Sublime Sound

[PeterA]

Yes Let's keep the subject on the sublime aspect of getting the most magic out of one's system which really isn't about the format but optimization.

Well stated Ian. Looking forward to getting you guys back over here after this crisis passes.

What I can say is that I’m now experimenting with the number of O-rings under the turntable plate and it is audible. I’m glad I have a lot of time on my hands.

 

[ddk]

so ddk is actually the 'tweak-meister'.

i have no doubt that these things work. lots of things work.

Thank you Mike, I'm honored to receive a Meister title from the Emperor Tweak!
Not many can claim replacing tens of thousands of dollars of cabling, treatments, platforms, litter boxes and chachkies with some cheap wiring a slab of steel and a bunch of rubber O rings, and KILL IT!

david

 

[Kingsrule]

I appreciate your perspective, but I have an all analog system. I do not have any digital in my system and I do not have plans to add a digital source in the foreseeable future. I have no interest in debating analog versus digital in my system thread.

No worries...I forgot u only have the one source and my intent was observation, not debate..
I deleted my post

 

[PeterA]

Thank you Mike, I'm honored to receive a Meister title from the Emperor Tweak!
Not many can claim replacing tens of thousands of dollars of cabling, treatments, platforms, litter boxes and chachkies with some cheap wiring a slab of steel and a bunch of rubber O rings, and KILL IT!

david

Ha. I should have consulted you before I bought all of that stuff, but then the impact of the improvement would not have been as appreciated. A good lesson learned the hard way.

Meister is the German word for Master. My mother is German. I've been listening a lot to the great German Meister composers, Bach, Beethoven, and Brahms, lately on vinyl LPs and teaching my kids about important music. I'd rather they hear the music than the system.

There, that brings the last few posts, MikeL, ddk, Folsom, Madfloyd, Al M., Bach, Beethoven, Brahms, and my mother and daughters all together in one short and simple paragraph for a happy coexistence. Even during this crisis, we can count our blessings.

 

[PeterA]

Quantifying improvements is difficult. I enjoyed my system before these recent changes not imagining what could be....Now that I have heard the improvements, I can't go back. I have no idea what these changes represent on a percentage basis. Complicating matters is that after reaching some level of quality reproduction and listening satisfaction, smaller and smaller improvements can often seem more and more significant, especially in terms of musical meaning and emotional involvement.

What I can say is that my system sounds more natural, performers are more present, and I hear more of what I think the recording is about. There is more informations with increased differences between individual recordings.

Yesterday, as I often do on Good Friday, I listened to my original UK pressing of Jesus Christ Superstar, Andrew Lloyd Webber's Passion of Christ. A few years ago, I had the pleasure of hearing Bach's Passion of Christ at the BSO. As I had not heard this recording for exactly one year, it was very interesting to reflect on how it sounds now after the recent changes to my system compared to my memory from a year ago.

The guitar riffs and setting established in the allegro were more moody and reminiscent of the 60's culture. Christ's love for Mary and hers for him seemed more emotional and intimate. His anger at the money changers in the temple and at his disciples, and at Judas for his betrayal, was more profound. The lashings he endured were more cringe worthy and his pain at the cross seemed more intense. Finally, his ascension was more beautiful. The whole listening experience was more vivid and powerful.

However, at the same time, I was more aware of the recording's flaws. I felt closer to the recording and more connected to what I heard, while my awareness of the system was less a part of the whole experience.

Ron asked me how I would quantify the changes. I told him that that would be tough to answer. 5-10% implies a small but significant evolution, but hardly any kind of revolution. I paid almost nothing for these changes, focusing instead on changing the set up. The sound is now quite different. Some might think it is akin to going from SS to tubes, or from digital to vinyl, that kind of magnitude, an unleashing of the system's potential and move towards real resolution. I don't know. The system is the same, the set up and presentation are just different. It is almost like I took a 90 degree turn, step off the path, and chose a different fork in the road while walking in the same forest. The destination is now different and I am moving in a new direction. This is more than some percentage change, but I have no idea how to convey the significance of the changes to others.

I suspected things were starting to work out, but it took listening to a familiar recording, not heard in a year, to realize how far I have come, and where I might end up.

Happy Easter Everyone!

 

[Lagonda]

Quantifying improvements is difficult. I enjoyed my system before these recent changes not imagining what could be....Now that I have heard the improvements, I can't go back. I have no idea what these changes represent on a percentage basis. Complicating matters is that after reaching some level of quality reproduction and listening satisfaction, smaller and smaller improvements can often seem more and more significant, especially in terms of musical meaning and emotional involvement.

What I can say is that my system sounds more natural, voices are more present, and I hear more of what I think the recording is about. There is more informations with increased differences between individual recordings.

Yesterday, as I often do on Good Friday, I listened to my original UK pressing of Jesus Christ Superstar, Andrew Lloyd Webber's Passion of Christ. A few years ago, I had the pleasure of hearing Bach's Passion of Christ at the BSO. As I had not heard this recording for exactly one year, it was very interesting to reflect on how it sounded now after the recent changes to my system compared to my memory from a year ago.

The guitar riffs and setting established in the allegro were more moody and reminiscent of the 60's culture. Christ's love for Mary and hers for him seemed more emotional and intimate. His anger at the money changers in the temple and at his disciples, and at Judas for his betrayal, was more profound. The lashings he endured were more cringe worthy and his pain at the cross seemed more intense. Finally, his ascension was more beautiful. The whole listening experience was more vivid and powerful.

However, at the same time, I was more aware of the recording's flaws. I felt closer to the recording and more connected to what I heard, while my awareness of the system was less a part of the whole experience.

Ron asked me how I would quantify the changes. I told him that that would be tough to answer. 5-10% implies a small but significant evolution, but hardly some revolution. I paid almost nothing for these changes, focusing instead on changing the set up. The sound is now quite different. Some might think it is akin to going from SS to tubes, or from digital to vinyl, that kind of magnitude, an unleashing of the system's potential and move towards real resolution. I don't know. The system is the same, the set up and presentation are just different. It is almost like I took a 90 degree turn, step off the path, and chose a different fork in the road while walking in the same forest. The destination is now different and I am moving in a new direction. This is more than some percentage change, but I have no idea how to convey the significance of the changes to others.

I suspected things were starting to work out, but it took listening to a family recording, not heard in over a year, to realize how far I have come, and where I might end up.

Happy Easter Everyone!

View attachment 63870

View attachment 63871

View attachment 63872

You are describing the changes beautifully Peter ! For the record, what arm did you use ?

 

[PeterA]

You are describing the changes beautifully Peter ! For the record, what arm did you use ?

Thank you Lagonda. Right now I am using both the SME V-12 on the table and an SME 3012R on the outboard arm pod I designed and placed behind the table. Both arms have a vdH Master Signature with Stradivarius lacquer finish on them. The cartridge on the 3012R has about 80 hours on it, while the one on the V-12 has about 45. That one just returned from its 200 hour inspection. AJ van den Hul did some fine adjustments to lower the sibilance slightly.

The arm in front is set up for standard thickness LPs. The one in back on the 3012R is set up for 180-200g LPs, mostly reissues and 45s. The two set ups sound extremely similar. I have not yet switched cartridges as they are now sounding great and I don't want to mess with anything for a while. Someday I will do a more rigorous comparison between the two arms, but for now they sound too much alike to worry about anything.

I did try the dynamic VTF on the V-12, and the sound of the arms was more different then. Now I use static balance or VTF for both arms.

 

[Lagonda]

So you probably used the V-12 in this case. I have done the same on my 2 arms. One for standard thickness LP’s and on set for 180-200g albums, but the 3012R does both excellently.
Thank you Peter, and happy easter to you too !

 

[PeterA]

So you probably used the V-12 in this case. I have done the same on my 2 arms. One for standard thickness LP’s and on set for 180-200g albums, but the 3012R does both excellently.
Thank you Peter, and happy easter to you too !

