Rega Planar 10 on its way here!

Which cartridge height is the P10 calibrated for?

 

If the arm is calibrated for a 16mm nominal tall cartridge then a DV XX2 will be nominally 2.7mm lower. Running 2mm tail down on my former Dynavector DV20 was noticeably darker sounding, i used .5mm tail up.
Just for reference.

 

The Rega solution is far less compromised than having to stack mats, or fitting shims under shallow cartridges - that is a major design flaw.

 

You attempt to portray yourself an authority on all things hi fi and apply all your biases to Rega turntables when actually you're extremely ignorant with respect to their design philosophy. Rega turntables are designed for Rega cartridges first and any considerations to other cartridge designs are after the fact.

 

Not f'd up. Different cartridge designs, cantilevers and suspensions yield different (or ideal) SRA and VTA under VTF load. By only looking at an unloaded cartridge height measurement you're not accounting for the actual engineered SRA and VTA of the Exact and Ania cartridges when they're installed and VTF-loaded. I know you don't think that Rega missed such crucially important details.

@Morbius suggested that Rega turntables were designed primarily to best serve Rega cartridges. Although I agree that a case can be made for that I personally don't agree mainly because I have had and continue to get superb results from non-Rega carts on a wide variety of Rega tonearms. No question that occasionally a shim is needed for best results.

Others have in other threads noted that the Rega 3-point installation system gives anyone the ability to do a dead-on installation on a Rega arm. For me and other picky cartridge installers, I disagree with that too. I like Lofgren A/Baerwald alignment for most carts (including Rega carts) on Rega tonearms, so I use only two mounting screw with Rega carts in order to be able to fine tune overhang and null points. That extra bit of tuning takes the Rega arm/cart combination the final few steps into best performance, IME.

 

if Rega planned for this, then we assume that that the tonearm height on a P6 supports a nominal 14mm cartridge. Say it deflects 1mm to level the tonearm / top of the cartridge.
This would mean that the Ania or Apheta would deflect 3mm (seems unlikely)- or they are designed to be perfectly aligned at 2mm tail down. seems reasonable.
this would still mean that non Rega cartridges are still tail down by their height less 14mm. not acceptable or ideal.
Another idea would be that the P10 tonearm is 2mm higher than the P6 and Rega assumes no users will run MM cartridges on a P10.
Regardless I would be following the recommended manufacturer's instructions for installation of non Rega cartridges , usually top of cartridge level with surface of record at nominal VTF.

 

does that answer the question? how does a P6 tonearm support two different heights of cartridges? this is not bias, just trying to understand their methodology which is shrouded in mystery like many other Rega specifications.

 

Didn't Shibata himself indicate that we should strive for less than 5% deviation in stylus alignment?

Some of these extreme alignment efforts would probably mystify the guy.

 

I think you can make a decent case for the approach you're taking. What I'm also suggesting is that many cartridge designs exist that demonstrably perform brilliantly through a significant range of SRA and VTA angles. What sounds best to you or me is sometimes going to be somewhat different, no doubt.

I run my Origin Live Illustrious arm/Transfiguration Phoenix with the headshell dead-level, and that does not yield the allegedly best/ideal (92 degrees?) stylus rake angle for the particular tip grind. Whatever. To my ears and by broad listening group consensus clearly the setup I've settled on for the associated Avid TT is the best sounding configuration.

Contrast that with the fact that, to my ears, I've rarely heard to best advantage any non-Rega cartridge installed on any Rega arm with a headhsell dead-level. A dead-level headshell is often just a good starting point rather than an ideal to achieve or get close to. Sometimes, dead-level is it; sometimes not.

Despite a bit of disparagement about the subject elsewhere in this thread, I've often used thinner or thicker platter mats to get to what sounds best rather than shim a Rega arm or adjust VTA on other arms that have imprecise VTA mechanisms (and there are a lot of those, unfortunately). I keep the excellent, very thin Origin Live mat handy, a thin, Japanese washi paper mat handy, a couple of thicknesses of Herbie's mats, and a couple of thicknesses of Funk Firm mats also hanging around when doing setups for people. Right now, I'm also running a P8/RB880 with an Apheta 2 and a second tonearm - an Origin Live Zephyr/Soundsmith Zephyr MIMIC Lo on a Tonearm Pods outboard mount. Works a treat. The Tonearm Pods outboard mounts are really well done. Although the Zephyr cart seems to do best with the headshell nearly level (there's plenty of VTA adjustment for that in the arm base), the RB880/Apheta 2 sounds superb/best somewhat tail down using the 5mm Funk Firm mat. Go figure. Plus, I really like the 5mm Funk Firm mat which, IMO, is one of the few mats that noticeably/audibly tops the stock felt Rega mat (which, plain though the felt mat is, works really well on all Rega tables).

My LP12/Akito/SVXZ2 MKII is running very slightly tail-up. My SL1200G/Zyx Yatra R100 series sitting unused on a storage shelf right now is running slightly tail-down, IIRC.

 

I found another pic, this baby looks sweet

 

Yeah, those are the stock pics. I find the cover rather underwhelming but it looks nice otherwise. Regardless, I listen to the music and if it's half as good as I heard, I'm in for a treat.

