Thank you, Andrej, Mark, Michael, and Greg for the great webinar. I very much enjoyed it and learned a great deal as well. I’ve got a new USB microscope on the way. Thanks again, guys!
Nick, thank you very much for your kind comments. We certainly enjoyed ourselves as well. More webinars to come - and we are taking requests for topics to cover!
@@WAM-Engineering ...and thanks to you too, of course, J.R. I assume this is you responding to my comment. You did a spectacular job of hosting and explaining everything in a nice and clear manner. Thanks so much, and I’m sure I can come up with some requests for topics. ;)
This is very interesting but I have a Shinon Red Boron that I got with a used Thorens table, ( also a Denon DL301), both of which had almost no use and the suspension appears to be fine. Visually the Shinon looks like the needle is at about a 65 degree angle. I know some needles the final angle is cut on the very tip of the stylus so visually the correct angle would have the cartridge looking like it is taking off into space. Also if it's 92 degrees, then measured from the other direction it would be 88 degrees, yes? The Shinon says tracking angle should be 22 degrees, measured from where? The Denon says mount with no tilt any direction. I have both mounted level and the both sound wonderful. Boy I remember when I was much younger we would just throw on the new Tull release and enjoy the music, didn't even think about this kinda stuff. I feel like I'm gonna spend all my time setting up stuff and not have time left to listen. Are we listening to the music or the system, seems the line is shifting more all the time.
Hello Brad. The 22 degrees referred to is the angle between record surface and the cantilever. That is the "nominal" target for the manufacturer. However, the stylus/cantilever assemblies are usually made with very large tolerances that would surprise most people. If your stylus is a conical, you really needn't worry about SRA terribly much. The challenges specific to conical styli (not being able to mechanically read all of the groove content) are not solvable no matter how well it is aligned. Get it in range and just enjoy what you have! If you have a line contact stylus, however, then proper alignment is critical to getting the most from the grooves.
I would be very interested in you talking about cartridges that have high channel separations >30dbs with one channel having higher vs the other and adjusting with various methods yields in correct azimuth. Also talk about uni pivots and how to apply these methods to those arms?
Hello Raoul. That sounds like two different webinars, right there! Azimuth and the challenge with free-rolling unipivot tonearms. If I can get a unipivot tonearm for my test bench I'd be happy to do a "free-rolling" webinar. Azimuth will have to wait on a future development that is in the works.
Amazing webinar, thanks so much for taking the time to organize and present this! I guess I'm a "young nerd' at 40 with a mildly supporting wife :) I've been going through hell and back trying to follow MF's instructions, invested heavily in a Dynalite microscope with max 250x magnification. I still can't get it right, probably due to the special naked Microline stylus of my Hana Umami Red. It's very much similar to the photo you showed at 47:17 minutes in the video. Could you possibly describe where exactly should SRA be measured on this stylus? I received from the manufacturer the information that without any pressure it should be 94deg and with 2g VTF 91deg, but I'm clueless. If I try to achieve these numbers going exactly through the middle of the stylus, the back of my tonearm would be so low it touches the record. My tonearm is a Reed 1-x which has the Azimuth adjustment close to the pivot point. I'm currently using the Bearwald setting done with Dr. Feickert protractor and adjust Azimuth with Dr. Feickert Adjust+.
Thank you for your kind comment! I have measured one Umami and have another one waiting on my bench. By the way, I think it is a fantastic sounding cartridge and rather undervalued for its performance based upon others I've heard. (Keep in mind, that I hear all cartridges with all three alignment parameters perfectly dialed in, so another sample might not sound that great and "normal" alignment - a level headshell and zero azimuth angle.) The Umami I measured needed 2 degrees of SRA correction, had a functionally perfect azimuth angle but needed almost 5 degrees of zenith correction. Unfortunately, these figures are NOT uncommon. Every cartridge manufacturer is struggling with improving tolerances from their stylus/cantilever assembly providers. To answer your question, you should trust the method outlined in the video where you measure the inside angle and the outside angle and apply the figures to the formula. The Hana Umami stylus does appear black for me too. I am not surprised at all if your tonearm has to drop lower than possible to get to 92 degrees (dynamic). I see that FREQENTLY - particularly if you have a 11"-12" tonearm. If you know your native SRA and azimuth angles, I can make you a customized shim for your cartridge made from a material with a rigidity slightly less than titanium.
