LISTSERV mailing list manager LISTSERV 16.0

Help for ARSCLIST Archives


ARSCLIST Archives

ARSCLIST Archives


ARSCLIST@LISTSERV.LOC.GOV


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Monospaced Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

ARSCLIST Home

ARSCLIST Home

ARSCLIST  June 2003

ARSCLIST June 2003

Subject:

Re: was Early English Columbia LPs

From:

George Brock-Nannestad <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

[log in to unmask]

Date:

Mon, 16 Jun 2003 02:29:21 +0200

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (210 lines)

From: Patent Tactics, George Brock-Nannestad

oh, is it difficult to use a precise terminology! I do not think that
Goran Finnberg and I disagree over very much, we simply use
different words. Anyway, to clarify:

Goran:

> George Brock-Nannestad wrote:
>
> > Since 1957 most stereo cartridges have
> > relied on having one set of coils sensitive in a slanted direction 45
> > degrees to the right and another set of coils sensitive 45 degrees to the
> > left of vertical. The stereo information in such stereo records are cut for
> > those directions, termed right and left channel.
>
> For a signal containing left OR right ONLY then weŽd see the above
> mentioned 45 degree movement.

----- I did not say 45 degree movement, only sensitivity. Actually the
combined sensitivity of the two sets of coils corresponds to a sort of
butterfly pattern, with maxima in the 45/45 directions.

>
> So in fact weŽd expect to see movement from all directions inbetween 45
> degree slant to side by side depending on the stereo width only.

----- I totally agree


>
> So, in fact, a stereo pickup will be able to move in all directions from
> lateral to vertical and everything in between.

----- again I agree, the stylus has to be able to move in all
directions, and that why it is important that its compliance is the
same in all directions. In fact, the stylus movement is basically of
the same shape that you can see on your phasor screen.

George wrote:
>
> > Blumlein's own design was
> > for vertical and horizontal (lateral).

(and then Goran quotes British Patent Specification 394,325

>
> So in fact any movement from purely lateral to purely verical or
> anything inbetween not only 45 degrees as implied by you could be had by
> the 45 degree mounting arrangement of the driving coils when fed by
> varying signals whose PHASE content is different between the two
> channels which will produce different VECTOR forces on the cutting
> stylus.
>
----- when I said "Blumlein's own", I meant that which he
implemented for his experiments. His cutterhead was vertical
combined with lateral. That was used in his famous "walking and
talking" demonstrations.

> > You can obtain one type of signal
> > from the other type by so-called matrixing, in which you add and subtract
> > the signals suitably. For 45/45, I obtain lateral mono from a stereo output
> > by summing the signals from the coil sets, and I obtain vertical mono by
> > taking the signal in the reverse from one of the coil sets and summing
> > (series connection is summing).
>
> For the moving magnet pickup cartridge its essential to provide the
> correct electrical loading impedance which is set to nominally 47 kohms
> loading shunted by 100 to 500 pF of capacitive loading to get the
> manufacturer specified frequency response.
>
> Any change from this means a non flat frequency response and should be
> avoided if quality results is to be had from the disk to be transferred.
>
> The correct way to do this is to use a phono preamplifier with the
> correct replay equalisation for the disk to be replayed and do the
> matrixing by mono the left and right signals, L plus R equal to Mono or
> lateral sensing, or inverting the polarity of one channel and then
> summing, L minus R equal to difference sensing, S, or vertical sensing
> only.
>
> This way will not compromise quality.

----- point well taken! What you are saying is that combining the
signals in the headshell is not correct unless the input impedance
constituting the load on the pickup is adjusted at the same time.
Here I have been guilty a lot of times.
>
George wrote:
> > Now, the channel separation of a stereo cartridge is rarely more than 20 dB
> > over a wide frequency range. For this reason there is no way to obtain a
> > pure vertical or a pure horizontal signal by summing as described, not even
> > with a balancing control.

Goran responded:
>
> The channel separation of a stereo cartridge has nothing to do with its
> ability to provide pure lateral sensing or vertical sensing.
>
> This is a matter of the phase response between the two channels only and
> if they are perfectly alike then pure vertical or a pure horizontal
> sensing will be perfect.

----- ah, but they are not perfectly alike in a manufacturer's world,
and that is why you will not get a perfect null if you have a lateral
record and a amplifier summing set up for vertical.
>
> Stereo separation by itself can be arbitrarily set by using M/S
> techniques to slightly widen the separation to any figure wished for.
> But that has nothing whatsoever to do with vertical/lateral sensing as
> such.

----- I agree. As an aside: the most impressive demonstration of
increased stereo separation I have heard in a room from an
analogue source was the use of ordinary left-right speakers in front
and side speakers connected in series (and correctly polarised!), to
the *hot* terminals of the amplifiers used. That effectively increases
the difference signal heard. Bang & Olufsen used that in the early
1970s (was it called Ambiophony?)