Sorry, Lagonda. I realized that I didn't answer your question. Yes, in this case it was the V-12.

 

[Kcin]

Thank you Lagonda. Right now I am using both the SME V-12 on the table and an SME 3012R on the outboard arm pod I designed and placed behind the table. Both arms have a vdH Master Signature with Stradivarius lacquer finish on them. The cartridge on the 3012R has about 80 hours on it, while the one on the V-12 has about 45. That one just returned from its 200 hour inspection. AJ van den Hul did some fine adjustments to lower the sibilance slightly.

The arm in front is set up for standard thickness LPs. The one in back on the 3012R is set up for 180-200g LPs, mostly reissues and 45s. The two set ups sound extremely similar. I have not yet switched cartridges as they are now sounding great and I don't want to mess with anything for a while. Someday I will do a more rigorous comparison between the two arms, but for now they sound too much alike to worry about anything.

I did try the dynamic VTF on the V-12, and the sound of the arms was more different then. Now I use static balance or VTF for both arms.

@PeterA, fascinating to read about the deconstruction of your former tweaks to where you are now. I am especially interested in that you appear to have the same cartridge in one arm with 80 hrs and another with 245hrs.

Your comment that they are too much alike is interesting, if it were not for SME's recent move to only supply arms with tables... one would seek out a V12 as a known quantity vs. the mysterious illusive and ever more expensive 3012R based on that statement in terms of your interpretation thus far.

You express yourself very well through your journey. Thanks for keeping us up to date.

 

[PeterA]

@PeterA, fascinating to read about the deconstruction of your former tweaks to where you are now. I am especially interested in that you appear to have the same cartridge in one arm with 80 hrs and another with 245hrs.

Your comment that they are too much alike is interesting, if it were not for SME's recent move to only supply arms with tables... one would seek out a V12 as a known quantity vs. the mysterious illusive and every more expensive 3012R based on that statement in terms of your interpretation thus far.

You express yourself very well through your journey. Thanks for keeping us up to date.

Thank you for the kind words Kcin. My first cartridge was sent back after 200 hours and there were modifications made to it which require starting the break in process again. This is why I stated there are only 45 hours on this cartridge.

The two arm/cartridge combinations do indeed sound very similar. Someday I will get around to doing a more comprehensive and serious comparison between the two tone arms and even mount the modern tonearm on the arm pod to make things equal.

For now I will say that there are many 3012R tonearms on the market and it is not difficult to find one in good condition for $2000-$2500. This is a superb option. If I had a different turntable it is not clear to me that I would get the V 12 tone arm for the higher cost. The vintage tonearm also has the advantage of swapping head shells and azimuth adjustment.

There are many more 3012R Tone arms in use on good turntables belonging to members of this forum then there are of the V 12 tone arm. I am not aware of anyone having done a direct comparison.

 

[Lagonda]

Thank you for the kind words Kcin. My first cartridge was sent back after 200 hours and there were modifications made to it which require starting the break in process again. This is why I stated there are only 45 hours on this cartridge.

The two arm/cartridge combinations do indeed sound very similar. Someday I will get around to doing a more comprehensive and serious comparison between the two tone arms and even mount the modern tonearm on the arm pod to make things equal.

For now I will say that there are many 3012R tonearms on the market and it is not difficult to find one in good condition for $2000-$2500. This is a superb option. If I had a different turntable it is not clear to me that I would get the V 12 tone arm for the higher cost. The vintage tonearm also has the advantage of swapping head shells and azimuth adjustment.

There are many more 3012R Tone arms in use on good turntables belonging to members of this forum then there are of the V 12 tone arm. I am not aware of anyone having done a direct comparison.

Peter did you install any of your other cartridges in a extra head shell ? And if yes do you find it easy to do the swapping, i have not done it yet. Does the V 12 not have azimuth adjustment ?

