LISTSERV mailing list manager LISTSERV 16.0

Help for ARSCLIST Archives


ARSCLIST Archives

ARSCLIST Archives


[email protected]


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Proportional Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

ARSCLIST Home

ARSCLIST Home

ARSCLIST  May 2015

ARSCLIST May 2015

Subject:

Re: NOS VRII

From:

Dave Radlauer <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

Association for Recorded Sound Discussion List <[log in to unmask]>

Date:

Wed, 13 May 2015 11:28:12 -0700

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (323 lines)

NOS = New Old Stock.  Long discontinued merchandise, but new and unused.  I
see it most often used in describing vacuum tubes.

Dave Radlauer

On Wed, May 13, 2015 at 11:20 AM, James Roth <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> A question if you will:
> What does NOS stand for?
>
> Regards,
> Ben Roth
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Association for Recorded Sound Discussion List [mailto:
> [log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Shai Drori
> Sent: Wednesday, May 13, 2015 12:35 PM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] Playing Edison Diamond discs
>
> I think I have a NOS VRII around here. Is it worth anything?
> Shai
>
> On 11/05/15 4:28 PM, Dave Burnham wrote:
> > Tom
> >
> > Perhaps I didn't make myself clear; when I used a VRII, it wasn't an
> antique. GE had a luxury version with gold coloured metal and I got one of
> those directly from the factory. My tracking force was around 2.5 to 3
> grams. Also, of course, you're right, a conical stylus would have put added
> wear on the narrower parts of the groove, but I don't remember my LPs of
> the day showing unusual wear from this effect. I'm talking about ca.1959 -
> 1962, a time when all mono cartridges had little vertical compliance,
> elliptical styli had yet to make an appearance and the VRII was still
> considered a high end cartridge. Something I don't know, was 1 mil the
> width of the cutting stylus, hence the widest part of the groove, or was it
> a compromise between the different widths of the groove?
> >
> > db
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Sent from my iPhone
> >
> >> On May 11, 2015, at 7:53 AM, Tom Fine <[log in to unmask]>
> wrote:
> >>
> >> Hi Dave:
> >>
> >> What are you tracking at? The groove-gougers, including those using the
> old GE VR cartridges probably did the most damage by tracking too heavy. As
> far as I know, the VR's can't track any lower than 2 grams, but that should
> be OK if the alignment is A-OK and the tonearm is in working condition.
> >>
> >> For 78's, I think the wider grooves are somewhat heartier, so you can
> track heavier and use a less compliant cartridge without doing damage.
> After all, the records were designed to stand up to at least a couple dozen
> plays with a steel needle tracking at a half-pound or so!
> >>
> >> That said, I just don't think a circa 1950 cartridge has the technology
> to translate into electric signals all of the information in the grooves. I
> just wouldn't go there, but I'm glad you guys using the antiques are
> getting good results.
> >>
> >> -- Tom Fine
> >>
> >> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Dave Burnham"
> >> <[log in to unmask]>
> >> To: <[log in to unmask]>
> >> Sent: Monday, May 11, 2015 12:28 AM
> >> Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] Playing Edison Diamond discs
> >>
> >>
> >>> As I've said previously, I used the VRII successfully for many years
> with no complaints. Certainly I would never play a stereo LP with this
> cartridge, not even a mono compatible one, but I never noticed damage to a
> mono LP or a 78 from using it.
> >>>
> >>> db
> >>>
> >>> Sent from my iPhone
> >>>
> >>>> On May 11, 2015, at 12:01 AM, Clark Johnsen <[log in to unmask]>
> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> Agree totally with Tom -- in his first paragraph.>> Beyond that,
> >>>> into the second one, he shifts from how well a cartridge (the
> >>>> VRII) might play a record, into how it might wear a record out.
> >>>> Those are two separate topics. While I myself have not experienced
> >>>> the wear-out, owing to my discreet reluctance (not variable) to
> >>>> press ahead with repeated playing, I can and do attest to its
> >>>> ability however to get great sound out of 78s on the first playing.
> >>>> And on the second. Which is all one needs to capture the signal.
> >>>>
> >>>> While I've said this before, perhaps it's worth repeating: As a
> >>>> practitioner of "high-end audio" record playing, I have applied
> >>>> many of those unusual procedures to my beloved 78s, to success.
> >>>> Nowhere online have I seen anything about these practices, so what
> >>>> should I do with this abstruse knowledge? Seriously. I'm asking.
> >>>>
> >>>> Please don't say, Make a cassette. Or, Make a CD. (I can't,
> >>>> anyway.) One big improvement lies in the enhanced linearity of the
> >>>> bass, which requires a full-range reproduction system to
> >>>> appreciate, which most folks don't have. (Just sayin'.)
> >>>>
> >>>> clark
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> On Sun, May 10, 2015 at 2:07 PM, Tom Fine
> >>>> <[log in to unmask]>
> >>>> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> Hi Jamie:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I agree with most of what you're saying, but guys like Doug
