I think it does matter to people and they do hear the differences, they just don't seem to discuss the topic much.
Here is a question: if it did not matter so much, why are there many new arm designs (Axiom, Durand, Graham, VPI, Kuzma, etc) which make it very easy to adjust, and often repeat, arm height? If it were simply a matter of setting it up once, I suspect that these arms would have much more basic mechanisms for adjustments, and not the elaborate off set towers for easy and repeatable VTA.
Last edited:
Dear Ron,
Setting the VTA/SRA correctly has significant impact on the sound specially when dealing with multiple arms & cartridges. One reason that you don't hear people talking about it is that they're struggling with it, it's not trivial +/- 0.5mm can be crucial.
david
Peter, Al, David
So u can perfectly measure .5mm every time? It is ALWAYS reproducible?
The record is PERFECTLY flat so there is NO deviation from the perfect .5mm adjustment as the record is played?
Really, these kinds of observations are getting a bit out there.
So u can perfectly measure .5mm every time? It is ALWAYS reproducible?
The record is PERFECTLY flat so there is NO deviation from the perfect .5mm adjustment as the record is played?
Really, these kinds of observations are getting a bit out there.
It's measurable and repeatable, I use a deck of cards to count the VTA/SRA height and can always go back to it whenever needed. I don't adjust for every record it's set up once on an average LP. It's clearly audible in a high resolution system.
david
I agree David, except that I too struggle with it and I do talk about it. Here is why:
What I struggle with is that as my experience increases, and my system continues to improve, I am beginning to realize that my 0.5mm increments are too large. These increments are a compromise because they are too large. Adjusting in increments of one playing card would give better results, but that would be a lot of work for someone who does this for each record, especially with an arm that is not designed for frequent and repeatable changes. I would like an arm which has an offset VTA tower, however, I suspect that most designs compromise rigidity for the sake of adjustability. The top Durand arms got rid of the offset tower of the lower models, I think for this very reason. The SAT, and perhaps a few other arms, might be exceptions. The SAT does not have an offset tower and its markings and clamping/raising mechanism design look like they may be very effective.
I am conflating David's point about correct VTA/SRA setting with my point about frequent adjustments. I think we both agree that correct/proper/preferable arm height is the goal. We differ in whether or not this is important on a per record basis.
Of course there is some record warp which some turntable designs can not correct. Vacuum hold down, periphery rings and clamps/wahsers help. However, most of my records are pretty flat and arm height changes of 0.5mm are audible. Some arm designs are better than others about making easily repeatable settings. I use an SME provided paper mm scale. I repeat by eye and it seems close enough for me, however, I am trying to find a machine shop to make for me a set of brass or stainless shims sized as follows:
16mm X 50mm X 30mm
17mm X 50 X 30
18mm X 50 X 30
19mm X 50 X30
0.25mm X 50 X30
0.50mm X 50 X30
The one quote I got is for hundreds of dollars, so I continue to look. The idea is to place one of these shims alone, or in combination with the 1/4 and 1/2mm shims between my armboard and the arm rest platform to have 16 easily repeatable settings in 0.5 increments between 16mm and 19.75 mm. David's cards cut into strips would also work.
I agree with you that these observations are a bit out there. But so are VTF increments of 0.1 grams or azimuth set up by some signal through a computer and overhang adjustments in mm. People do what they can and are willing to try. But, it is all audible in a well sorted system and for some listeners, it makes a difference and is worth the effort to pursue. The best thing is that one can improve the sonics of his system without spending much money.
I am not certain, but I strongly suspect that David thinks proper cartridge/arm set up is much more important than cable and power cord differences. I also think this matters to greater or lesser degrees to people and that it can vary by quite a bit from system to system in importance. It sure sounds crazy to those who have not heard the effects.
Peter,
.5mm in a 12" tonearm means a .1 degree variation in angle. If recordings go from veiled and non transparent to marvelous with such variation IMHO probably this means that you have developed an extraordinary sensitivity to some fine particular detail of the recording and are taking it for fundamental for your enjoyment.
Please understand that, even discounting for the usual audiophile hyperbole, what you are describing an enormous difference!
IMHO the differences due to changes in stylus profile due to normal use along the life of the stylus will be much higher than that. Or a simple change of height of .05 mm in cartridge tip to base distance due to aging of the suspension will produce a .5 degree change in SRA - five times higher that what you are adjusting.
I hope I got the geometry and math right, please correct me if I swapped the zeros ...
