IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

2 Pages V   1 2 >  
Reply to this topicStart new topic
Inner Groove Distortion, Split from: LPs that actually do sound better? (#83780)
Pepzhez
post Sep 9 2010, 13:08
Post #1





Group: Members
Posts: 257
Joined: 18-May 03
Member No.: 6685



As compared to vinyl, CD/FLAC/MP3/AAC are extremely handicapped when it comes to producing inner groove distortion.

In other words, if distortion is your thing, vinyl cannot be beat; nor can said distortion be eliminated from the format.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
doctorcilantro
post Sep 9 2010, 15:47
Post #2





Group: Members
Posts: 33
Joined: 2-July 09
Member No.: 71158



QUOTE (Pepzhez @ Sep 9 2010, 14:08) *
As compared to vinyl, CD/FLAC/MP3/AAC are extremely handicapped when it comes to producing inner groove distortion.

In other words, if distortion is your thing, vinyl cannot be beat; nor can said distortion be eliminated from the format.


Not that simple. Some sides are cut a 10 minutes, and why people use linear trackers.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Pepzhez
post Sep 9 2010, 16:35
Post #3





Group: Members
Posts: 257
Joined: 18-May 03
Member No.: 6685



Ten minute sides are a solution of sorts, albeit not very common, practical, or particularly good value for money. Such releases cover, oh, I'd guess .0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000001 of recorded music, if even that.

Likewise, linear tracking tables in theory work to minimize inner groove distortion, but in actual practice this is not so easy to accomplish. There were a slew of linear tracking turntables on the market in the early 1980s. Most were mediocre, or worse, performers, and these devices are not held in very high esteem today -- nor are they particularly sought after.

This isn't to say that vinyl cannot be an enjoyable listen, and, yes, a vinyl version of a particular recording may for a variety of reasons be preferable to its CD counterpart, but there are inherent limitations to the format that one ought to be aware of and will have to live with, one way or another. Inner groove distortion and wobbling pitch were always annoyances to me. If such things do not bother you, then you needn't worry about them.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
botface
post Sep 10 2010, 09:33
Post #4





Group: Members
Posts: 355
Joined: 14-January 08
Member No.: 50483



QUOTE (Pepzhez @ Sep 9 2010, 16:35) *
Inner groove distortion and wobbling pitch were always annoyances to me.

Sounds like your turntable was pretty poor quality and not set up properly
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Pepzhez
post Sep 10 2010, 12:28
Post #5





Group: Members
Posts: 257
Joined: 18-May 03
Member No.: 6685



You are incorrect on both counts. Early on I owned the usual substandard Gerard phonographs that young kids tended to have. Later on I owned top shelf model (and highly regarded during their era) turntables from the likes of Dual and Linn. Without a doubt those tables were big improvements, and while they can help tremendously to minimize the inherent shortcomings of the format, they certainly cannot eliminate them.

Yes, I do know how to set up a turntable properly, thank you. That was a necessary acquired skill at the time for anyone desirous of decent vinyl playback.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
botface
post Sep 10 2010, 12:36
Post #6





Group: Members
Posts: 355
Joined: 14-January 08
Member No.: 50483



QUOTE (Pepzhez @ Sep 10 2010, 12:28) *
You are incorrect on both counts. Early on I owned the usual substandard Gerard phonographs that young kids tended to have. Later on I owned top shelf model (and highly regarded during their era) turntables from the likes of Dual and Linn. Without a doubt those tables were big improvements, and while they can help tremendously to minimize the inherent shortcomings of the format, they certainly cannot eliminate them.

Yes, I do know how to set up a turntable properly, thank you. That was a necessary acquired skill at the time for anyone desirous of decent vinyl playback.

That's curious. I've never heard "wobbling pitch" from a decent turntable that's been properly maintained. I've also never been unduly troubled by inner groove distortion on most records. If you know how to set up a cartridge/arm properly you will appreciate that inner groove distortion can be reduced to insignificant levels - not totally eliminated, you're right. Having said that the degree of distortion also depends on programme material. Maybe you just have better ears than me
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Fedot L
post Sep 10 2010, 14:58
Post #7





Group: Members
Posts: 109
Joined: 2-January 10
Member No.: 76586



QUOTE (Pepzhez @ Sep 9 2010, 15:35) *
…linear tracking tables in theory work to minimize inner groove distortion

No. The so-called "inner groove distortion" has nothing to do with neither tone-arm type (pivoting or linear tracking) nor cartridge alignment adjustment. Even with the best cartridge alignment adjustment, the "tracing distortion" will be present, as not depending on it.