Watch my video on Vertical Tracking Angle here: th-cam.com/video/dbqa2n4khb4/w-d-xo.html. Our research team have learned a great deal more about VTA and SRA since making this webinar. In the VTA video I discuss why changing arm height does NOT allow you to hear changes in VTA. I make this claim again in the 2024 Munich HiFi panel video to the agreement of others on the panel. In short, when you raise/lower your 505, you are NOT hearing changes in SRA or VTA as they are being dominated by changes in multiple vector forces. VTA and SRA must be addressed at the headshell to appreciate it in isolation.
JR, thank you so much! this was a great webinar. Just the tricks, are worth the time. What Leica microscope do you use? you mentioned the Hana being a great stylus, what other stylus you think is undervalued? I need to replace my stylus and I have a Steelhead and unfortunately the MC load goes to 400ohm. I prefer the MC over the MM sound coming out of the Steelhead. Thank you
Thank you! I plan to re-do this webinar once the WallyScope is released. There is an even easier, faster and safer way to measure dynamic SRA that I'll reveal. I use a Leica assembly with three different compound lenses, variable through the lens lighting (brightfield, refracted), digital camera with large receptor, automated stage, optical zoom function, etc. Be very careful about using third party stylus retippers. If you have a very high end cartridge I would never suggest using a retipper at all for most of them - particularly the brands that take great care with their assemblies and have specialized designs such as Lyra. More on this issue to come... I don't recall saying the Hana had a great stylus per se (they have their mount issues like almost everyone else) but I do recall saying that it was a good value for the money.
@@WAM-Engineering I am sorry for the rewording, with new stylus I meant cartridge. What cartridges in the $2-$4k would you recommend for a phono stage that has a max load of 400ohm in the MC inputs? Looking forward to the scope. Do you have a model for the Leica? Also, how would your azimuth tool work with a gimbaled tone arm? I have a VPI and their anti-skating is affecting the azimuth, so I feel I have to choose between the correct azimuth or antiskating.
@@josephwhite4043 there are plenty that are in that price range that play well below 400 ohms. I don't have a specific recommendation for you but be sure to check out the Lyra, Hana and the entry level Haniwa as it may still be on sale at the top end of your range. Once again, I am away from my lab so I can't read the model of the Leica XX7000 something is all I recall for the central unit. At this level of microscopy, you often put a microscope together from its many parts since one size does not fit all. Therefore, it is a conglomeration of many different models for the stage, camera, lenses, illumination, etc. I think you mean that you have a unipivot arm. A gimbaled arm is fixed on the azimuth axis and wouldn't change unless you change the height of the tonearm or adjusted the azimuth mechanism itself. Your issue is one of the challenges free-rolling unipivots have. Best to measure the force that the wire puts on the tonearm with a WallySkater - which would then offer you a way to adjust for it or ameliorate it altogether. Or, perhaps, your anti-skate mechanism is setup wrongly and is applying a force on the tonearm that alters azimuth. The collar has to be mounted to the counterweight shaft properly and the string has to be as level as possible when pulled taught by the lever arm. People tend to WAY over apply anti-skate force because they insist on using test records. Not a good idea, that. If you have any other questions, reach out to me directly. Thanks!
I agree. It was tough to manage during the process and our first attempt at a webinar. We will be making the WallyScope video in the spring in which we will correct several things that were done not as well as we would have liked. Keep an eye out for it. Thanks for commenting.
If you watch my series on the 7 Alignment Targets you’ll start to see the response: optimization is not possible with a multivariate approach, there has never been a single test record cut with KNOWN angular errors by which we can use as a reference for playback errors, in many of the listed tests you aren’t even measuring what you are told you are measuring (second and third order phenomena at best), lack of understanding of the influence of vector forces on such tests, inability to hit optimal VTA and SRA using the means suggested in such tests, etc. I could go on and on. Bottom line: AM is good to use to IMPROVE your sound but it is not possible to OPTIMIZE your performance with it.
Hi EPG. Not sure I can be much help. The USB scopes are all pretty limited in their ability to capture a good photo so I don’t use them. I haven’t touched them for measurements since making this video. I use the WallyScope and my lab scope.
