Arny Krueger wrote:
"Arny Krueger" wrote in message

"Don Pearce" wrote in message
et
Arny Krueger wrote:

http://delback.co.uk/turntable_tests/
For grins, you might try to extract some frequency
response information from them.
The Linn Sondek in that last link has the most fearsome
wow (about 0.3% RMS) - bad enough to be a real fault, I
think.

Correct that. The predominate jitter frequency seems to be 0.55 Hz -
off-center record.



A test record shouldn't be able to go off-centre. All of mine are
drilled small, and are a very tight fit on the spindle.

d

In article , Arny
Krueger
wrote:
"Jim Lesurf" wrote in message

Just posting to let people know that audiomisc.co.uk now includes a
web version of the 4th article in my recent HFN series on LP. This one
provides measured results for the old Shure V15/III and compares it
with some modern MM carts. Also has some close up photos of each
stylus, etc.

With no exact link, it took me about 5 minutes to actually find the
page.
:-(

Sorry about that. I was just assuming people would go to the main audiomisc
page and scroll down this they found it. But I agree I should have given
the URL.

The URL is http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/HFN/LP4/NewLampsForOld.html

Once there, it was an interesting read. No surprise, the Shures had far
better technical performance than the rest.

The V15's did. I was impressed by how well they had stood up to the passing
of time. Textbook performance for stylii that are many years old.

But I was suprised by how the 97 really didn't seem very good to me.

I'm kinda surprised you didn't try to find the optimal load for the
cartridges.

Mainly because the article was 'New Lamps for Old' on the basis of just
swapping one cartridge for another. I am hoping to look at loading in the
future, but had to keep the work and the article length down to a
convenient size.

Slainte,

Jim

--
Change 'noise' to 'jcgl' if you wish to email me.
Electronics http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scot...o/electron.htm
Armstrong Audio http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/Armstrong/armstrong.html
Audio Misc http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/index.html

Arny Krueger wrote:
"Jim Lesurf" wrote in message

Just posting to let people know that audiomisc.co.uk now
includes a web version of the 4th article in my recent
HFN series on LP. This one provides measured results for
the old Shure V15/III and compares it with some modern MM
carts. Also has some close up photos of each stylus, etc.

With no exact link, it took me about 5 minutes to actually find the page.
:-(

The URL is http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/HFN/LP4/NewLampsForOld.html


I notice that the red plastic stylus 'handle' on Jim's V15 is aligned
just as badly as mine was.
I wish I knew what happened to my V15 when I moved house. :-(

--
Eiron.

In article , Eiron
wrote:
Arny Krueger wrote:
"Jim Lesurf" wrote in message

Just posting to let people know that audiomisc.co.uk now includes a
web version of the 4th article in my recent HFN series on LP. This
one provides measured results for the old Shure V15/III and compares
it with some modern MM carts. Also has some close up photos of each
stylus, etc.

With no exact link, it took me about 5 minutes to actually find the
page.
:-(

The URL is http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/HFN/LP4/NewLampsForOld.html


I notice that the red plastic stylus 'handle' on Jim's V15 is aligned
just as badly as mine was.

Yes, it is visibly skewed. However the results indicate that the actual
cantilever, etc, are very well aligned so this seems to be a cosmetic
problem. Less obvious if not looking at a 'macro' view. :-)

Slainte,

Jim

--
Change 'noise' to 'jcgl' if you wish to email me.
Electronics http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scot...o/electron.htm
Armstrong Audio http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/Armstrong/armstrong.html
Audio Misc http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/index.html

"Jim Lesurf" wrote in message
...
Just posting to let people know that audiomisc.co.uk now includes a web
version of the 4th article in my recent HFN series on LP. This one
provides
measured results for the old Shure V15/III and compares it with some
modern
MM carts. Also has some close up photos of each stylus, etc.


Excellent article, Jim.

It confirms why even now the Shure V15III is so often
the cartridge of choice for many discerning transcription
clients.

Iain

"Iain Churches" wrote in message
.fi
"Jim Lesurf" wrote in message
...
Just posting to let people know that audiomisc.co.uk now
includes a web version of the 4th article in my recent
HFN series on LP. This one provides
measured results for the old Shure V15/III and compares
it with some modern
MM carts. Also has some close up photos of each stylus,
etc.

Excellent article, Jim.

It confirms why even now the Shure V15III is so often
the cartridge of choice for many discerning transcription
clients.

It also shows that at its best, the LP format falls way behind most other
parts of a high quality reproduction chain. Furthermore, the LP was usually
appreciably worse than the best it could be, as the two other cartridges
show.

We've got other examples of people with impressive-sounding kit that had
frequency variations on the order of 10 dB within the 50-15 kHz range.

Arny Krueger wrote:
"Iain Churches" wrote in message
.fi
"Jim Lesurf" wrote in message
...
Just posting to let people know that audiomisc.co.uk now
includes a web version of the 4th article in my recent
HFN series on LP. This one provides
measured results for the old Shure V15/III and compares
it with some modern
MM carts. Also has some close up photos of each stylus,
etc.
Excellent article, Jim.

It confirms why even now the Shure V15III is so often
the cartridge of choice for many discerning transcription
clients.

It also shows that at its best, the LP format falls way behind most other
parts of a high quality reproduction chain. Furthermore, the LP was usually
appreciably worse than the best it could be, as the two other cartridges
show.

We've got other examples of people with impressive-sounding kit that had
frequency variations on the order of 10 dB within the 50-15 kHz range.


I wouldn't rule out LPs if I was you, and you like listening to music.
Even quite modest LP reproduction hardware can produce a very persuasive
sound - better than digital counterparts on occasion IMO.

Rob

Rob wrote:

I wouldn't rule out LPs if I was you, and you like listening to music.
Even quite modest LP reproduction hardware can produce a very persuasive
sound - better than digital counterparts on occasion IMO.

And of course that 'very persuasive sound' quality is exactly preserved
when you
digitize your LPs using a decent soundcard and put them onto CD.
For the full experience I like to leave a minute or so of the runout
groove on the CD.

--
Eiron.

Eiron wrote:
Rob wrote:

I wouldn't rule out LPs if I was you, and you like listening to music.
Even quite modest LP reproduction hardware can produce a very
persuasive sound - better than digital counterparts on occasion IMO.

And of course that 'very persuasive sound' quality is exactly preserved
when you
digitize your LPs using a decent soundcard and put them onto CD.

I'd tend to agree, in the sense that it's in the right ball park.

For the full experience I like to leave a minute or so of the runout
groove on the CD.


Ooh no, no, no - unnecessary cantilever stress :-)

In article ,
Eiron wrote:
I wouldn't rule out LPs if I was you, and you like listening to music.
Even quite modest LP reproduction hardware can produce a very
persuasive sound - better than digital counterparts on occasion IMO.

And of course that 'very persuasive sound' quality is exactly preserved
when you digitize your LPs using a decent soundcard and put them onto
CD. For the full experience I like to leave a minute or so of the runout
groove on the CD.

Indeed - copy an LP to CD properly and none will tell the difference. Copy
a CD to LP - I've heard it done - and the difference is obvious.

--
*Sometimes I wake up grumpy; Other times I let him sleep.

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.