For next week, current noise, and why phono stage noise measurements taken with inputs shorted, particularly MM, can often be of pixies. But not here.
On my old setup total noise was >10 mV 7-8 from cartridge alone my new one Total~7.5 when hot, 6 from cartridge
here is good You showed me total loop WITH cartridge is what matters. My Solo was rated at 0.09 uV equivalent input noise. The cartridge is 0.62 uV alone! PLEASE do not stop sharing your knowledge here. In my warped mind it is some of the most interesting stuff.
@JP posted an excel sheet calculator. I verified it by measuring noise on a line input <0.2 mV (amp and preamp only) Then with TT unplugged and shorted, 2-3 mV all at 100% volume at speaker terminals
Random uncorrelated noise generators in series add as noise power (square root of the sum of the squared noise voltages). This means the largest voltage noise source will be overwhelmingly dominant. If everything else is playing nice, the cartridge should be the dominant source by a sizable margin. On the other hand... IF the phono stage is well engineered. A number aren't, sadly. This paints the picture sufficiently: Phono stage noise when cartridge connected - diyAudio
I'll probably be a bit scarce here for a bit; a relief to some I'm sure. I finally found arm cables for my Kenwood, so I think I'll throw it on the bench for a refurb and give it some play time. No redrawing of the lines makes that project on-topic for this thread.
Without being crude, those who find it a relief should just skip over it. Please. For those of us who find it 'good stuff', share when you can. Technics = MIJ = Kenwood but regardless, share the result any way you choose...but please share
Not leaving, just occupied. It's an L-07D, so I'm pretty sure I'll document it somewhere. Was actually thinking maybe doing the PS-X9 first just to get it out of the way. Just need to figure out more workbenches. Seems the ideal number of workbenches for any given project is always n+1.
Madison’s the best, I’m an alum…met my wife there Sad when o’kayz burned down but at least Cathy was able to open another venue- used to date her sister lol And then there’s the time my gf punched Shirley Manson at the Paradise. . . . .
Hi group, 1200GR owner here; got a question about tonearm effective mass. The GR's is 12g, including the Technics headshell, which is 7.67g. I need to use a heavier headshell to properly match a cart to the tonearm, in order to get acceptable resonance. So, doing some math, 12g minus 7.67 gives you 4.33g. I am using an Ortofon LH-4000, with a weight of 14.3g. Simply adding the 14.3 with the 4.33 gives me an effective mass of 18.63g. Am I correct here, or am I missing something? Thanks in advance for your responses....
It's a little more complicated than that since the headshell mass is not directly over the stylus, it is spread out between there and the connector, and some headshells have a higher percentage of their mass near the connector. So a better approximation would be to take the difference in the headshell weights, in this case around 6.7g, and multiply that by 70%, so around 4.7g added to effective mass. But the counterweight will need to be moved further from the pivot too, so that adds more effective mass, so maybe make it around 7g. So as you can see, in the end, your method probably is close enough. Another thing to keep in mind, if the tonearm is specified at 12g effective mass, that is usually measured with no cartridge installed. When a cartridge is installed, the counterweight gets moved further from pivot to balance, so effective mass increases (disregarding the further increase due to cartridge mass). If set up for an 8 gram cartridge, your 12g tonearm becomes 15g, so then add the 8g cartridge and it is 23g. Some of the old Technics specs included the cartridge weight that was used for measurement, often 6g. There's an Excel calculator you can play with at Effective Mass Calculator. What cartridge are you planning to use?
You are not missing anything. You might want to check out the AT-LH18H headshell too. It has features to easily adjust azimuth, and stylus to headshell tail distance while it’s non slotted screw holes assure compliance to the Technics tracking error scheme.
The 12 increases due to CW offset increase say 15 Then add cartridge and head shell delta? so in my case for example: Head shell is 2.4 heavier, I'll use 2 Cartridge with hardware 6.8 Total ~ 15 + 2 + 6.2 = 23.8 correct? the calculator 23.8
Hi there, Thanks for your insights. I'm using a Goldring Eroica H cartridge, 6.6g with hardware, estimating 9mm dynamic compliance. Vinyl Engine's calculator would put that, at my calculation, at the top of the acceptable resonance range.
Yes, probably close. I don't know how accurate your 8g measurement is for the tonearm, I'd expect a little less, maybe around 6-7 g would get you in the 12g range for effective mass, but it's all kind of guesswork to a certain extent
You're just estimating dynamic compliance at 10Hz by taking 50% of the specified 18 mm/N (cu) static compliance? May be closer to 12cu based on the Paul Miller Lab report for the Eroica LX. In any case, it is a relatively low compliance cartridge so you should be fine, probably the more weight the better.
I measured it 3 times at platter level Fluctuated between 7-8, settled on 8 Even if 7, small overall difference Thanks
Is your pivot to stylus distance set to 23.3cm because you are using Baerwald alignment? Is this the type of discussion that gets your buddies here in this thread mad at you?
Yes I also verified tracking force and CW distance. The CW is sort of an estimate to center of mass, used a metal rule. I weighed it, exactly 100 g with the dial they'll get over it