The importance of VTA, SRA and Azimuth - pics
- Thread starter ack
- Start date
Myles, it doesn't sound to me as though you have actually used the counter-intuitive. It is a good idea, but in practice is only a marginal improvement over not having it.Really valuable information! I don't think that all vinyl lovers realize adjusting tonearm height affects VTF. Kinda sucks but needs to be accounted forThat's why I love Peter Lederman's Counter-Intuitive for the VPI arm. Allows for superfine adjustments in VTF almost on the fly (0-0.3 gm) without having to mess around with the counterweight. The Counter-Intuitive even allows for precise tuning of the VTF while listening eg. set the cartridge's VTF to the manufacturer's recommended value and then slide the ring back or forth. Very easy to get 0.005 to 0.01 gm adjustment (eg.more or less at the limit of reliability of most meters).
The reason is that it is virtually impossible to make small precise movements any direction that result in accurate repeatable results when measured. Worse, it is also quite difficult to make a change in VTF without affecting azimuth (sometimes significantly) or vice versa because the CI is not movement restricted in any direction.
I drank the kool-aid for awhile, but upon starting to check my assumptions (those being what was implied by sales-speak) with measurements, it didn't hold up. Settings could be wildly off but look correct on the applied adhesive strip.
--Bill
Are you kidding me dude??? I reviewed it. Actually it sounds like you never used it correctly. Perhaps you put the CI on backwards or didn't use it properly. Not only that but HW also recommends the CI. Doubt he would if it didn't work.
You're telling me you couldn't slide the CI a fraction of a mm without disturbing azimuth? I never found that the case and azimuth was set and rechecked using my AT 6020. Marginal? Hardly.
And actually I don't have one but four CIs, one for each arm wand.
Last edited:
No, I'm not kidding, Dude.
It is remarkably simple to install, and operates the same forward or reverse. But it is dreadfully easy to nudge the CI ring forward or back just slightly as you turn it left/right for az, or vice versa. It most cases (especially az) it is far too coarse for accurate adjustments that are being tracked with measurements. And forget about returning to a previous setting based on viewing the marker ring. You could be way off in azimuth or VTF.
So you can honestly say that your VTF hasn't changed *at all* after making azimuth adjustments? You must be using different CI's than I did.
--Bill
No I'm lying. You know it might serve you better to tone down your accusations since you don't know me or been to, heard or seen my system. It might do you good to look for other explanations other than the person is incompetent or lying. Your attitude is growing old very quick.
1. Actually the piece fits differently front or back.
2. Perhaps you have a defective CI because mine grabs and holds onto the CW like an iron glove. In fact I've turned the CW before the CI and always check now that the CW is really tightened down.
3. Perhaps you have an older, slightly different (HW is known to have some variability between gens of gear and since you don't list your system (???), it's hard to tell) diameter CW from VPI.
My attitude? I just parroted your attitude towards me in your first response, back to you! Don't like it? Don't dish it out.
Mine didn't. The only thing different was the Soundsmith logo on the right side.
Boy mine never did. They were snug, but could easily be moved without much effort. This was on two wands, one with a standard weight and the other with the heavier 16 marked weight. The adhesive label (which on mine was too coarsely marked to be anything other than a rough guide) was slick and glossy and probably contributed to at least part of the ease of movement.
This was about 1.5 yrs ago on a (then new) Classic 2 table with 10.5 arm and two wands. I have since gotten rid of all my VPI stuff.
It does sound like you're describing a different or revised CI or slightly larger diameter weights. I certainly was not impressed with mine.
--Bill
Oh really? Actually if you look back, you initiated the insulting. And it's not just me. You have a condescending attitude to everyone on here.
Bblue i am still curious to the sound the decca makes in your system , you must have an opinion by now , and also where the rest consists off .
greetings hj
greetings hj
Hi,
Well, it's a mixed bag to me. After I got rid of the hummmmm, it was clear that the soundstage was deep and wide, and there was lots of attack with a natural presentation through the mid-range. But there's a strange lack of width and detail in the higher frequencies. The bass octaves are pretty decent but lack a certain amount of detail. I didn't notice any mistracking.