 

[PeterA]

The V 12 has a fixed headshell with no azimuth adjustment. However, I have found that using the height adjustment screw does tilt the arm slightly so that azimuth can be altered before locking down the arm pillar tight. I don’t know if this is recommended or if anyone else does this but one can make very fine adjustments. Or at least I can with my sample.

I have tried my other cartridges in extra headshells on the 3012R tonearm. I prefer the master signature cartridge. The swapping is pretty easy but arm height azimuth and alignment all need to be redone. Also vertical tracking force so it is not a quick and simple switch. I suspect there are people who are more familiar with the tonearm and can make the swap faster than I can.

 

[Lagonda]

The V 12 has a fixed headshell with no azimuth adjustment. However, I have found that using the height adjustment screw does tilt the arm slightly so that azimuth can be altered before locking down the arm pillar tight. I don’t know if this is recommended or if anyone else does this but one can make very fine adjustments. Or at least I can with my sample.

I have tried my other cartridges in extra headshells on the 3012R tonearm. I prefer the master signature cartridge. The swapping is pretty easy but arm height azimuth and alignment all need to be redone. Also vertical tracking force so it is not a quick and simple switch. I suspect there are people who are more familiar with the tonearm and can make the swap faster than I can.

Thank you Peter !

 

[tima]

My first cartridge was sent back after 200 hours and there were modifications made to it which require starting the break in process again.

Having Master sigs myself and not yet sending them to vdH, I'm curious about what modifications were made and why. Did you request those or were they at vdH suggestion? And what was the turnaround time? TIA

 

[PeterA]

Hello Tim, I don't really know what is done during the 200-250 hour inspection and fine-tuning service. I did request that he tone down the sibilance if possible. The damper might have been adjusted for the sibilance and this might account for the new break in period. And I think he checks to see if too much or too little bias was used. I use 0.25g on the V-12 and 0.50g on the 3012R because that is the lowest setting.

Turn around was between 3-4 weeks, delayed slightly because of shipping in March during this pandemic.

 

[PeterA]

More discoveries with fine tuning: I had originally placed seven (7) large O rings under each stainless steel plate under the phono stage, the preamp, and their two power supplies located on my component rack. These were is a 2 - 3 - 2 front to back configuration with the 3 rings running down the middle and the 2 rings in the front and back. This allowed the four corners of each plate to be slightly cantilevered, or suspended without rubber directly in contact underneath.

I had some extra O rings for the turntable and amp plates which I installed a few weeks later. These were arranged in a more even pattern under the amps (3 X 4 grid) and turntable (5-4-4-5 pattern). The other day, somewhat bored during the lock down and a bit curious as to the effect of the O ring placement, I decided to experiment a little. I rearranged the pattern under the preamps on the rack from the 2-3-2 pattern to a 3-2-3 pattern, front to back. This placed rubber under the four corners of each plate. I listened.

The sound had changed, and I pretty quickly recognized that the it was more dull. A bit less life, a bit more congealed, a bit less airy. There was less harmonic content, the decays were shorter and the overal sound was decidedly less natural. My guess was that adding this one O ring, but more importantly, reconfiguring the placement pattern, had now overdamped the sound of the system.

I lifted up each component on short wood blocks, returned to the original O ring configuration, and lowered the components and plates. Back to good sound. This got me thinking. Perhaps the stock rubber footers on top of the plates combined with the rubber O rings below the plates, in the same locations, was responsible for the over dampening.

So, I lifted up the two heavy mono block amps and steel plates onto blocks and removed one O ring from each corner, under the amp footers. Sure enough. The sound became more alive and natural, characterized mostly by a more open, dynamic sound, specifically with greater harmonic content and longer decays. No negatives.

I then addressed the turntable. This was a 5-4-4-5 pattern, so I removed one ring from the front right corner, one from the rear right corner and the second ring in from the front left corner, and the secone ring in from the rear left corner. These positions correspond with the locations under the four metal ball bear feet of the turntable. Here again, a slight uptick in natural sound.