Hi Ricky. The point made that you “can’t do it by ear” is multifarious. First, you’ll never know if you have a flaw in the mount until it is inspected using univariate means (e.g., optical inspection) rather than multivariate means (e.g., electrical reading from stylus traveling through groove or by ear). For example, I recently inspected a $7500 cartridge that had its SRA off by 12° under dynamic conditions. This is an absolutely impossible angle to recover from for any tonearm ever made. In fact, the back end of the cartridge would be scraping along the surface of the record by the time you got to about 5° or 6°. Now, if you were adjusting this cartridge by ear I imagine you could find some alignment that you were comfortable with, but you will never, ever know how good this cartridge could sound if the stylus had been mounted correctly. In my experience, a good percentage of audiophiles live with this situation and will never know it because they will not optically inspect their stylus cantilever assembly. Secondly, while I am sure that you can get it sounding good by ear alone, you will never know for certain whether you are getting THE MOST from the cartridge you paid dearly for unless you can zero in on the mechanical relationship between the stylus and groove to ensure optimal angles are achieved. Third, when you adjust your tonearm height to achieve optimal SRA, you are also changing the azimuth angle and - on most tonearms - VTF. So, while the sound has improved from the adjustments, you are compelled to ask WHAT improved and whether the overall sound improved but to the detriment of one or more other parameters which could afford to give a bit more from the grooves if you knew which parameter to change, by how much and in what direction. All of this is doable.
Hi Ricky, the problem is that when you change the tonearm height to affect the rake angle, it changes azimuth as well and (on many tonearms) it also changes VTF. So, the question becomes: with the tonearm height change you just made, was rake impacted positively or negatively and was azimuth impacted positively or negatively? Your net result might be an overall subjective improvement, but how do you know if you have optimized it or not unless you measure directly?
Made me think that this is at present time with wildly accessible microscopes and software plus internet, TH-cam and info more available for the masses. How were the SRA setting on the average TT in the 80-ties. Before the CD and all that were playing LPs back then? The knowledge spread to the masses and the crazy sofisticate TT that we have today were not there. One like Michael Fremer that played LP then and now. When for example did he or people start adjust SRA?? Or with lack of knowledge that has been produced by research the recent decades. That the nobody more or less did not adjust SRA (maybe they just aimed on getting the tonearm parallel to the record) for their advanced stylus shapes? (When the knowledge were not spread and no tools for adjusting SRA.) I don't mean that SRA is not important when it is. I am just interested what the general consensus were and if they even care about SRA in the 80-ties? 😀
It wasn't really done at all, to my knowledge. Just like we have learned how to attend to many unrecognized parameters in digital playback over the years in order to improve the performance, so as with vinyl playback. In particular, the increase in use of the fine line contact stylus profile offers opportunities to get more from the groove WHEN IT IS PROPERLY ALIGNED than did conical, elliptical and even Shibata styli profiles. So - NO - they didn't care about this stuff during the 80's because it hadn't been researched well so little was known of it. Our upcoming submissions to JAES will help push the science forward so that more people can see for themselves the physical properties that make these parameters worth attending to.
@@WAM-Engineering Interesting if we conclude that LP playback were worse sound quality wise in the 80-ties. Just in all those reasons. Memory of how it sounded show us again and as proven to be false for those that thinking it were better then. Anyway we are able to squishing the most sound quality out of the format today. And it is nice to see you pushing the envelope on how we can set the turntable up, as good as possible.🙏👍
You can measure all you want, for an “exotic” stylus shape in a high-end setup, these tools do not have the precision to optimize SRA or VTA. You can only do this by ear. Stop relying on tools and just listen!
I invite you to support your position with a reasoned argument rather than an opinion without any evidentiary support or logical coherence. If you cannot do so, I will assume your post is simply attempting to elicit a prescribed emotional response which adds nothing to the conversation and delete it. I’d rather not do that. Even if we disagree I’d prefer to allow you to be heard, but you must have something to say here that will help advance the conversation about analog optimization. Do you have anything to say to support a multivariate approach like “use your ears” is always better than a univariate approach like “measure and hit the mark” on a mechanical transcription system?
![[#2024MAMA] G-DRAGON - 무제(Untitled, 2014)+POWER+HOME SWEET HOME+뱅뱅뱅+FANTASTIC BABY | Mnet 241123 방송](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/Ox29z5Nf1Uk/mqdefault.jpg)
Thank you, Andrej, Mark, Michael, and Greg for the great webinar. I very much enjoyed it and learned a great deal as well. I’ve got a new USB microscope on the way. Thanks again, guys!
Nick, thank you very much for your kind comments. We certainly enjoyed ourselves as well. More webinars to come - and we are taking requests for topics to cover!
