why lower noise? how low noise and lower distortion relate.

[Mike Lavigne]

today i had a friend visit who has not been to my room for about 14 months. he just sent me an e-mail.....

hi mike
good to visit with you today, even if it was a bit short. your system really sounds better than it ever has - the noise floor is the lowest i've heard on any system. despite my penchant for the musicality of vintage style systems, i've always had two big issues with them, one of which i could live with, which is the lack of full frequency range coverage, but the second is that it is nearly impossible to get low noise floor with them. i've heard a million modern gear systems too, the best of the best - never have i heard, or rather not heard, or whatever, so little noise. amazing. i wonder, of the things you've done in the last year plus, what you think is the biggest factor in achieving this - the equitech? the room treatment changes opened up the sound, but shouldn't change the noise floor like that, i would think. i didn't listen to CD today, and was not familiar with those tapes in the context of your older system configurations, but i guess the other factor then, with LP's, is that new record player of yours.

my answer to his question......

As far as how the system has achieved low noise, I can think of a few obvious reasons and maybe a few not so obvious ones.



---yes, the Equi=tech does get a share of the credit. Not only for low noise, but an increase in dynamic contrasts, and it’s contribution to bettering the power supply of every piece of electronics. My darTZeel amplifier has those annoying red lights on the front. When the amp gets to ‘near clipping’ those lights flash. Before the Equi=tech there were many recordings which could push the amp to flash in time with the music. Since the Equi=tech the lights almost never flash. I think the power supply stays much more stable when pushed than before. Every piece of gear has received that benefit, but they don’t have warning lights to call attention to the benefit.

---a lower noise turntable, and lower distortion arm. The combination makes considerable difference.

---all new power cords. I was using the Jena Labs Fundamental One with in-line conditioners. When I got the Equi=tech I re-visited my power cords and found a significant improvement in lower distortion and lower noise with the Absolute Fidelity power cords from Gary Ko of Genesis Loudspeakers. He is a local friend.

www.absolutefidelity

these power cords are designed for specific applications. It has improved the synergy of the system as well as lowering noise and increasing vividness.

---the Wave Kinetics A10-U8 footers; I have 7 sets of them ($700 each set of 4). These really improved things particularly under the network pods of my Transparent Opus speaker cables. Don’t laugh. Next time you come over we’ll pull them out, listen, and put them back in. huge issue. Distortion in your speaker cables cannot be ignored. There is no other solution for it. and until you hear it removed, you’ll never know the distortion was there.

---the out of phase subwoofer driver on the right side caused distortion, and made it impossible to adjust the speakers properly.

---closing up the bass trapping in the ceiling, and adding the diffusion reduced distortion.

Remember; lowering noise and reducing distortion are almost the same thing. When things clear up the detail pops out. If the bass is clean and energetic, you hear far into the recording, the foundation and ambience are clear, nuance is easily perceived.

this seemed like the kind of subject 'we' like to chew on here....

 

[Phelonious Ponk]

Mike, congratulations on the progress in your system. Mine certainly has limitations that you don't face, but noise is not one of them. Part of that is due to my choices of equipment and listening venue (all digital, active, computer-sourced, headphones/near field...), a bit has to do with tweaking power source (two strips into separate circuits, once I got the right things isolated from each other, the floor dropped to well below the voices in my head). The rest, I guess, is luck. But I've had noise problems before, and they can be among the most difficult systematic problems to deal with.

Tim

 

[Steve williams]

Hi Mike

Congrats on your update and sharing the photos. As always, first class

I am interested in your thought going from a linear tracking arm as in the Rockport to a pivotal tracking arm (as in the Talea).
Although I lack any and all knowledge of turntables I always thought that a linear tracker was the most accurate for getting info out of those inner grooves. Any thoughts on noise floor changes betwen these two types of tracking arms

 

[RogerD]

"Remember; lowering noise and reducing distortion are almost the same thing. When things clear up the detail pops out. If the bass is clean and energetic, you hear far into the recording, the foundation and ambience are clear, nuance is easily perceived."

