porcy62 Posted February 7, 2008 Report Posted February 7, 2008 (edited) Thanks Peter, the Brinkmann sounds just perfect and looks very impressive, indeed! Even my wife that usually hates my stereo rig, was surprisingly enthusiast of the design. About TT with two arms, actually there are less expensive models, some brands like Clearaudio and Acoustic Solid have in catalog TT's with two arms, but I never auditioned them, neither I saw one on the used market. Another option would be mounting a SME tonearms with removable headshell, though I don't know if it could really provides an easy and fast switching of cartdridges, never owned one. http://www.sme.ltd.uk/content/Series-300-1332.shtml http://www.sumikoaudio.net/sme/prod_modelm2.htm Edited February 7, 2008 by porcy62 Quote
street singer Posted February 7, 2008 Report Posted February 7, 2008 How 'bout a picture or two of that new table, Porcy? Pleeeease?! Quote
porcy62 Posted February 7, 2008 Report Posted February 7, 2008 (edited) How 'bout a picture or two of that new table, Porcy? Pleeeease?! I'd gladly do it, but my digital camera died in summer vacation. (R.I.P.) Sorry. Anyway the table is exactly like this: http://brinkmann-usa.com/lagrangeturntable.php Clic on the picture for a larger view These germans are so maniac that they provide a genuine leather mat for the clamp, so you don't damage it when you lay it down on the rack. Edited February 7, 2008 by porcy62 Quote
street singer Posted February 7, 2008 Report Posted February 7, 2008 How 'bout a picture or two of that new table, Porcy? Pleeeease?! I'd gladly do it, but my digital camera died in summer vacation. (R.I.P.) Sorry. Anyway the table is exactly like this: http://brinkmann-usa.com/lagrangeturntable.php Clic on the picture for a larger view Gorgeous. Would love to hear it... Quote
porcy62 Posted February 7, 2008 Report Posted February 7, 2008 How 'bout a picture or two of that new table, Porcy? Pleeeease?! I'd gladly do it, but my digital camera died in summer vacation. (R.I.P.) Sorry. Anyway the table is exactly like this: http://brinkmann-usa.com/lagrangeturntable.php Clic on the picture for a larger view Gorgeous. Would love to hear it... Indeed, I find it even sexy. Quote
sidewinder Posted February 7, 2008 Report Posted February 7, 2008 Looks nice. I'll have to get a demo of one of these, some day. (Presumably the German maniacs import them into the UK?) Quote
porcy62 Posted February 7, 2008 Report Posted February 7, 2008 Looks nice. I'll have to get a demo of one of these, some day. (Presumably the German maniacs import them into the UK?) I advise you: don't do it! You start with one snort and after a while you're in the streets smuggling drug in order to pay one of these beasts! Quote
sidewinder Posted February 7, 2008 Report Posted February 7, 2008 I advise you: don't do it! You start with one snort and after a while you're in the streets smuggling drug in order to pay one of these beasts! Don't worry Porcy I'm an LP12/Aro/XX-2 man through-and-through. Indoctrinated ! Quote
mikeweil Posted January 21, 2009 Report Posted January 21, 2009 (edited) I bought a Grado mono cartridge a few months ago as I had a spare headshell for my Thorens TD 160. Those mono LPs from the 1950's indeed do sound quieter and a bit more dynamic. My question is: should I play back mono pressings manufactured after 1968 with this mono cartridge or rather with the stereo? E.g. I have a Japanese LP reissue of Shearing material clearly designated as mono grooves which also sounds better when played back with the mono, but I'm not sure about my other mono LPs made after 1968 ... How do you handle these? Edited January 23, 2009 by mikeweil Quote
porcy62 Posted January 22, 2009 Report Posted January 22, 2009 I bought a Grado mono cartridge a few months ago as I had a spare headshell for my Thorens TD 160. Those mono LPs from the 1950's indeed do sound quieter and a bit more dynamic. My question is: should Im play back mono pressings manufactured after 1968 with this mono cartridge or rather with the stereo? E.g. I have a Japanese LP reissue of Shearing material clearly designated as mono grooves which also sounds better when played back with the mono, but I'm not sure about my other mono LPs made after 1968 ... How do you handle these? Post 1968 mono records were usually cutted on stereo machine, I play them with my stereo cart. Somewhere in SHF, SH says that 'true' mono carts could damage mono records cutted on stereo cutting machine. I missed the specs of a 'true' mono carts: different suspensions, bigger stylus, etc, I presume. Since the mono 'revival', lots of manufacturers has 'mono' versions into their catalogues. If they are 'true' mono...or simply a stereo with the horizontal modulation splitted on both channels, who knows? Quote
Harold_Z Posted January 22, 2009 Report Posted January 22, 2009 A few months ago I bought a new Marantz receiver. Although there is no mono switch I noticed from the first mono record I played a noticeable improvement over the 10 year old Pioneer the Marantz replaced...and the improvement was in precisely the areas that a mono switch or a mono cartridge would effect. Is it a possibility that the newer quality receivers and amps "sense" a mono record and adjust playback accordingly? Quote
Teasing the Korean Posted January 22, 2009 Report Posted January 22, 2009 I was under the impression that there is also another date in the 50s during which mono LPs changed somehow, resulting in three phases of mono microgroove records. Is this true? Quote
porcy62 Posted January 22, 2009 Report Posted January 22, 2009 A few months ago I bought a new Marantz receiver. Although there is no mono switch I noticed from the first mono record I played a noticeable improvement over the 10 year old Pioneer the Marantz replaced...and the improvement was in precisely the areas that a mono switch or a mono cartridge would effect. Is it a possibility that the newer quality receivers and amps "sense" a mono record and adjust playback accordingly? I don't think so, phono equalisation stages are improved, probably, since LPs are hip now, the manufactures put more effort on the engineering of phono stages. BTW Marantz were sonically superior to Pioneer, even 10 years ago, IMHO. Quote
Teasing the Korean Posted January 23, 2009 Report Posted January 23, 2009 Porcy, you of all orgsters should be able to answer my question... Quote
chewy-chew-chew-bean-benitez Posted January 23, 2009 Report Posted January 23, 2009 when i play a mono lp w/ my stereo needle? what audio disadvantages are there? Quote
porcy62 Posted January 23, 2009 Report Posted January 23, 2009 Porcy, you of all orgsters should be able to answer my question... Sorry man, I probably missed it, what do you mean with 'three phases of mono microgroove records?'. I thought that there were some major improvement in the 50 's with frequency response, due both by recording equipments and cutting technique, but, not 'three phase'. Quote
porcy62 Posted January 23, 2009 Report Posted January 23, 2009 (edited) when i play a mono lp w/ my stereo needle? what audio disadvantages are there? from wiki: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stereophonic_sound In 1958 the first group of stereo two-channel records were issued – by Audio Fidelity in the USA and Pye in Britain, using the Westrex "45/45" single-groove system. While the stylus moves horizontally when reproducing a monophonic disk recording, on stereo records the stylus moves vertically as well as horizontally. One could envision a system in which the left channel was recorded laterally, as on a monophonic recording, with the right channel information recorded with a "hill-and-dale" vertical motion; such systems were proposed but not adopted, due to their incompatibility with existing phono pickup designs (see below). In the Westrex system, each channel drives the cutting head at a 45 degree angle to the vertical. During playback the combined signal is sensed by a left channel coil mounted diagonally opposite the inner side of the groove, and a right channel coil mounted diagonally opposite the outer side of the groove.[9] The combined stylus motion in terms of the vector sum and difference of the two stereo channels. Effectively, all horizontal stylus motion conveys the L+R sum signal, and vertical stylus motion carries the L-R difference signal. The advantages of the 45/45 system are that it has greater compatibility with monophonic recording and playback systems. A monophonic cartridge will reproduce an equal blend of the left and right channels instead of reproducing only one channel. Conversely, a stereo cartridge reproduces the lateral grooves of monophonic recording equally through both channels, rather than one channel. As well, it gives a more balanced sound, because the two channels have equal fidelity (rather than providing one higher-fidelity laterally recorded channel and one lower-fidelity vertically recorded channel). Overall, this approach may give higher fidelity, because the "difference" signal is usually of low power and thus less affected by the intrinsic distortion of "hill-and-dale"-style recording. In my experience an optimized modern mono cart enhances the dynamic and reduces the background noise, because it will pick up only the horizontal stylus motion (L+R sum signal), and avoid every phase problems from the blend of both channels of the stereo cart, since there should be no L-R difference signal on a mono record cutted with 45/45 system. Mono records cutted with true mono machine should have only a lateral movement, again the mono cart will pick up that signal only, avoiding all the useless vertical modulation. I am sure Chuck will knows when the mono cutting machine were phased out in the industry. TTK, maybe this is an answer to your question too. Edited January 23, 2009 by porcy62 Quote
_forumlogo.png.a607ef20a6e0c299ab2aa6443aa1f32e.png)
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.