The distortion that increases as the stylus passes from the “outer” to the “inner” grooves, is not an “inner groove distortion”, the so-called "inner groove distortion" is the "tracing distortion", non-linear distortion proper fundamentally to the mechanical reproduction of any groove (and not only "inner") of a gramophone record, and by any stylus, due to the difference between the shapes of the cutter chisel and the stylus. But to a variable degree, depending, at equal signal frequency and amplitude, on the radius of the groove. And in the same groove, on the shape of the stylus' surface in contact with the groove.

The only way to reduce it very considerably with "mechanical" cartridges: the use of styli types designed and manufactured for CD-4 discrete quadraphonic reproduction (“Shibata”, “Pramanic” etc.), or their modern analogues (“Fine-line”, “Line contact” etc.) having the finest possible radius of contact with the groove sides.

http://www.answers.com/topic/tracing-distortion

Good illustrations:
http://www.speakerbits.com/speaker-repairs...article-24.aspx

A general link:
http://www.google.ru/search?hl=ru&neww...q=&gs_rfai=
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
doctorcilantro
post Sep 11 2010, 03:17
Post #8





Group: Members
Posts: 33
Joined: 2-July 09
Member No.: 71158



QUOTE (Fedot L @ Sep 10 2010, 14:58) *
QUOTE (Pepzhez @ Sep 9 2010, 15:35) *
…linear tracking tables in theory work to minimize inner groove distortion

No. The so-called "inner groove distortion" has nothing to do with neither tone-arm type (pivoting or linear tracking) nor cartridge alignment adjustment. Even with the best cartridge alignment adjustment, the "tracing distortion" will be present, as not depending on it.

The distortion that increases as the stylus passes from the “outer” to the “inner” grooves, is not an “inner groove distortion”, the so-called "inner groove distortion" is the "tracing distortion", non-linear distortion proper fundamentally to the mechanical reproduction of any groove (and not only "inner") of a gramophone record, and by any stylus, due to the difference between the shapes of the cutter chisel and the stylus. But to a variable degree, depending, at equal signal frequency and amplitude, on the radius of the groove. And in the same groove, on the shape of the stylus' surface in contact with the groove.

The only way to reduce it very considerably with "mechanical" cartridges: the use of styli types designed and manufactured for CD-4 discrete quadraphonic reproduction (“Shibata”, “Pramanic” etc.), or their modern analogues (“Fine-line”, “Line contact” etc.) having the finest possible radius of contact with the groove sides.

http://www.answers.com/topic/tracing-distortion

Good illustrations:
http://www.speakerbits.com/speaker-repairs...article-24.aspx

A general link:
http://www.google.ru/search?hl=ru&neww...q=&gs_rfai=



So now you're suddenly equivocating 'innner groove distortion' with 'tracing distortion'? One being a function of tonearm alignment, and the other due to stylus shape. Not new concepts, and often addressed by today's designers.

And then admit something like an Optimized Contour Contact Line diamond will function great.

Sure, you may have to match up a linear tracker more carefully to cart., and worry about lateral effective mass, but do it right, and you can achieve more than acceptable fidelity.

Sure vinyl has it's limits, but there are some damn good implementations these days.

Troll?

This post has been edited by doctorcilantro: Sep 11 2010, 03:20
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Arnold B. Kruege...
post Sep 11 2010, 09:47
Post #9





Group: Members
Posts: 3700
Joined: 29-October 08
From: USA, 48236
Member No.: 61311



QUOTE (doctorcilantro @ Sep 9 2010, 10:47) *
QUOTE (Pepzhez @ Sep 9 2010, 14:08) *
As compared to vinyl, CD/FLAC/MP3/AAC are extremely handicapped when it comes to producing inner groove distortion.

In other words, if distortion is your thing, vinyl cannot be beat; nor can said distortion be eliminated from the format.


Not that simple. Some sides are cut a 10 minutes, and why people use linear trackers.