So true, I have found that the lower the distortion(noise) is,the more dynamic and clean the bass is. It is amazing how much noise that can be produced by a audio circuit,the trick is to recognise what makes the noise,and make the neccessary changes.

 

[Mike Lavigne]

Hi Mike

Congrats on your update and sharing the photos. As always, first class

I am interested in your thought going from a linear tracking arm as in the Rockport to a pivotal tracking arm (as in the Talea).
Although I lack any and all knowledge of turntables I always thought that a linear tracker was the most accurate for getting info out of those inner grooves. Any thoughts on noise floor changes betwen these two types of tracking arms

hi Steve,

since the Rockport is a 'system' and you cannot judge the parts independantly; any opinions i have on the specific characterisitics of the Rockport linear tracking arm are offered provisionally. also, i think that there has not been enough develpment of the linear tracking approach to know it's ultimate potential.

all that said, my opinion is that as you travel down the road of tonearm performance, that unipivots have passed linear trackers to my ears....specifically, that the Talea 2 is a better tonearm overall than the Rockport linear tracker. is the NVS a better turntable than the Rockport Sirius III? it's lower noise, and equally as speed stable and accurate at least.

the Rockport linear tracker is now a 16 year old design. that it's held off the competition for this long is remarkable. but i think it's now merely 'one of the very best'. i'm now hearing things on Lps i've never heard before....and not just subtle things.

as far as the theoretical advantage of linear trackers, you have to balance that with the theoretical disadvantage of the additional mass a linear tracker must move in contrast with the theoretical advantage of the freedom to wiggle of a unipivot. and as a unipivot gets longer, the tracking advantage of a linear tracker get's reduced. as i've watched the development of the unipivot arms of Joel Durand in my room compared to the Rockport linear tracker, it's been clear how this plays out.

and to answer your last question, Joel's unipivots have no issues with inner grooves. period.

to try and stay on topic and relate these thoughts to this thread.....this is a situation where lowered distortion in a tonearm, and slight lowering of noise in the turntable, add up to a percieved dramatic lowering of the nosie floor and increase in detail and microdynamics of the performance.

 

[Steve williams]

and as a unipivot gets longer, the tracking advantage of a linear tracker get's reduced.

makes sense Mike

Thanks

 

[Johnny Vinyl]

Mike,

Can you (layman-wise) explain why longer tonearms are better?

 

[Mike Lavigne]

Mike,

Can you (layman-wise) explain why longer tonearms are better?

ok, i'll try....but i'm not a techie, i'm an observer. so for me to explain something technical is pushing things.

records are cut with a lathe that uses a linear tracking jig. it cuts straight across the metal surface. so to properly read that groove, the stylus needs to be as close to perpendicular as possible all the way from one side of the Lp (outermost groove), to the other side of the Lp (innermost groove).

a linear tracker theoretically mimics exactly the path of the lathe. i say 'theoretically' because there are many different issues with linear trackers i won't get into that can screw this up. but it does have this theoretical advantage of perfect tangency.

any pivoted arm can only theoretically have perfect tangency (being perpendicular) at two points thru it's travel. however, the longer the arm, the less variance from perfect tangency it will have. since as the pivot point for the arm moves further and further back from the spindle, the arc gets broader and broader. less alignment error as the length is increased. obviously there are logistical and mechanical problems which compromise a long tonearm, so there are limits to length in the real world.

as far as inner groove distortion; as the grooves get tighter (sharper arc) toward the spindle, correct alignment is more critical.

i hope that this makes sense.

 

[RogerD]

"- the noise floor is the lowest i've heard on any system. despite my penchant for the musicality of vintage style systems, i've always had two big issues with them, one of which i could live with, which is the lack of full frequency range coverage, but the second is that it is nearly impossible to get low noise floor with them. i've heard a million modern gear systems too, the best of the best - never have i heard, or rather not heard, or whatever, so little noise"

The 2nd conclusion about vintage gear is not correct.