George wrote:
> > The only way to obtain that is to use a mono pickup.
Goran replied:
> ThatŽs one way to do it.
> Albeit a very good way to do it.
> Another way is to simply mono, L plus R, a stereo cartridge.
>
> This will net you a 3 dB increase in S/N compared to any other way
----- this I do not understand
 and
> rid you of boatloads of distortion and rumble and subsonic shit from
> warped disks free without the need to filter it out.

----- again, I do not understand this argument, provided the rumble,
etc. is of a vertical nature

George wrote:
> > And here Ortofon have a genial solution: they have revived a
> > cartridge from 1949, it is dynamic (moving coil), and it has a high vertical
> > compliance.

.....................

>
> > That will give pure lateral mono, except for pinch effect, which
> > is reduced if you use an elliptical stylus that is oriented as the cutting
> > stylus was
>
> Pinch effect does NOT excist in mono only pickups. In stereo pickups you
> get rid of pinch effect by mono the signal or L plus R.

----- here I disagree: pinch effect was one of the curses of early
mono reproduction, because it wore the records down due to lack
of vertical compliance of the early, heavy pickups and soundboxes.
That was also the reason why "trailing needles" were prescribed for
early instantaneous recordings. Pinch effect refers to the fact that
you cut with a chisel-like stylus as opposed to embossing by a
round stylus. In the resulting groove the width measured across the
groove (perpendicular to the curve) at any point with a high velocity
(a steep angle with respect to the zero "line") will be narrower, and
the angle you encounter "between" groove flanks will be
consideralbly less than 90 degrees. This pushes the stylus up twice
in a period, and so has double the frequency. An elliptical stylus
will suffer less. In an embossed record an elliptical stylus sinks for
a similar reason. If the stylus is incapable to follow this vertical
movement, then the groove flanks suffer. Pinch effect wear and
needle chatter is avoided in any pickup having a high vertical
compliance. The Ortofon Mono Pickup known as the C-head (the
A-head had a lower *lateral* compliance) has a high vertical
compliance, but no vertical output, obviously. In the image of the
butterfly pattern used above, think of the two lateral wings being of
a very, very low height, so that any deviation from true lateral gives
virtually no output. This is considerably lower than what you will
have if your stereo pickup coils, core pieces, and capacities are not
perfectly balanced, which is also the prerequiste for a good stereo
separation.


Goran wrote:
> BTW, the use of an elliptical stylus will negate scanning losses, treble
> loss, in the inner grooves near the center of the disk where the linear
> velocity is much lower compared to the start of the disk since the
> scanning radius of such a tip will better follow the much smaller
> curvature of the treble frequencies.

----- that is not true of Dynagroove encoded RCA records. They
used a tracing simulator that pre-distorted the grooves to give a
good result with spherical styli. This means that the result will be
worse when an elliptical stylus is used. I have heard this extremely
clearly on an ELP turntable which has the smallest elliptical
footprint I know.

George wrote:
> - vertical tracking angle has to fit as well as any rotation of
> > the original cutting stylus in its holder. If you want to use several kinds
> > of stylus on this cartridge it is going to be expensive.

Goran agreed:
> Yes, since you need several such costly cartridges for each stylus size
> you wish to use since the stylus cannot be removed from the cartridge
> body and changed to a different one as can be done with a moving magnet
> cartridge.

Boy, was this a lengthy exchange!!

Kind regards,


George

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

Advanced Options


Options

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password


Search Archives

Search Archives


Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe


Archives

December 2021
November 2021
October 2021
September 2021
August 2021
July 2021
June 2021
May 2021
April 2021
March 2021
February 2021
January 2021
December 2020
November 2020
October 2020
September 2020
August 2020
July 2020
June 2020
May 2020
April 2020
March 2020
February 2020
January 2020
December 2019
November 2019
October 2019
September 2019
August 2019
July 2019
June 2019
May 2019
April 2019
March 2019
February 2019
January 2019
December 2018
November 2018
October 2018
September 2018
August 2018
July 2018
June 2018
May 2018
April 2018
March 2018
February 2018
January 2018
December 2017
November 2017
October 2017
September 2017
August 2017
July 2017
June 2017
May 2017
April 2017
March 2017
February 2017
January 2017
December 2016
November 2016
October 2016
September 2016
August 2016
July 2016
June 2016
May 2016
April 2016
March 2016
February 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
October 2015
September 2015
August 2015
July 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006
December 2005
November 2005
October 2005
September 2005
August 2005
July 2005
June 2005
May 2005
April 2005
March 2005
February 2005
January 2005
December 2004
November 2004
October 2004
September 2004
August 2004
July 2004
June 2004
May 2004
April 2004
March 2004
February 2004
January 2004
December 2003
November 2003
October 2003
September 2003
August 2003
July 2003
June 2003
May 2003
April 2003
March 2003
February 2003
January 2003

ATOM RSS1 RSS2



LISTSERV.LOC.GOV

CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager