Rubbish in, rubbish out?

[CJSF]

I got to thinking, I lost and then found my loverly warm, open, detailed, involving presentation, all in the space of 48 hours! We often see posts asking how to improve the status-quo, get some life and involvement into their music? Its been a long while since I have been there, then I got thrown in at the deep end, loosing 'the sound'.

So often the advise is new cartridge, TT and/or arm, in an ideal world where money was no object, perhaps?

As I say, I got to thinking, what do I do, what did I do to get things back on an even keel. The fact that a recent post mentioned a dealers sound not being involving, that buged me. I have never been in the real budget end of the market, Ortofon Blue was my lowest in a Rega arm on a P5. How did I get them to perform, VTA was fixed, so I spent a few quid on a proper digital stylus ballance, (not expensive on that site!) setting the down force to the recomended weight, no guess work, no keep the fingers crossed. From there one reduced the stylus weight by tiny amounts, trusting my ears. Its not easy, on the buget arms as there is generaly no triming weight but it can be done.

Inveriably the recomended starting weight is high, solid, no hint of skiding, but it can often sound a little dead? Regardless of cost any cartridge will do this. Carefull easing back on the weight will bring life to the sound, some cartridges more than others, there will come a point where it starts to go whispy then miss track, measure this on the digital scales, you have a minimum , 'no go point', edge the down force a couple of points forward, to a point where the sound is pleasing, weigh it, thats your ideal down force.

Other things affect the above, not least, the quality of the stylus fitted by the manufacturer, you are not going to get much on an entry level package deal cartridge. Try to side step these and see what the dealer can do?

Arms in my humble opinion are not trusted as much as they shoud be, The Rega so often found as a starter is a superb piece of kit, coping well with cartriges 2 or 3 times its price, indeed I had a Sumiko MC Pearwood in a Rega 300 arm, it worked superbly well.

Bias is another stumbling block, from what I have seen most over do it, or go to the other extreem, I can only sugest adjust and listen, to me its a hit or miss afair at this level. VTA, again is a bit hit or miss, Rega say it makes no differance . . . . I begg to differ, but agree, it is an aproximation of compromise with varying thickness in vinyl.

These are thoughts on my own experiances with setting up turn tables. I think I have seen it mentioned, the cartrige makes the system. I would go a little further to say the 'arm/cartrige set up' makes a system, the aim is giving the best possible signal to the other components in the chain . . . isn't that what Linn used to say, 'rubbish in, rubbish out'.

CJSF

 

[Frank Harvey]

I still stand by that rule. It's like having two identical photos you want blown up to put in a large picture frame. The only difference between the two pics is one is low resolution, one is high. The bigger you blow up the photo, the more you can see it's limitations. This is equivalent to a 'bigger', better system showing up the limitations of the source signal. Either way, when you're focussing on the detail of the end result, the differences are marked.

 

[CJSF]

I still stand by that rule. It's like having two identical photos you want blown up to put in a large picture frame. The only difference between the two pics is one is low resolution, one is high. The bigger you blow up the photo, the more you can see it's limitations. This is equivalent to a 'bigger', better system showing up the limitations of the source signal. Either way, when you're focussing on the detail of the end result, the differences are marked.

Hi davidf, I worry when dealers present a 'system/sound' that is obviously not tuned to its best potential. I have extracted some real quality sound from on paper what are 'ordinary' systems, it sometimes needs sidways thinking and patience but can be done. To a degre, as with your low resalution picture, it starts to show limitations, so stop and enjoy untill the higher res pic can be obtained,

A point that few appreciate, most speakers can be made to produce a much better sound than they do in there standard presentation. Propper stand are essential, I did a lot of work on stands in the 80's, many poo-hood the ideas untill I proved the point with practical demonstrations, they walked away mumbling that it was not possible what they had just heard. Few understand what is actualy happening even today. As is a cartrige/arm potentialy a vibrating mass, valves are a vibrating mass cables are not, even solid state amps have there issues, transformers vibrate.

Deal with these areas and a very modest system can make the hairs stand up.

CJSF

 

[Frank Harvey]

Agree CJSF. Always remember in the early 90s at the first dealer I worked for, where we had a number of "reference" systems at certain price points. The budget one was a Denon CD player, Rotel amp, and a pair of Celestion 3 speakers. At the time, it was customary to just reach for the heaviest speaker stands and the cables that the salesperson liked. I tried a few cables out, and settles on what I thought really brought that system to life - Naim NAC-A5 (when it was just under £5/m) and a Chord Cobra interconnect.

The stands were interesting. The usual stands were Apollo AZs, being welded together and sand filled. I then tried the Epos ES11 stands, which differed in that they were a four leg, open frame type, with on open top plate too (just a frame on top to hold the four legs stable and house the top spikes). Wow. All of a sudden, the speaker just opened up, the bass was agile and tight, and compared to the Apollo stand, it now sounded like a hi-fi system. That's not to say the Apollo AZs aren't good, they are, but with the right speaker.

If anyone can point me in the direction of such stands, it'd be appreciated.

 

[chebby]

The stands were interesting. The usual stands were Apollo AZs, being welded together and sand filled. I then tried the Epos ES11 stands, which differed in that they were a four leg, open frame type, with on open top plate too (just a frame on top to hold the four legs stable and house the top spikes). Wow. All of a sudden, the speaker just opened up, the bass was agile and tight, and compared to the Apollo stand, it now sounded like a hi-fi system. That's not to say the Apollo AZs aren't good, they are, but with the right speaker.

If anyone can point me in the direction of such stands, it'd be appreciated.

You know that CJ was the designer/inventor/manufacturer of the original Foundation stands company back in the 1980s and won an industry award for his 'Foundation Classic' stands in 1985?

 

[nopiano]

When I relied mainly on LP replay I was only too aware that the sound changed almost daily. I mostly concluded that was down to temperature. This morning still being below freezing outside, I would bet that records wouldn't sound as good. Besides, even in a centrally heated house, the air quickly dries, so a glass of water on the turntable table (preferably with a little sponge to aid evaporation) would help curb the static.

I'm a fair weather record player these days! (And my old Foundation stands are safely stored in the study, for the next time I use bookshelf speakers)

 

[nopiano]

David, I think there is a brand called Something Solid who I came across through the Harbeth forum. They seem to make that type of thin open framed stand. Not exactly like you describe, but in case you'd not come across them...

 

[Frank Harvey]

You know that CJ was the designer/inventor/manufacturer of the original Foundation stands company back in the 1980s and won an industry award for his 'Foundation Classic' stands in 1985?

Yes, I was aware of his past

 

[Frank Harvey]

David, I think there is a brand called Something Solid who I came across through the Harbeth forum. They seem to make that type of thin open framed stand. Not exactly like you describe, but in case you'd not come across them...

I believe Spendor use them. He brought some in when he showcased some of the Classic range to me.

No disrespect to Something Solid or the designer, but stands that look like that 'have a place'. People nowadays want what they buy to look good. They want something that's a little quirky, to show off to their friends. I just don't understand why there aren't more good looking speaker stands around. As an example, Atacama's HMS2.0 looked great for the type of stand it was (I have a pair), but when they changed it to HMS2.1, they replaced the racetrack shaped columns with round ones, which just made them look like the SL range, and a lot less desirable.

The Custom Design stands are an example of a better looking open top style design (although slightly different).

 

[CJSF]

Agree CJSF. Always remember in the early 90s at the first dealer I worked for, where we had a number of "reference" systems at certain price points. The budget one was a Denon CD player, Rotel amp, and a pair of Celestion 3 speakers. At the time, it was customary to just reach for the heaviest speaker stands and the cables that the salesperson liked. I tried a few cables out, and settles on what I thought really brought that system to life - Naim NAC-A5 (when it was just under £5/m) and a Chord Cobra interconnect.

The stands were interesting. The usual stands were Apollo AZs, being welded together and sand filled. I then tried the Epos ES11 stands, which differed in that they were a four leg, open frame type, with on open top plate too (just a frame on top to hold the four legs stable and house the top spikes). Wow. All of a sudden, the speaker just opened up, the bass was agile and tight, and compared to the Apollo stand, it now sounded like a hi-fi system. That's not to say the Apollo AZs aren't good, they are, but with the right speaker.

If anyone can point me in the direction of such stands, it'd be appreciated.

One of the problems with stands of the 80's era, 'fill them full with sand', makes them heavy but often produces a very dead sounding result. If people had tried the quater, half and three quater fill test they would have been suprised . . . and still could be! But it takes time and patience, comodities few have much of? A full sand fill rarly works well, half full is a good starting point, you see its not the weight, its what the filling does that is important, absorbing energy from the speaker, to much and you have a dull sound. Cocktail fillings is what I specialised in, but that is another story.

Cables are a dodgy subject, like you, I have tried many types of speaker cable but always come back to my Linn K2, I am still using the 8m runs I had in the 80's, the same with interconects, I had my own brand and stil use that today. Cables change the sound and ballance, once you find one you like stick to it, that sound becomes a referance in the mind, more of the same is good, change the sound and one ends up chasing ones own tail?

CJSF

 

[Frank Harvey]

One of the problems with stands of the 80's era, 'fill them full with sand', makes them heavy but often produces a very dead sounding result. If people had tried the quater, half and three quater fill test they would have been suprised . . . and still could be! But it takes time and patience, comodities few have much of? A full sand fill rarly works well, half full is a good starting point, you see its not the weight, its what the filling does that is important, absorbing energy from the speaker, to much and you have a dull sound. Cocktail fillings is what I specialised in, but that is another story.

When asked, I always say start with a third. This keeps centre of gravity low, unlike fully filling it, which might make it impressively heavy, but can muddle bass with certain types of speaker (like the Celestion at the time).

 

[CJSF]

One of the problems with stands of the 80's era, 'fill them full with sand', makes them heavy but often produces a very dead sounding result. If people had tried the quater, half and three quater fill test they would have been suprised . . . and still could be! But it takes time and patience, comodities few have much of? A full sand fill rarly works well, half full is a good starting point, you see its not the weight, its what the filling does that is important, absorbing energy from the speaker, to much and you have a dull sound. Cocktail fillings is what I specialised in, but that is another story.

When asked, I always say start with a third. This keeps centre of gravity low, unlike fully filling it, which might make it impressively heavy, but can muddle bass with certain types of speaker (like the Celestion at the time).

Sounds about right David, you are obviously clued up. Muddled sound, thats where my cocktails come in, I did a lot of work with and for Celestion in the 80's, especialy with the 6 and 600.

CJSF

 

[Frank Harvey]

Sounds about right David, you are obviously clued up. Muddled sound, thats where my cocktails come in, I did a lot of work with and for Celestion in the 80's, especialy with the 6 and 600.

CJSF

If I recall correctly, the 6 was a relatively lightweight design? I presume you're talking about the SL6?

 

[CJSF]

Sounds about right David, you are obviously clued up. Muddled sound, thats where my cocktails come in, I did a lot of work with and for Celestion in the 80's, especialy with the 6 and 600.

CJSF

If I recall correctly, the 6 was a relatively lightweight design? I presume you're talking about the SL6?

Yes David, so long ago I had forgotten the prefixes.

CJSF

 

[Frank Harvey]

Yes David, so long ago I had forgotten the prefixes.

CJSF

I remember when I was at Radfords, we had a used pair of SL600s come in (very similar, but a slight difference, the details of which escape me right now after a bottle of Pinot Noir), but they sounded great, driven properly. I did end up with a pair of Celestion Kingstons in the late 90s, which were fantastic. I wish I still had them. I was reminded of them this week after listening to a pair of white Eclipse TD510Z MkIIs - it was the stands that reminded me.

 

[CJSF]

Yes David, so long ago I had forgotten the prefixes.

CJSF

I remember when I was at Radfords, we had a used pair of SL600s come in (very similar, but a slight difference, the details of which escape me right now after a bottle of Pinot Noir), but they sounded great, driven properly. I did end up with a pair of Celestion Kingstons in the late 90s, which were fantastic. I wish I still had them. I was reminded of them this week after listening to a pair of white Eclipse TD510Z MkIIs - it was the stands that reminded me.

Hi Dave, I was out of hifi by 1996, starting another episode in my life ? ? ? The need for power was the down fall of the 600, I used EAR 509 mono blocks, the copper tweeter turned blue, I was off the Celestion scene by the 700 was conceived so have no idea where it went performance wise? Discovered transmision line speakers, I still use the LB1's I aquired in the early 90's, fiinding nothing I like better, different yes but not better, silk dome tweeters, a truly musical extended base (for its size), imaging that equled my 'original' LS35a's. Later versions were to thick and coloured in the base in an effort to give more extention? Even with my stands, I could not clean them up to my satisfaction.

All water under the bridge, for the past 5 years I have been putting my life back together . . . I enjoy my hifi and the fiddling I get up to, I have a Rega P5 . . . P5 in name and resemblance only, making the best of a Gyger re tiped £1400 MC cartridge. Cables and interconects are still the ones I used for all my evaluation in the 80's, amplifier is a modest Icom 45, again fiddled and tweaked just a tad, complimented by an Icom PS1 phono stage and a Carver moving coil transformer with veriable load. Everything simple, no fancy knobs and whistles, what I have is tuned to its full ability . . . or should one say to my limited ability and understanding?

My thinking has not changed since those heady days, much of the hifi world has . . . however from what I read they are still chasing their own tails?

CJSF

 

[nopiano]

I remember these two well. The SL6 was I think the first metal domed tweeter and may have been designed with an early CAD approach. It had a wooden cabinet and a slightly depressed treble range which made it perfect for early Cd based systems. The later SL600 was made of aerolam, an aerospace product, a sort of honeycomb metal, painted with a browny grey nextel finish.

I won a pair of SL600 at one of the old Heathrow autumn shows, and used them until the late 90s when they were stolen. No grilles, but looked very cool and technical. They were the first speaker that I heard a 'holographic' stereo image from, with identifiable depth (and width) perspectives. That's when I got Celestion's stands created by CJSF I believe. The stands must've been too heavy to carry so they remained from the burglary!

 

[CJSF]

I remember these two well. The SL6 was I think the first metal domed tweeter and may have been designed with an early CAD approach. It had a wooden cabinet and a slightly depressed treble range which made it perfect for early Cd based systems. The later SL600 was made of aerolam, an aerospace product, a sort of honeycomb metal, painted with a browny grey nextel finish.

I won a pair of SL600 at one of the old Heathrow autumn shows, and used them until the late 90s when they were stolen. No grilles, but looked very cool and technical. They were the first speaker that I heard a 'holographic' stereo image from, with identifiable depth (and width) perspectives. That's when I got Celestion's stands created by CJSF I believe. The stands must've been too heavy to carry so they remained from the burglary!

You are dead right on the 6 and 600 nopiano, the 6's were a little laid back, the stand helped to lift them. The 600 cause all sorts of issues becaus of the metal case ringing like a bell. Then someone came up with the idea of puting a 'crack in the bell', 3 joins were an epoxy of some kind the 4th was a mastic, breaking the ring, problem solved.

CJSF

 

[CJSF]

Well gents and ladies . . . I hope there are some ladies taking an intest? . . . Having solved my disapearing 80's sound bringing the system back to life. The next step, is my tried and tested way of geting the best out of my system. One has to assume there is more to come, you have audably improved the sound 'more of' by in this case, adding damping rings to the valves. It therefore stands to reason, you are hearing more, how much more is there to be extracted?

Turn to the source, VTA and stylus are set for the previous 'no rings' setup, are these setting holding back retreval? I am luck enough to have a VTA adjustment on my Audiomods arm, measure the gap with a slip guage, in this case 5mm. Normaly it is accepted a 1mm change is the least audible? I beg to differ, on a qualaty TT/arm setup I work to 0.5m, so that where I went. Mixed feelings, it put a solidity into the presentation but took some of the life out, these are tiny notations, heard better as the system quality rises, but even at the entry level things are usualy positive.

So I wanted the solidity but not the slightly dull sound, now I could have gon back to a 5mm VTA and leave well alone, not my style, I always leave a path back to where one started, slip guage measurment noted. Reduce the neddle pressure, yes ite still a needle in my eyes but not made from a hawthorn spike or steal . . . I was able to reduce the pressure by three quaters of a turn on the triming fly-weight on my arm, I went to a full turn but that started to sound a little whispy.

Life is back in the sound, I am hearing more layers to the music especialy on my Propius pipe organ vinyl I use as a test for low and high frequancy. I'm now hearing what I thought were single notes (pipes) under pined with quiet 'twidaly bits'. And the lower frequancies, there is more tune and detail again with underpinning in some cases. The working of the pumps is quite audable, leading edges, 'O' those leading edges, are so, so sharp. and the swell, 'Big got Bigger', only an Organ can do it!

All this for the cost of 3 'O-rings' ate less than a pound each for 10, inc., p&p . . . and a few hours dedicated listening*preved*

CJSF

 

[plastic penguin]

I still stand by that rule. It's like having two identical photos you want blown up to put in a large picture frame. The only difference between the two pics is one is low resolution, one is high. The bigger you blow up the photo, the more you can see it's limitations. This is equivalent to a 'bigger', better system showing up the limitations of the source signal. Either way, when you're focussing on the detail of the end result, the differences are marked.

Not a good analogy to use photos as an example. When enlarging pictures you are hampered by the paper quality; the bigger the image the more it tends to show up the grains. I learnt this working in the digital and lithographic printing industry for 10 years.

That said, I do agree with a below-par source you are not going to get the best from the rest of the system.

 

[Frank Harvey]

I'm sure the basic point has been made and understood...there's always variables.

 

[davenrk]

One of the problems with stands of the 80's era, 'fill them full with sand', makes them heavy but often produces a very dead sounding result. If people had tried the quater, half and three quater fill test they would have been suprised . . . and still could be! But it takes time and patience, comodities few have much of? A full sand fill rarly works well, half full is a good starting point, you see its not the weight, its what the filling does that is important, absorbing energy from the speaker, to much and you have a dull sound. Cocktail fillings is what I specialised in, but that is another story.

Cables are a dodgy subject, like you, I have tried many types of speaker cable but always come back to my Linn K2, I am still using the 8m runs I had in the 80's, the same with interconects, I had my own brand and stil use that today. Cables change the sound and ballance, once you find one you like stick to it, that sound becomes a referance in the mind, more of the same is good, change the sound and one ends up chasing ones own tail?

CJSF

good morning Cliff
are you still here on whatfifi forum?
thanks

 

[GSV Ethics Gradient]

Probably better to PM than resurrect a thread from 2017.