Stay tuned...

 

If form/function sort of way, though, it is sort of brilliant.

Kinda makes sense, given the rest of the design.

 

I saw a P10 at my dealer before the pandemic -- it looks way cooler in person because of the contrast of the ceramic (?) platter with the matte skeletal plinth. It has the hi-tech vibe. I would have bought the P10 over my Nottingham had it been available in early 2016. The only other table that I desired more at that place was a Linn LP12 (not sure what level). That table looks classy in a traditional way. The store had Nottinghams, SME's, Dr. Feickert, AMG, etc.

Can't wait to see Strat's pictures.

 

Yea, I remember the style from the Thorens tables in the early 2000s, like the TD 800 series. They used it a lot after that, stylized it some for the TD 309, still use it on some models, don't know how far back the idea goes, probably way before that ...

 

Congrats on the purchase! I've had my P10/Hana SH combo for 4 months now and I couldn't be happier!

 

I have run Benz ACE, Glider and Ortofon Cadenza Blue carts on my RB 600 with no issues because at the time of upgrade from an Exact Rega did not produce an MC cart. Although I have used shims, and later a Pete Riggle VTA adjuster, to dial the installation in it was mainly to future proof me for carts. Before the tonearm mods I heard no appreciable difference with carts with minimal VTA or SRA variance. You have my next table. Best wishes.

 

Which turntable did you guys have before? Just curious.

 

Rega P8 with Apheta 3

 

Congrats on the new TT ! Looking forward to your impressions of the P10 vs the VPI.

 

Tonight I switched to a P10 with Apheta 3 from a VPI Scout 2 with a Hana ML, so am also looking forward to hearing about your experiences and any tips, etc…

Speaking of tips, the RCA cables are locking, so if unfamiliar like I was, loosen the barrels or else they won’t insert into your phono pre jacks.

Also, not sure it’s precisely setup since i couldn’t get the arm floating with the cartridge precisely at 1mm from the mat, did my best to get close though.

Anyone know if that matters?

Thanks

 

Rega RP40/Ortofon 2M Bronze.

 

I think you're supposed to have a record on the stationary platter, I just adjust the counterweight until the arm balances level over the platter then dial in the tracking force then I tweek it to the exact VTF with a scale.

 

Hi @Agitater, that is an excellent post. BTW, it is the stacking of mats, rather than complete replacement which I suggested was a poor compromise. Since my time in retail when I always returned to the Linn, Rega, Roksan etc. stock felt mats, many more have obviously come onto the market since then. As usual differentiating a difference to a clear preference isn't that easy.

Regarding what works best for any given arm / cartridge, from my ancient experience you need to take it on an individual cartridge basis due to the small production variations, rather than model by model, so one size very rarely fitted all with room temperatures another variable.

I never found one person in blind dems who consistently had a preference for tail up / tail down +/- 1mm using different tracks on a single perfectly flat LP.

 

Congrats Strat. I’m still enjoying my RP8/Apheta 2. I’m sure you’ll love your P10 (I heard one a while back with the then new Rega Aethos amp and some B&W’s at a London dealer event, though it wasn’t really put through its paces), especially Santana Abraxas (ho, ho, ho….).

 

You can make a case for the idea that changing the mat thickness is a compromise. But in my experience, changing the mat to a thinner or thicker one, as needed for a particular tail-up or tail-down preference in sound with a specific arm/cart combination has never resulted in a compromise or somewhat compromised result compared to the application of a built-in mechanical VTA adjustment.

Room temperature variables? I do not think that particular variable is something any audiophiles in any listening room should concern themselves with unless the room is obviously allowed to vary daily to uncomfortable extremes.

I think your comment implies that on-the-fly VTA is a great idea because it provides audiophiles with the means to individually tailor tonality for every single track. I think that’s a mistake because the resulting sound can easily up being a reflection of how such a listener thinks all tracks should sound rather than how the recording artist and producer and engineer wanted each track to sound.

Given your room temperature variable also, noted above, that leaves an audiophile to presumably settle down to listen to an album and enjoy music but instead checking room temperature and humidity to ensure prior to play that the environment is optimal for speaker performance and sound transmission in the particular listening room, establishing a list of VTA positions for each track of each album he really likes (and getting up from his listening chair to make the adjustment prior to the start of each track), and what else?

I know someone who does all of that and more during almost every listening session at his place. Pre-pandemic, attendance at his hosted listening sessions had permanently waned to just two or three of us. It was not enjoyable. We wanted to listen to the recorded music as the artists and producer intended it to be heard. Instead, we were forced to listen to our friend’s idea of what each individual track should sound like. His intention was to get to the actual recording, but in the act of tweaking the setup or every single track achieved exactly the opposite most of the time.

What he didn’t realize is that he’d achieved success when he first set up his current room and component combination. Then someone put it into his thinking that he could double-down on that. He can’t. We can’t. He (and the rest of us) once we’ve set up a room and component combination to best advantage can only bias the sound after that. Exceptions exist, without a doubt, but tweaking tonality and adjusting room conditions prior to every track is not the way recorded music was intended to be enjoyed. Others may disagree and may actually enjoy such granular pre-listening, track prep efforts. I decline such opportunities.