There is a real issue with dubbing 78's (or any other recording) at a speed
other than what it was intended to be played back at. You are drastically
changing the frequencies of the recording when you play it at the wrong
speed, which will totally screw up the intended phono-EQ decoding, which is
keyed into the original frequencies. In other words, RIAA EQ decoding
won't work right on a RIAA recording played back at another speed that is
very far from the original pitch. Acoustic recordings had no phono-EQ
(they were recorded flat), but since shortly after the dawn of electrical
recording about 1924, various phono EQ settings were applied to all phono
recordings (with the occasional exception of some radio or instantaneous
transcription discs which were sometimes recorded flat). It is really
important to get the playback setting as correct as possible--there is a
huge impact on the sound when that is not done. I think getting the
playback phono EQ application wrong will have a far greater impact on the
sound than such niceties as cartridge cantilever performance. Not that
those things are unimportant--they are just subtleties compared to the far
bigger issue of getting phono EQ right.
There are admittedly times when a problematic record simply will not track
at the intended speed, and we do what we have to, to get it to play at all,
but that's the exceptional case.
On Sun, Apr 15, 2018 at 3:44 PM, Mickey Clark <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> The problem with vinyl is cartridge inadequacies
> One major reason for my preference for 78s is the presence.
> I can only achieve the quality that I strive for by playing a 78 slow.
> What I hear when playing a stereo record is a sense of lack of mid-range
> texture. I use a Shure M97 cartridge for slow dub 78s only. I find that
> the sound is compressed when I play a 78 at full speed. This is due, I
> believe to the flexing of the cantilever assembly in the cartridge. Less
> so than an M44 which has a thicker and thus more rigid cantilever. On a 33
> 1/3 I hear sibilants popping out at you with a washed-out quality of
> mid-range. The location of the pick-up in many stereo cartridges is inside
> the body of the cartridge. The vibrations relayed by the cantilever are
> accurate for bass - i.e. the stylus can reach the peak of a wave form
> without flexing because there is adequate time for it to achieve this. high
> frequencies are far smaller and can be tracked adequately as well.
> The problem is the mid-range frequencies - a cantilever assembly will flex
> slightly, not reaching the full amplitude of the wave form. In the case of
> a tuba, you will tend to hear the fundamental of the note which will
> overpower the overtones which give the sound more character.
> The General Electric VR22 - Golden Classic - variable reluctance
> cartridges address this issue by working in an entirely different manner.
> The magnet is on the very tip of the cantilever . The relationship of the
> magnet with the two metal nodes that protrude from the cartridge induces
> magnetic fluctuations which are picked up by two coils within the body of
> the cartridge. The cantilever in this design is only a ground in the
> circuit and does not need to be rigid in order to perform it's function.
> As I was curious about this cartridge, I found a new-old stock 1960 Golden
> Classic which I have mounted on a ca. 1935 Micro transcription turntable
> with a professional Audax tone arm.
> The following link is to comparative samples of Renata Tebaldi singing Un
> Bel Di from London issue of Madame Butterfly. Original sample rate
> 96,000/24 resampled to 44,100/16. I ran a very low dehum filter to both and
> maximized the levels for comparison (so at least the peaks are in line with
> each other. As I expected, the GE golden classic retains more of the breath
> of the voice and the strings have more presence.
> I prefer the 58 year old cartridge on the 85 year old Micro(later McCurdy)
> to the Shure on a Technics SP-15 -Mickey
> -----Original Message----- From: Lou Judson
> Sent: Sunday, April 15, 2018 9:07 AM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] "High Def vinyl?"
> It in’t so surprising to me that it is sourced from digital - there is no
> economical way to record analog any more - the question is, has it been
> damaged by poor digital practices?
> Lou Judson
> Intuitive Audio
> On Apr 14, 2018, at 8:14 PM, Corey Bailey <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> From digital to analog.
>> Verrry Interrresting!
>> Corey Bailey Audio Engineering
>> On 4/14/2018 4:37 PM, John Haley wrote:
>>> Ah, Lou. Almost the same analogy I made, before seeing your email.
>>> John Haley
>>> On Sat, Apr 14, 2018 at 7:27 PM, Lou Judson <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>>> Verrrry Interrresting as Arte Johnson used to say: <
>>>> But will it be playable? They say so, but the proof is in the playing…
>>>> still suseptible to dust, scratches, clicks and pops!