Linear trackers do not resolve most problems with inner groove distortion, or inherent LP distortion in general. They do address two kinds of distortion that I can think of, one of which does not absolutely need a linear tracker to address. But, there are plenty other kinds of distortion that linear trackers don't help with at all. That's one reason why they did not take over the marketplace - they were only a fractional solution.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Arnold B. Kruege...
post Sep 11 2010, 10:02
Post #10





Group: Members
Posts: 3700
Joined: 29-October 08
From: USA, 48236
Member No.: 61311



QUOTE (doctorcilantro @ Sep 10 2010, 22:17) *
So now you're suddenly equivocating 'inner groove distortion' with 'tracing distortion'? One being a function of tonearm alignment, and the other due to stylus shape. Not new concepts, and often addressed by today's designers.


What he's saying is that inner groove distortion has two major causes, only one of which is addressed by linear tracking tone arms. This is fact. You can't play divide and conquer unless you actually conquer both of them.

QUOTE
And then admit something like an Optimized Contour Contact Line diamond will function great.


Great compared to what? Compared to less-optimal styli, they trade reduced but not vanishing tracing distortion for other problems, including a need for increased mounting precision.

QUOTE
Sure, you may have to match up a linear tracker more carefully to cart., and worry about lateral effective mass, but do it right, and you can achieve more than acceptable fidelity.


I don't think that anybody is saying that vinyl can't have acceptable fidelity if you are tolerant enough of audible noise and distortion. Some of us happen to not be so tolerant, and will only find it to be acceptable when other generally superior alternatives fail, mostly for non-technical reasons like disagreeable mastering or the simple fact that much great music was recorded before digital.

QUOTE
Sure vinyl has it's limits, but there are some damn good implementations these days.


I have yet to see any significant improvements in basic vinyl playback in the past 20 or 30 years. Just different trade-offs or more often, just a lot of hype.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
doctorcilantro
post Sep 11 2010, 12:19
Post #11





Group: Members
Posts: 33
Joined: 2-July 09
Member No.: 71158



Fair enough. Just seemed like the poster was equivocating.

So avoiding Pinch Effect is impossible with any modern arm/tonearm?

I have read arguments against LTs because of possible mistracking on off-center pressings which 'should' cause mistracking. Haven't noticed that myself, yet.

Axon noted:

QUOTE
Tracking and tracing distortion are rather similar mathematically, so I strongly suspect that what most people refer to as "mistracking" really is mistracing or tracing distortion. Mistracking only happens when the stylus physically loses contact ("tracking") with one or both sides of the groove. That's usually not what's going on with IGD.


I take you believe that IGD remains with linear trackers because of exactly ...?

If the stylus is tangential to the groove, what happens when using a linear tracking with an off-center pressing as it approaches the end of an LP?

thanks

QUOTE (Arnold B. Krueger @ Sep 11 2010, 10:02) *
QUOTE (doctorcilantro @ Sep 10 2010, 22:17) *
So now you're suddenly equivocating 'inner groove distortion' with 'tracing distortion'? One being a function of tonearm alignment, and the other due to stylus shape. Not new concepts, and often addressed by today's designers.


What he's saying is that inner groove distortion has two major causes, only one of which is addressed by linear tracking tone arms. This is fact. You can't play divide and conquer unless you actually conquer both of them.

QUOTE
And then admit something like an Optimized Contour Contact Line diamond will function great.


Great compared to what? Compared to less-optimal styli, they trade reduced but not vanishing tracing distortion for other problems, including a need for increased mounting precision.

QUOTE
Sure, you may have to match up a linear tracker more carefully to cart., and worry about lateral effective mass, but do it right, and you can achieve more than acceptable fidelity.


I don't think that anybody is saying that vinyl can't have acceptable fidelity if you are tolerant enough of audible noise and distortion. Some of us happen to not be so tolerant, and will only find it to be acceptable when other generally superior alternatives fail, mostly for non-technical reasons like disagreeable mastering or the simple fact that much great music was recorded before digital.

QUOTE
Sure vinyl has it's limits, but there are some damn good implementations these days.


I have yet to see any significant improvements in basic vinyl playback in the past 20 or 30 years. Just different trade-offs or more often, just a lot of hype.

Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Saucerful
post Sep 11 2010, 17:13
Post #12





Group: Members
Posts: 5
Joined: 18-January 09
Member No.: 65699



I've been into vinyl casually for about 2 or 3 years. I have a Stanton T.120C turntable, that's the version with the S-shaped tonearm. My cartridge is a Shure M97xE. Despite being quite inexperienced with vinyl, my ear is pickier than some, and so I consider the inner groove distortion produced by my rig to be bothersome.