The underlined statement is probably true to some degree and sadly so. It is not expensive to lower the noise floor. This is not a subject that carries great interest with people that are tied to the "Hi End" audio industry. There's just too much money to be made with the status quo.

 

[FrantzM]

Mike

I am entirely convinced about AC Power. I have experienced it first hand. I don't know what the measurements say about that but it has been a constant in my experience. i think the Equi=tech is responsible for a lot of what you now hear. I am also convinced of the value of proper vibration reduction in certain gears. Turntables come to mind and some tubes gears as well. Frankly I would think that they even might help R2R but not convinced really. As for their contribution to SS gears, I am skeptical but ... I am utterly impressed about how you go after your room... subtly changing the configure but toward the goal of reducing the (your) room contribution... All these IMO have brought your system to its present (exalted) level ..
You may notice that I left the vibration gears under the Transparent cable and the power cables out of what I think brought these improvements.. Allow me to remain utterly skeptical about their contribution... I am open to changing my mind upon audition .. I sincerely doubt that will be the case though ...
Enjoy your great system and I am looking forward to experience it ...

 

[Johnny Vinyl]

ok, i'll try....but i'm not a techie, i'm an observer. so for me to explain something technical is pushing things.

records are cut with a lathe that uses a linear tracking jig. it cuts straight across the metal surface. so to properly read that groove, the stylus needs to be as close to perpendicular as possible all the way from one side of the Lp (outermost groove), to the other side of the Lp (innermost groove).

a linear tracker theoretically mimics exactly the path of the lathe. i say 'theoretically' because there are many different issues with linear trackers i won't get into that can screw this up. but it does have this theoretical advantage of perfect tangency.

any pivoted arm can only theoretically have perfect tangency (being perpendicular) at two points thru it's travel. however, the longer the arm, the less variance from perfect tangency it will have. since as the pivot point for the arm moves further and further back from the spindle, the arc gets broader and broader. less alignment error as the length is increased. obviously there are logistical and mechanical problems which compromise a long tonearm, so there are limits to length in the real world.

as far as inner groove distortion; as the grooves get tighter (sharper arc) toward the spindle, correct alignment is more critical.

i hope that this makes sense.

It does and thank you!

 

[Mike Lavigne]

It does and thank you!

i forgot to add that longer tonearms are not necessarly better, but.....properly designed longer arms can be better. getting just any old 12" arm is not the answer. longer arms have their challenges as the greater length puts more focus on materials and precision. set-up, for instance, is more critical with a longer arm. small errors have more negative effects. however; when those challenges are met a longer tonearm can be better.

i just did not want to leave any sort of general impression that longer is always better.....'in tonearms'.

 

[Johnny Vinyl]

i forgot to add that longer tonearms are not necessarly better, but.....properly designed longer arms can be better. getting just any old 12" arm is not the answer. longer arms have their challenges as the greater length puts more focus on materials and precision. set-up, for instance, is more critical with a longer arm. small errors have more negative effects. however; when those challenges are met a longer tonearm can be better.

i just did not want to leave any sort of general impression that longer is always better.....'in tonearms'.

Got it! Thx for the clarification Mike!

Another question! How easily can these longer arms be introduced (replaced) on one's extisting TT? Is this even possible?

 

[Mike Lavigne]

Got it! Thx for the clarification Mike!

Another question! How easily can these longer arms be introduced (replaced) on one's extisting TT? Is this even possible?

it's not only possible, but it's normal on better turntables that various arms are accomodated.

every turntable has a different arm mounting scheme....so it's hard to generalize about what the choices one has. and some tt's come as 'systems', where the arm is packaged and designed into the turntable and changing arms is not practical. typically at more entry levels of tt's and arms, longer arms are to be avoided as the level of precision needed in a longer arm is rarely seen at modest price points.

many tt plinths (a plinth is the structure of the tt that the platter is attached to) are too small to allow room for longer arms. some tt's have rotating arm boards, where one can rotate the arm board outward to accomodate longer arms....or even make larger arm boards. another valid approach is to have a separate arm tower sitting next to the turntable and simply move the tower to the right place for the longer arm base.