> >>>>> Pomeroy, who have a long track record of making excellent-sounding
> >>>>> remasters from disks can read chapter and verse why doing EQ in
> >>>>> the digital domain doesn't work as well. See Gary Galo's article
> >>>>> in ARSC Journal, too. That said, I'm not averse to taking
> >>>>> something back out to analog, I've always had good luck with it,
> >>>>> so I don't see that as taboo (ie do what you suggest -- a flat
> >>>>> transfer and your 45/45 processing in the digital realm, but then
> >>>>> I'd take it back out to analog for proper de-emphasis EQ). I also
> >>>>> don't think it's possible to totally remove surface noise and, in
> >>>>> the case of heavily damaged grooves, all the ticks and pops
> >>>>> without serious, horribly audible digital artifacts.  So going for
> >>>>> "total removal of the disk medium" is a fool's errand, there comes
> >>>>> a point where what's left is too thin sounding or inherently
> >>>>> distorted so it's more annoying tham some surface noise masking
> >>>>> the harsh distortion. The worthy goal that you're espousing, using
> modern digital tools, is to get as much music content out of the grooves
> and cancel out as much noise as possible.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> By the way, the description you wrote "the stylus is unyielding
> >>>>> and gouges its way through pinch effect" exactly describes such
> >>>>> record-wreckers as the GE variable reluctance cartridge. Those
> >>>>> kinds of cartridges (including the cheapo 3-gram trackers included
> >>>>> in the console systems) cored out the grooves on many a 1950's and
> >>>>> 60's mono record, making them not worth buying even in the dollar
> bins at record stores.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> -- Tom Fine
> >>>>>
> >>>>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jamie Howarth"
> >>>>> <[log in to unmask]>
> >>>>> To: <[log in to unmask]>
> >>>>> Sent: Friday, May 08, 2015 6:27 PM
> >>>>> Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] Playing Edison Diamond discs
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I think what frustrates the discussion is that digital it is
> >>>>> possible to
> >>>>>> exactly duplicate what you are achieving mechanically plus a whole
> lot more.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> It's not that the stylus is unyielding and gouges its way through
> >>>>>> pinch effect (one hopes). It's simply not wired to communicate
> >>>>>> what it's doing in that axis. There is nothing magical about
> >>>>>> 45/45 coil placement that makes it suck compared to 90/0... You
> >>>>>> want to use the GE? Terrific. It still moves vertically it just
> >>>>>> couples the entire mass of the tone arm and bearing to that motion
> rather than absorb it locally in the cantilever.
> >>>>>> Terrific.
> >>>>>> To each his own.
> >>>>>> Every iota of geometry in the groove/stylus interface can be
> >>>>>> deduced from 45/45. All of the mechanical noise cancellation or
> >>>>>> the facsimile thereof achieved via wiring for 90/0 can be achieved
> digitally, and then some.
> >>>>>> I'll bet Ortofon says nothing about doing the declick and cleanup
> >>>>>> from a non-de-emphasized digitization but it's a good idea before
> >>>>>> all the bass boost and treble rolloff. Do the RIAA or whatever
> >>>>>> curve afterward. Slap some on in the monitor so you know what
> >>>>>> you're listening to. But preserve and restore right off the
> >>>>>> cartridge. Don't bake in anything that loses information.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Please pardon the misspellings and occassional insane word
> >>>>>> substitution I'm on an iPhone
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> On May 8, 2015, at 4:56 PM, "Goran Finnberg [log in to unmask]"
> >>>>>> <
> >>>>>>> [log in to unmask]> wrote:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Dough Pomeroy:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> You are not the only responder to
> >>>>>>>> have stated that a mono mix should be made before de-clicking
> >>>>>>>> and other noise removal work is done.  I have heard this view
> >>>>>>>> stated in the past, but I can't agree.
> >>>>>>> And now for the ultimate way to recover the most from any
> >>>>>>> lateral cut mono disk record:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> http://ortofon.com/hifi/products/cartridges/2m-series/2m-mono-se
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> "Why should you use a dedicated mono cartridge for playing vinyl
> >>>>>>> mono records?
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> On a mono record the signal is cut only in the lateral dimension
> >>>>>>> whereas a stereo record is cut at +/- 45 degrees into the
> >>>>>>> opposing groove-walls, see figure to the right.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> A stereo cartridge will be able to replay stereo and mono
> >>>>>>> records, because mono is a special version of stereo where the
> >>>>>>> right and left channels are identical.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> While a stereo cartridge can play mono records it can’t achieve
> >>>>>>> the same signal precision between the two channels. A mono
> >>>>>>> cartridge produces but one signal that is directed to both
> >>>>>>> channels in the system. A mono cartridge playing a mono record
