Print

Print


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
>>> 
>>> 
>>>