@@WAM-Engineering ...and thanks to you too, of course, J.R. I assume this is you responding to my comment. You did a spectacular job of hosting and explaining everything in a nice and clear manner. Thanks so much, and I’m sure I can come up with some requests for topics. ;)
Thank you for the great job J.R., excellent job. It definitely clarified a lot of questions I had and now I'm ready to try it out. Cheers gentlemen.
Thank you, Craig! Good luck
This is very interesting but I have a Shinon Red Boron that I got with a used Thorens table, ( also a Denon DL301), both of which had almost no use and the suspension appears to be fine. Visually the Shinon looks like the needle is at about a 65 degree angle. I know some needles the final angle is cut on the very tip of the stylus so visually the correct angle would have the cartridge looking like it is taking off into space. Also if it's 92 degrees, then measured from the other direction it would be 88 degrees, yes? The Shinon says tracking angle should be 22 degrees, measured from where? The Denon says mount with no tilt any direction. I have both mounted level and the both sound wonderful. Boy I remember when I was much younger we would just throw on the new Tull release and enjoy the music, didn't even think about this kinda stuff. I feel like I'm gonna spend all my time setting up stuff and not have time left to listen. Are we listening to the music or the system, seems the line is shifting more all the time.
Hello Brad. The 22 degrees referred to is the angle between record surface and the cantilever. That is the "nominal" target for the manufacturer. However, the stylus/cantilever assemblies are usually made with very large tolerances that would surprise most people.
If your stylus is a conical, you really needn't worry about SRA terribly much. The challenges specific to conical styli (not being able to mechanically read all of the groove content) are not solvable no matter how well it is aligned. Get it in range and just enjoy what you have! If you have a line contact stylus, however, then proper alignment is critical to getting the most from the grooves.
This was great. It hurt my brain a bit, but it’s a good hurt.
Ha! Take two aspirin and call me in the morning.
Or, you can make it even easier and use a WallyScope. www.wallyanalog.com/wallyscope
Thanks for a great video and explanation!
I would be very interested in you talking about cartridges that have high channel separations >30dbs with one channel having higher vs the other and adjusting with various methods yields in correct azimuth. Also talk about uni pivots and how to apply these methods to those arms?
Hello Raoul. That sounds like two different webinars, right there! Azimuth and the challenge with free-rolling unipivot tonearms. If I can get a unipivot tonearm for my test bench I'd be happy to do a "free-rolling" webinar. Azimuth will have to wait on a future development that is in the works.
Amazing webinar, thanks so much for taking the time to organize and present this! I guess I'm a "young nerd' at 40 with a mildly supporting wife :) I've been going through hell and back trying to follow MF's instructions, invested heavily in a Dynalite microscope with max 250x magnification. I still can't get it right, probably due to the special naked Microline stylus of my Hana Umami Red. It's very much similar to the photo you showed at 47:17 minutes in the video. Could you possibly describe where exactly should SRA be measured on this stylus? I received from the manufacturer the information that without any pressure it should be 94deg and with 2g VTF 91deg, but I'm clueless. If I try to achieve these numbers going exactly through the middle of the stylus, the back of my tonearm would be so low it touches the record. My tonearm is a Reed 1-x which has the Azimuth adjustment close to the pivot point. I'm currently using the Bearwald setting done with Dr. Feickert protractor and adjust Azimuth with Dr. Feickert Adjust+.
Thank you for your kind comment! I have measured one Umami and have another one waiting on my bench. By the way, I think it is a fantastic sounding cartridge and rather undervalued for its performance based upon others I've heard. (Keep in mind, that I hear all cartridges with all three alignment parameters perfectly dialed in, so another sample might not sound that great and "normal" alignment - a level headshell and zero azimuth angle.)
The Umami I measured needed 2 degrees of SRA correction, had a functionally perfect azimuth angle but needed almost 5 degrees of zenith correction. Unfortunately, these figures are NOT uncommon. Every cartridge manufacturer is struggling with improving tolerances from their stylus/cantilever assembly providers.
To answer your question, you should trust the method outlined in the video where you measure the inside angle and the outside angle and apply the figures to the formula. The Hana Umami stylus does appear black for me too.
I am not surprised at all if your tonearm has to drop lower than possible to get to 92 degrees (dynamic). I see that FREQENTLY - particularly if you have a 11"-12" tonearm. If you know your native SRA and azimuth angles, I can make you a customized shim for your cartridge made from a material with a rigidity slightly less than titanium.
На слух получается настроить,если есть в тонарме регулировка VTA во время прослушивания.На Dynavector 505 это прекрасно.