The conclusion I have reached is that my components, and the resulting sound from my system, are quite sensitive to placement, and to the support structure on which they are placed. I recognized the effect of overdamping with the pneumatic isolation platforms I had been using, and with the bare birch plywood shelves on my rack. Fine tuning the resonance of the steel plates' interactions with my components for a sound which to me is most pleasing and natural, is the key here. Experimentation is vital to finding this balance. Simply inserting a product under the component may work for some people and in some systems and be very satisfying, but I am finding that being able to fine tune these interactions myself has led to more satisfying results.

Here is a photo that I shared before. Imagine the four O rings in each corner now removed:

 

[tima]

Hello Tim, I don't really know what is done during the 200-250 hour inspection and fine-tuning service. I did request that he tone down the sibilance if possible. The damper might have been adjusted for the sibilance and this might account for the new break in period. And I think he checks to see if too much or too little bias was used. I use 0.25g on the V-12 and 0.50g on the 3012R because that is the lowest setting.

Turn around was between 3-4 weeks, delayed slightly because of shipping in March during this pandemic.

Thanks for that info. Are your Master Sigs specs identical? (Box lid)

 

[PeterA]

Thanks for that info. Are your Master Sigs specs identical? (Box lid)

The specs on the boxes are identical

 

[PeterA]

While a bit bored last week, I contacted Magico to confirm I had properly installed the SPODS under my Q3s. It was not clear to me that the height adjustment for leveling purposes should be done with the top screw or with the bottom screw spike. The design is a constrained layer with two machined aluminum pieces, a copper section, top and bottom independent screws, and a locking nut.

Peter Mackay at Magico responded and confirmed that the footer should be tight/snug up against the bottom of the speaker enclosure to draw out cabinet resonances, and that the bottom spike screw should be used for height adjustment and then locked down with the large nut. This made sense and was how I had installed them, but it was nice to confirm the installation.

During the email exchange, Mr. Mackay asked if I had tightened the tension rods connecting the front baffle with the attached drivers to the main aluminum enclosure. They recommend checking the rod tension after shipping, and then checking twice during the first year. As I bought these speakers used, and they had just been inspected by the factory, I had assumed all was fine. That was two years ago.

I located and bought the same torque wrench that Magico supplies with all M series speakers. Photo below. Mr. Mackay sent me a copy of the Magico tensioning rod instructions, and I went to work. There are ten (10) such rods on each speaker connecting the curved front baffle to the sealed enclosure. There is an Isodamp gasket between the two pieces of aluminum, cut out around the drivers and fitted into a recess in the front baffle. I once saw this on an M Pro speaker on which a dealer was replacing the tweeter. The design and build quality was impeccable, and I assume it is the same or similar with my Q3.

The recommended tension is 120 inch pounds. This pressure compresses the Isodamp gasket material and creates the load necessary to optimize the dampening properties. I very slowly tightened each bolt starting at the top of each speaker as per the instructions. Of the twenty bolts, sixteen needed tightening. Surprisingly, I was able to turn each of these 16 bolts between 1/4 to one full turn.

I let everything settle for an hour or so as the amps warmed up, and I had a listen. I heard more micro details and increased clarity. Bass is a bit more extended and articulate. The cabinets must now have less resonance. Again, I was surprised by what I heard, but it makes sense. Much effort has gone into reducing resonance with this speaker enclosure.

The many changes and experiments I have been conducting over the past few months seem to be cumulative. The steel plates added a sense of liveliness by reducing the overdamped effect of the wooden shelves. Raising the plates off of the wood shelves onto the rubber O rings increased the harmonic content I was hearing. The tightening of the tension rods increased resolution. Together, these three recent changes, plus the earlier ones where I started removing stuff from my system, all add up to a more natural presentation of the music, and a listening experience that brings me closer to my memory of the sound or real instruments. It is just more convincing sounding.

This last improvement, may be the most obvious because it is basic maintenance, about which I was not aware. If anyone reading this has speakers that might benefit from such maintenance, I urge you to give it a try.