Peter,
.5mm in a 12" tonearm means a .1 degree variation in angle. If recordings go from veiled and non transparent to marvelous with such variation IMHO probably this means that you have developed an extraordinary sensitivity to some fine particular detail of the recording and are taking it for fundamental for your enjoyment.
Please understand that, even discounting for the usual audiophile hyperbole, what you are describing an enormous difference!
IMHO the differences due to changes in stylus profile due to normal use along the life of the stylus will be much higher than that. Or a simple change of height of .05 mm in cartridge tip to base distance due to aging of the suspension will produce a .5 degree change in SRA - five times higher that what you are adjusting.
I hope I got the geometry and math right, please correct me if I swapped the zeros ...
Thank you Fransisco. I appreciate your opinion.
Here is what I wrote: "Anyway, on the first night, Al and I did hear a slightly veiled sound on the Beethoven quartets which restricted transparency. I raised the arm height by 0.5mm and that did the trick. The sound became more open and clean sounding." That is not the same as you suggest: "If recordings go from veiled and non transparent to marvelous with such variation...."
"More open and clean sounding" is not the same as "marvelous". And "slightly veiled sound...which restricted transparency is not "veiled and non transparent". You are changing the words, and I would suggest changing the meaning at the same time. I think you and I may disagree that what I am describing is "an enormous difference". These are all matters of degree, pardon the pun. My point is that the sound improved. You are right that a 0.5mm height change in a 12" arm is about 1/10th of a degree. I don't know what to say except that that particular recording sounded better. I think Al M. made additional comments about the effect of that 0.1 degree SRA change. The improvement also contributed to his enjoyment of the recording and involvement with the music.
I don't know about stylus wear or suspension fatigue over time. I have noticed that I have adjusted SRA as the cartridge ages and also with different temperature and humidity conditions.
I accept that you think it is audiophile hyperbole, however, Ron did not drive up with his blue and red lights flashing to issue us a warning.
People know I don’t do arm cart setup by myself. I have a tonearm guy do that for me. I am lazy. Only after a David made me learn step by step to install the 3012r with the Opus and taught me where and what to listen for when adjusting vta, I realized I hadn’t been hearing the best of what each cart I own has to offer. The sound my tonearm guy set up for me became just very good but not great. If I don’t adjust my vta on a cart right, it would just sound a notch or two below the one with the right angle. This given that my tonearm guy initially setup the arm cart accurately to a proper protractor. It is also not only the vta, the tracking force also plays role. They seem to be interrelated. When I lowered the tracking force of AtlasSL, I had to readjust the vta to be rewarded with even better sound than when David set up for me....hehe . The truth is if I hadn’t been coached what to hear it probably took me years and years to find out myself. I am no expert. But now that I have some knowledge how to tune the sound, I actually have a lot more fun playing trying out different parameters and learn from results. The vta does make a difference between an excellent sound and a magical sound (tubes required ).
Kind regards,
Tang
. The truth is if I hadn’t been coached what to hear it probably took me years and years to find out myself. I am no expert. But now that I have some knowledge how to tune the sound, I actually have a lot more fun playing trying out different parameters and learn from results. The vta does make a difference between an excellent sound and a magical sound (tubes required ).Kind regards,
Tang
My comments were mainly on the technical part, the subjective appreciation was a global one on what you and Al. M enthusiastically posted about the listening session. Sorry but for me "slightly veiled sound which restricted transparency" is not far different from my words in a subjective appreciation in a short post and, what matters for me is that it carried a large subjective change, IMHO implying that such exercise shows as almost mandatory in your system.
Do you re-calibrate your settings for cartridge use?
Ron "continues to be puzzled ", I exposed why I am puzzled - different ways of looking at the issue.
People know I don’t do arm cart setup by myself. I have a tonearm guy do that for me. I am lazy. Only after a David made me learn step by step to install the 3012r with the Opus and taught me where and what to listen for when adjusting vta, I realized I hadn’t been hearing the best of what each cart I own has to offer. The sound my tonearm guy set up for me became just very good but not great. If I don’t adjust my vta on a cart right, it would just sound a notch or two below the one with the right angle. This given that my tonearm guy initially setup the arm cart accurately to a proper protractor. It is also not only the vta, the tracking force also plays role. They seem to be interrelated. When I lowered the tracking force of AtlasSL, I had to readjust the vta to be rewarded with even better sound than when David set up for me....hehe
Kind regards,
Tang
Do you adjust the VTA for each recording?
Similar threads