Watch my video on Vertical Tracking Angle here: th-cam.com/video/dbqa2n4khb4/w-d-xo.html.
Our research team have learned a great deal more about VTA and SRA since making this webinar. In the VTA video I discuss why changing arm height does NOT allow you to hear changes in VTA. I make this claim again in the 2024 Munich HiFi panel video to the agreement of others on the panel.
In short, when you raise/lower your 505, you are NOT hearing changes in SRA or VTA as they are being dominated by changes in multiple vector forces. VTA and SRA must be addressed at the headshell to appreciate it in isolation.
JR, thank you so much! this was a great webinar. Just the tricks, are worth the time. What Leica microscope do you use? you mentioned the Hana being a great stylus, what other stylus you think is undervalued? I need to replace my stylus and I have a Steelhead and unfortunately the MC load goes to 400ohm. I prefer the MC over the MM sound coming out of the Steelhead.
Thank you
Thank you! I plan to re-do this webinar once the WallyScope is released. There is an even easier, faster and safer way to measure dynamic SRA that I'll reveal.
I use a Leica assembly with three different compound lenses, variable through the lens lighting (brightfield, refracted), digital camera with large receptor, automated stage, optical zoom function, etc.
Be very careful about using third party stylus retippers. If you have a very high end cartridge I would never suggest using a retipper at all for most of them - particularly the brands that take great care with their assemblies and have specialized designs such as Lyra. More on this issue to come...
I don't recall saying the Hana had a great stylus per se (they have their mount issues like almost everyone else) but I do recall saying that it was a good value for the money.
@@WAM-Engineering I am sorry for the rewording, with new stylus I meant cartridge. What cartridges in the $2-$4k would you recommend for a phono stage that has a max load of 400ohm in the MC inputs?
Looking forward to the scope.
Do you have a model for the Leica?
Also, how would your azimuth tool work with a gimbaled tone arm? I have a VPI and their anti-skating is affecting the azimuth, so I feel I have to choose between the correct azimuth or antiskating.
@@josephwhite4043 there are plenty that are in that price range that play well below 400 ohms. I don't have a specific recommendation for you but be sure to check out the Lyra, Hana and the entry level Haniwa as it may still be on sale at the top end of your range.
Once again, I am away from my lab so I can't read the model of the Leica XX7000 something is all I recall for the central unit. At this level of microscopy, you often put a microscope together from its many parts since one size does not fit all. Therefore, it is a conglomeration of many different models for the stage, camera, lenses, illumination, etc.
I think you mean that you have a unipivot arm. A gimbaled arm is fixed on the azimuth axis and wouldn't change unless you change the height of the tonearm or adjusted the azimuth mechanism itself. Your issue is one of the challenges free-rolling unipivots have. Best to measure the force that the wire puts on the tonearm with a WallySkater - which would then offer you a way to adjust for it or ameliorate it altogether. Or, perhaps, your anti-skate mechanism is setup wrongly and is applying a force on the tonearm that alters azimuth. The collar has to be mounted to the counterweight shaft properly and the string has to be as level as possible when pulled taught by the lever arm. People tend to WAY over apply anti-skate force because they insist on using test records. Not a good idea, that.
If you have any other questions, reach out to me directly. Thanks!
I wonder why the window of the video is such a small part of the entire screen. It is impossible for me to see what is demonstrated.
I agree. It was tough to manage during the process and our first attempt at a webinar. We will be making the WallyScope video in the spring in which we will correct several things that were done not as well as we would have liked. Keep an eye out for it. Thanks for commenting.
How about skipping ALL of this and just using the AnalogMagic 2 software to find the best performing Azimuth, VTF, SRA, etc.!
If you watch my series on the 7 Alignment Targets you’ll start to see the response: optimization is not possible with a multivariate approach, there has never been a single test record cut with KNOWN angular errors by which we can use as a reference for playback errors, in many of the listed tests you aren’t even measuring what you are told you are measuring (second and third order phenomena at best), lack of understanding of the influence of vector forces on such tests, inability to hit optimal VTA and SRA using the means suggested in such tests, etc. I could go on and on.
Bottom line: AM is good to use to IMPROVE your sound but it is not possible to OPTIMIZE your performance with it.
My gosh, you are so nerds! Listen to the music - will you? Cheers from another vinyl nerd. :)
Guilty as charged!
I have a USB microscope but its not a DinoLite. Can I still use this software with it to measure? If not, what are my options? Thanks!