I can get a similar sound from MC/MM cartridges by running them extremely tail-down (SRA below zero). John Wright (Mr. London) told me in a recent email that the extreme negative angle of the stylus (even a fine line type like the Paratrace that the Reference uses) of 12 to 15 degrees (tip forward! away from tonearm pivot) "is the unique Decca design". To me, ignoring the SRA of the cutting stylus like this is like creating a type of Low Pass filter, losing detail and upper frequency dimension along the way. There's a lot missing up there, but it is replaced with this almost silky high frequency sound that is pleasant, even euphoric to listen to, but not at all representative of the actual contents of the vinyl.
At first listen, though, or if you haven't heard the fine detail that should be there before, it is initially a mind blowing presentation. I can certainly see why there is such a dedicated following, and I really like the idea of a no-cantilever cartridge and essentially mid/side coils instead of the conventional 45/45 LR method. If there was some way that type of 'positive scanning' (Decca coined the phrase) could accurately trace the cutting stylus like we strive for with other cartridges it would probably be exceptional. But as it is, for me, no thanks.
Meanwhile I'm selling my A90 and ZYX Airy 3, returning the London and resuming my search for something that can really track and trace well. I'm going to re-install my old Super Track V with a Jico SAS stylus to confirm that I'm not insane and it can really track and trace as well as I remember.
I have some interesting 400x+ microscope pictures of the London stylus which I'll post, plus some others. Will try some extreme closeups of the A90 as well before it goes.
--Bill
Now, that's exciting
BTW, Jonathan, I heard the Lyra Atlas in the Vandersteen/ARC room at THE Show in CA, recently...marvelous sound -- it was one of the best-sounding rooms I had experienced during our three-day sonic encounter. Congratulations
Sorta like that joke about heaven and hell where the cooks are British, the Italians are the administrators, etc....{no offense to British cooking, that has improved; as to italian administration, well....}
Haha
How about those Italian cars, though
Thank you for the kind words, Sam. The Atlas took about two years from inspiration to production, including the development of a completely different design which I ultimately decided not to release as a product, yet provided important contributions to the Atlas. So it's something of a relief when people say that they like how it performs and sounds.
Regarding the phono stage design that I am working on, how it operates is radical or downright bizarre, depending on whether you have a glass half-full or half-empty kind of mentality. The big problem with attempting radical things is that there are no existing examples that you can look to for guidance - you have to make your own experiments and suffer your own failures to learn what is possible and what isn't.
For the above reasons this project is not easy, but I believe that it will have a unique sound of its own, and hopefully be able to provide some unique insights into the performances that are recorded on LPs. Maybe it will even sound half-way decent (smile).
best regards, jonathan
Regarding the phono stage design that I am working on, how it operates is radical or downright bizarre, depending on whether you have a glass half-full or half-empty kind of mentality. The big problem with attempting radical things is that there are no existing examples that you can look to for guidance - you have to make your own experiments and suffer your own failures to learn what is possible and what isn't.
For the above reasons this project is not easy, but I believe that it will have a unique sound of its own, and hopefully be able to provide some unique insights into the performances that are recorded on LPs. Maybe it will even sound half-way decent (smile).
best regards, jonathan
Think I know what you're talking about from our conversation. Now if you had been able to pull that off, that would have been exciting!
THis is not about kids and failure but failure in general .
http://utah4h.org/files/publications/publication/pub__6701109.pdf
http://utah4h.org/files/publications/publication/pub__6701109.pdf
I agree. If you study some of the newer thoughts on changing human behavioral patterns, getting people to realize that failure is part of the learning process is very important.
Yes especially if you scroll the above quotes ,albert einstein said: if you ve never failed, youve never tried anything new
Dave Slagle has some interest comments regarding SRA on the HiFiHeroin blog:
http://www.hifiheroin.blogspot.com/2012/09/know-your-angles-new-toy.html
http://www.hifiheroin.blogspot.com/2012/09/know-your-angles-new-toy.html
I have noticed that effect. Any magnification will distort the image because of the curved optics unless it is perfectly centered. Good luck getting it perfectly centered. I have pretty good near vision so I do the best I can with the naked eye and then adjust by ear.
Thanks Mark! The last paragraph sums it up quite nicely. It's a guide, nothing else; what some people have turned it into is a crutch because they don't trust their ears.
Similar threads
