To my ears, the best sounding LP I ever acquired was the "White Bird" album 
by It's a Beautiful Day.
I don't know if it was an excellent job of recording or mastering, or if I 
got Number One off the
stamper, but it was breathtaking.  I bought an early import CD of that album 
and it paled by comparison.
Just my dos centavos.

Lou Houck
Rollin' Recording
Boerne, TX

----- Original Message ----- 
From: Tom Fine
To: [log in to unmask]
Sent: Thursday, December 15, 2011 2:18 PM
Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] Straight Line Tracking was Stanton Turntable 

This is an exaggeration. There were plenty of good pop and rock records cut 
over the years, with
nice-sounding top end. It's possible to do and was possible to do from the 
earliest days of
close-mic recording. Also, as some subsequent CD reissues have clearly 
demonstrated, some of the
distortion heard on some recordings came from either overloaded microphones 
(sticking a
high-sensitivity European condenser mic real close to a loud sound source is 
not a good idea) or
overloaded electronics (typical American mic preamps of the "golden era" 
were not designed for
high-output condenser mics placed close to loud sources, they were designed 
for lower-output ribbon
mics) or poor mixing decisions leading to saturated tape. One example on how 
to do all of this right
are the best sounding Contemporary Records albums done by Roy DuNann. He 
used a passive mixer,
knowing the level coming in from his AKG and Neumann mics was too much for 
mic preamp modules at the
time. He then used a line amp on each output buss. By the mid-60's, it was 
well understood how to
record loud treble-laden sources to end up with a successful LP cut. Plus 
there were numerous
electronics made specifically to deal with this issue in the LP cutting 
chain, such things as
Fairchild's HF-only limiters, Pultec equalizers, etc.

-- Tom Fine

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Andrew Hamilton" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Thursday, December 15, 2011 2:28 PM
Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] Straight Line Tracking was Stanton Turntable 

The popular floor model lathes (Neumann and Scully) all have straight
pivoting pickup arms for checking the test grooves while being cut in spite
of having tangentially-advancing carriages for the cutter head.

There are so many tt's out there which pivot, even though it's a compromise,
that it might be best just to let disc playback be inherently flawed,
however enjoyable.

The fidelity decreases as a disc is played back on either straight,
S-shaped, or tangential pickup arms - even optically scanned grooves, since
the cutting was done with a constant angular velocity, resulting in

The surface noises of galvanizing and pressing are quite pronounced and only
tolerable because of not being correlated to the audio.

As Al Grundy explains, the RIAA eq curve and Pop music don't shake hands
well - even if the curve is perfectly de-emphasized, since the practice of
close-miking and loud treble is incongruous with the motivation to boost the
high end (75 µs) by so much, merely to diminish surface noise.  It
necessitates compatibility processing such as low corner frequencies on Low
Pass filters, acceleration limiting, and peak limiting.

If you want good sound, attend a symphony performance in a suitable hall.
(*\*   On the other hand, Caruso thought the gramophone was excellent.


On 12/15/11 1:24 PM, "Michael Biel" <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> As Ted Kendall finally was able to explain, the tone arm Stanton offered
> as an option was not a "straight LINE" tracking device, it was a PIVOTED
> straight arm without an S-bend.  Haven't any of you seen a modern DJ
> turntable with a straight unbent arm? This is what one looks like:
> Read ALL of what I wrote in my original posting without the clipping:
> From: "[log in to unmask]" <[log in to unmask]>
>>> Why would the straight arm be skip proof? joe salerno
>> It helps in the back-cueing that DJs do. The force is pushing
> straight
>> back on the arm, and is less likely to jump grooves during back
> cueing
>> than an S-shaped arm. Unless you back-cue, you are better off with
> the
>> S-shaped arm.
> It is a "straight" arm, not a "straight line" device.
> Mike Biel  [log in to unmask]
> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] Straight Line Tracking was Stanton Turntable
> reviews....anyone?
> From: Ted Kendall <[log in to unmask]>
> Date: Thu, December 15, 2011 12:09 pm
> To: [log in to unmask]
> On 15/12/2011 16:23, Aaron Levinson wrote:
>> Goran-
>> Based on this reasoning isn't that why the linear tracking tonearm was
>> arguably the truest playback system of all?
>> AA
>> On 12/15/11 9:10 AM, Goran Finnberg wrote:
>>> Mike Biel:
>>>> Unless you back-cue, you are better off with the
>>>> S-shaped arm.
>>> The straight arm gives less wow and flutter.
>>> Also it gives less distortion as the S-shaped arm cannot be adjusted
>>> to have
>>> more than two points of distortion minima and all other places are the
>>> tracking distortion much higher.
>>> Furthermore a bent arm creates the need for anti skate adjustment.
>>> Without
>>> it the right channel will distort much earlier than the left channel.
>>> Also the cartridge stereo channel separation will become nonsymmetrical
>>> without anti-skate adjustment.
>>> So on.
>>> Straight line is always better in all respects as it mimics the way
>>> the disk
>>> was cut.
> Of course a linear track arm is the nearest approach to the path of the
> cutter, but this is not present in the Stanton turntables under
> discussion. The point at issue is the difference between a straight
> pivoted tonearm without offset, which is a geometrical abomination only
> of use to scratchers, and a pivoted arm with the necessary offset for
> minimum tracking error, obtained in the Stanton case by use of an S
> shaped arm.

Serif Sound ♬ CD Premastering
➣ Dingbat Lacquer Sound Disc

No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG -
Version: 8.5.454 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/4081 - Release Date: 12/14/11