Hi EPG. Not sure I can be much help. The USB scopes are all pretty limited in their ability to capture a good photo so I don’t use them. I haven’t touched them for measurements since making this video. I use the WallyScope and my lab scope.
If you can’t do it by ear, then what’s the point? I am sure I can get it within the range of 90 to94 degrees by listening.
Hi Ricky. The point made that you “can’t do it by ear” is multifarious.
First, you’ll never know if you have a flaw in the mount until it is inspected using univariate means (e.g., optical inspection) rather than multivariate means (e.g., electrical reading from stylus traveling through groove or by ear). For example, I recently inspected a $7500 cartridge that had its SRA off by 12° under dynamic conditions. This is an absolutely impossible angle to recover from for any tonearm ever made. In fact, the back end of the cartridge would be scraping along the surface of the record by the time you got to about 5° or 6°. Now, if you were adjusting this cartridge by ear I imagine you could find some alignment that you were comfortable with, but you will never, ever know how good this cartridge could sound if the stylus had been mounted correctly. In my experience, a good percentage of audiophiles live with this situation and will never know it because they will not optically inspect their stylus cantilever assembly.
Secondly, while I am sure that you can get it sounding good by ear alone, you will never know for certain whether you are getting THE MOST from the cartridge you paid dearly for unless you can zero in on the mechanical relationship between the stylus and groove to ensure optimal angles are achieved.
Third, when you adjust your tonearm height to achieve optimal SRA, you are also changing the azimuth angle and - on most tonearms - VTF. So, while the sound has improved from the adjustments, you are compelled to ask WHAT improved and whether the overall sound improved but to the detriment of one or more other parameters which could afford to give a bit more from the grooves if you knew which parameter to change, by how much and in what direction.
All of this is doable.
Hi Ricky, the problem is that when you change the tonearm height to affect the rake angle, it changes azimuth as well and (on many tonearms) it also changes VTF. So, the question becomes: with the tonearm height change you just made, was rake impacted positively or negatively and was azimuth impacted positively or negatively? Your net result might be an overall subjective improvement, but how do you know if you have optimized it or not unless you measure directly?
Made me think that this is at present time with wildly accessible microscopes and software plus internet, TH-cam and info more available for the masses.
How were the SRA setting on the average TT in the 80-ties. Before the CD and all that were playing LPs back then?
The knowledge spread to the masses and the crazy sofisticate TT that we have today were not there.
One like Michael Fremer that played LP then and now. When for example did he or people start adjust SRA??
Or with lack of knowledge that has been produced by research the recent decades.
That the nobody more or less did not adjust SRA (maybe they just aimed on getting the tonearm parallel to the record) for their advanced stylus shapes? (When the knowledge were not spread and no tools for adjusting SRA.)
I don't mean that SRA is not important when it is. I am just interested what the general consensus were and if they even care about SRA in the 80-ties? 😀
It wasn't really done at all, to my knowledge. Just like we have learned how to attend to many unrecognized parameters in digital playback over the years in order to improve the performance, so as with vinyl playback. In particular, the increase in use of the fine line contact stylus profile offers opportunities to get more from the groove WHEN IT IS PROPERLY ALIGNED than did conical, elliptical and even Shibata styli profiles. So - NO - they didn't care about this stuff during the 80's because it hadn't been researched well so little was known of it. Our upcoming submissions to JAES will help push the science forward so that more people can see for themselves the physical properties that make these parameters worth attending to.
@@WAM-Engineering
Interesting if we conclude that LP playback were worse sound quality wise in the 80-ties.
Just in all those reasons.
Memory of how it sounded show us again and as proven to be false for those that thinking it were better then.
Anyway we are able to squishing the most sound quality out of the format today. And it is nice to see you pushing the envelope on how we can set the turntable up, as good as possible.🙏👍
You can measure all you want, for an “exotic” stylus shape in a high-end setup, these tools do not have the precision to optimize SRA or VTA. You can only do this by ear. Stop relying on tools and just listen!
I invite you to support your position with a reasoned argument rather than an opinion without any evidentiary support or logical coherence. If you cannot do so, I will assume your post is simply attempting to elicit a prescribed emotional response which adds nothing to the conversation and delete it. I’d rather not do that. Even if we disagree I’d prefer to allow you to be heard, but you must have something to say here that will help advance the conversation about analog optimization.
Do you have anything to say to support a multivariate approach like “use your ears” is always better than a univariate approach like “measure and hit the mark” on a mechanical transcription system?