 

[Johnny Vinyl]

Thank you Mike! You've been a fountain of really good information today, and I appreciate the time you took to answer my queries!

 

[Mike Lavigne]

Mike

I am entirely convinced about AC Power. I have experienced it first hand. I don't know what the measurements say about that but it has been a constant in my experience. i think the Equi=tech is responsible for a lot of what you now hear.

Hi Frantz,

my feelings are that actual noise reduction in the A/C grid from the Equi=tech is likely about 15-20% of the total change in percieved lowered noise and distortion in my system over the last year. so we see this a little different. maybe if we add the Absolute Fidelity power cords it goes to 25%. but most of the improvement was with solving the out of phase speaker driver, getting the speakers properly adjusted, improving isolation, some room changes, and improved source gear with the new turntable.

of course, i've been present for every incremental change.

I am also convinced of the value of proper vibration reduction in certain gears. Turntables come to mind and some tubes gears as well. Frankly I would think that they even might help R2R but not convinced really. As for their contribution to SS gears, I am skeptical but ... I am utterly impressed about how you go after your room... subtly changing the configure but toward the goal of reducing the (your) room contribution... All these IMO have brought your system to its present (exalted) level ..

thanks.

You may notice that I left the vibration gears under the Transparent cable and the power cables out of what I think brought these improvements.. Allow me to remain utterly skeptical about their contribution... I am open to changing my mind upon audition .. I sincerely doubt that will be the case though ...

there is only one way to accomodate a 'doubting Thomas'....that is with the personal expereince of hearing it. which i do hope happens later this year as we've discussed.

Enjoy your great system and I am looking forward to experience it ...

thank you.

 

[DonH50]

Just to be the geek, noise and distortion are not easily (nor necessarily) related and reducing one does not imply improvement in the other. Typically the opposite. That said, lowering either or both is a worthwhile goal in any system!

 

[RogerD]

Just to be the geek, noise and distortion are not easily (nor necessarily) related and reducing one does not imply improvement in the other. Typically the opposite. That said, lowering either or both is a worthwhile goal in any system!

Then I'll just say all noise is distortion or all distortion is noise.

bottom line is anything but signal is......

 

[Mike Lavigne]

Just to be the geek, noise and distortion are not easily (nor necessarily) related and reducing one does not imply improvement in the other. Typically the opposite. That said, lowering either or both is a worthwhile goal in any system!

ok, let's come at this from a different direction.

when you hear more detail in a system, more ambient information being presented, more linear bass, greater dynamic range, greater microdynamics, more snap to the transients, and more textural nuance.....how do you determine what might be a lowering of noise floor, and what might be lowering distortion?

where does one 'effect' end and the other begin?

note that i do agree with you to an extent. in my situation i had a chance to see how my efforts resulted in changes during each step of the process. most times there were improvements to both noise floor and distortion.....in other words; things were both clearer and there was less noise. although mostly it was more one than the other. and it was mostly distortion being removed that yeilded the larger change. let's face it; there is a 'limit' to how much noise can be removed. OTOH the only way you know how much distortion can be removed is when you hear it removed. otherwise you are blissfully unaware. you have accepted the distortion as truth.

 

[jazdoc]

I've been privileged to have had a front row seat the past couple years during the evolution of Mike's room. I can attest that there has been remarkable progress. The room never sounded anything less than very good, however to my ears, the journey was certainly not linear. Indeed there were several instances where things were 'different' not necessarily 'better'. However, the sum total has certainly reached a new plateau. IMO, while there have been some major changes, especially TT/tonearm, the end result is the sum of many smaller improvements which taken together have achieved the current result.

I consider myself very lucky to have local audiophiles like Mike and Bruce who set extremely lofty goals for us mere mortals. As fabulous as their rooms sound, they pale by comparison to the quality of their owners!