> >>>>>>> produces a more forceful and stable image with a fuller, more
> impactful sound.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Another big advantage in using a mono cartridge to play mono
> >>>>>>> records is the absence of response to vertical movement. This
> >>>>>>> means that a mono cartridge is basically immune to the pinching
> >>>>>>> effect which comes into action when the stylus is pushed
> vertically upward in very narrow grooves.
> >>>>>>> Also the response to dust, dirt and wear is reduced
> >>>>>>> substantially. The final result will be a clean and noiseless
> reproduction of the mono record.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> The listening experience will be significantly improved when
> >>>>>>> using a high quality true mono cartridge for the replay of your
> mono records."
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> End Quote Ortofon.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> 1/ Complete removal of the pinch distortion that can reach up to
> >>>>>>> 30 % second harmonic when played by a stereo cartridge.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> 2/ Free removal of dust dirt ticks and scratches and audible
> >>>>>>> distortion caused by wear.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> 3/ Up to 20 dB less rumble by using an only horisontal sensing
> >>>>>>> replay device that excludes the vertical component where all the
> rumble hides..
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Makes the uses of digital click/crackle/hiss removal tools much
> >>>>>>> more effective.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> So ditch all your stereo catridges and play the disks as they
> >>>>>>> were meant to be played !!!
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> :-)
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> I find the best contemporary digital
> >>>>>>>> de-clickers are so good that they fully remove the distortions
> >>>>>>>> caused by scratches. Once these and other defects are replaced
> >>>>>>>> by sound synthesized from surrounding audio, they effectively
> >>>>>>>> vanish and do not depend on mixing for removal.
> >>>>>>> By using a true lateral responding device only then the digital
> >>>>>>> noise removal tools work much faster since there is less to do.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> As you have mentioned, the stereo
> >>>>>>>> transfer of a lateral recording allows distorted areas on only
> >>>>>>>> one groove wall to be manually replaced by a less distorted
> >>>>>>>> section from the corresponding section from the opposite wall,
> >>>>>>>> and this is indeed a powerful tool.
> >>>>>>> And you have lost 3 dB S/N that is free when using a lateral
> >>>>>>> responding device only.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> A mono mix prior to de-clicking just
> >>>>>>>> combines the non-vertical noise from both channels. I find
> >>>>>>>> processing the stereo before making the mono to be a superior
> >>>>>>>> approach, but I understand there are those who disagree.
> >>>>>>> Thus the noise increases 3 dB because it is not correlated ie is
> >>>>>>> not in phase between L/R.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> The audio signal, is identical on the left or right track thus
> >>>>>>> when combined increases by +6dB thus we always gain +3 dB net by
> >>>>>>> using a lateral responding device which we get by summing L+R.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> It´s free. to do.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> But then the very best to get the most out of any lateral
> >>>>>>> recorded disk is a lateral responding, mono only, cartridge as
> stated by Ortofon.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Because then we remove all the imperfections in using a stereo
> >>>>>>> cartridge trying to extract the audio from lateral cut disks.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> The EMT OFD65 with a truncated elliptical is very good for 78´s.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> And it is a lateral responding only device too.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> --
> >>>>>>> Best regards,
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Goran Finnberg
> >>>>>>> The Mastering Room AB
> >>>>>>> Goteborg
> >>>>>>> Sweden
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> E-mail: [log in to unmask]
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Learn from the mistakes of others, you can never live long enough
> to
> >>>>>>> make them all yourself.    -   John Luther
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> (\__/)
> >>>>>>> (='.'=)
> >>>>>>> (")_(") Smurfen:RIP
>
> --
> Cheers
> Shai Drori
> Timeless Recordings
> [log in to unmask]
> בברכה,
> שי דרורי
> מומחה לשימור והמרה של אודיו וידאו וסרטים 8-35 ממ.
>



-- 
hm# 510-848-8323
cell# 510-717-5240
www.JAZZHOTBigstep.com

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

March 2024
February 2024
January 2024
December 2023
November 2023
October 2023
September 2023
August 2023
July 2023
June 2023
May 2023
April 2023
March 2023
February 2023
January 2023
December 2022
November 2022
October 2022
September 2022
August 2022
July 2022
June 2022
May 2022
April 2022
March 2022
February 2022
January 2022
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