At first I thought it was because of the way I set the cartridge up, but I had it taken off and reinstalled by the DJ/PA equipment specialist at my local music shop. Same issue with very noticeable inner groove distortion. Granted, it seems to be much more noticeable on some records than on others, and most of my vinyl is used, which leads me to believe that part of the issue can be blamed on the poor tracking of previous owners' cartridges. I know something is definitely wrong though, because I experience the distortion even on new vinyl close to the inner groove and especially on 7" vinyl where the tonearm is consistently on a more extreme angle.

If you're wondering about the rest of my rig, for now I'm just using the built-in phono preamp on my turntable and going line-in to my Asus Xonar Essence STX sound card and out to my Sennheiser HD 555 headphones.

So, notwithstanding any sound quality issues inherent in using the built-in preamp or any of that sort of thing, I'm wondering what my best course of action would be to reduce inner groove distortion. For now, I'm just getting ideas, so price isn't really an object. I'll sort out what I can afford later. I just want to know what are the likely culprits. Should I replace my cartridge? Or should I toss my Stanton and get an entirely different turntable? I'm not looking to replace my entire rig just yet, so suggestions for headphones and preamps/amps aren't really what I'm looking for today. I'm just wondering what I should do with my turntable/cartridge setup.

Thanks in advance.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Fedot L
post Sep 12 2010, 18:39
Post #13





Group: Members
Posts: 109
Joined: 2-January 10
Member No.: 76586



QUOTE (doctorcilantro @ Sep 11 2010, 03:17) *
QUOTE (Fedot L @ Sep 10 2010, 14:58) *
QUOTE (Pepzhez @ Sep 9 2010, 15:35) *
…linear tracking tables in theory work to minimize inner groove distortion

No. The so-called "inner groove distortion" has nothing to do with neither tone-arm type (pivoting or linear tracking) nor cartridge alignment adjustment. Even with the best cartridge alignment adjustment, the "tracing distortion" will be present, as not depending on it.

So now you're suddenly equivocating 'inner groove distortion' with 'tracing distortion'? One being a function of tonearm alignment, and the other due to stylus shape.

The so-called "inner groove distortion" is not a function of tone-arm alignment. Any pivoting tone-arm alignment leaves variable horizontal tracking angle errors and in “outer”, and in “medium”, and in “inner” grooves.

And linear tracking tone-arms reduce horizontal tracking angle errors to negligible levels.

Concerning what I’ve written about tracing distortion, proper to ANY groove, and not to “inner ones”, and why it is so, I’ve nothing to add to what I’ve written (and studied by specialists since 1940s).
QUOTE (doctorcilantro @ Sep 11 2010, 03:17) *
And then admit something like an Optimized Contour Contact Line diamond will function great.
Sure, you may have to match up a linear tracker more carefully to cart., and worry about lateral effective mass, but do it right, and you can achieve more than acceptable fidelity.

You are right. That’s just what I wrote in my first post.
QUOTE (Arnold B. Krueger @ Sep 11 2010, 10:02) *
QUOTE (doctorcilantro @ Sep 10 2010, 22:17) *
So now you're suddenly equivocating 'inner groove distortion' with 'tracing distortion'? One being a function of tonearm alignment, and the other due to stylus shape. Not new concepts, and often addressed by today's designers.

What he's saying is that inner groove distortion has two major causes…

Who is that “he”?
As for me, I never said this. Once more, I’ve repeated in this post above that what is popularly called “inner groove distortion” is not “inner groove distortion”, but the distortion proper to the playing of ANY groove by a stylus that has not, and cannot have, the profile of the cutting chisel, but aggravating on the shorter radii of the record. Thus having ONE cause.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Arnold B. Kruege...
post Sep 13 2010, 10:19
Post #14





Group: Members
Posts: 3700
Joined: 29-October 08
From: USA, 48236
Member No.: 61311



QUOTE (Fedot L @ Sep 12 2010, 13:39) *
QUOTE (Arnold B. Krueger @ Sep 11 2010, 10:02) *
QUOTE (doctorcilantro @ Sep 10 2010, 22:17) *
So now you're suddenly equivocating 'inner groove distortion' with 'tracing distortion'? One being a function of tonearm alignment, and the other due to stylus shape. Not new concepts, and often addressed by today's designers.

What he's saying is that inner groove distortion has two major causes…

Who is that “he”?
As for me, I never said this. Once more, I’ve repeated in this post above that what is popularly called “inner groove distortion” is not “inner groove distortion”, but the distortion proper to the playing of ANY groove by a stylus that has not, and cannot have, the profile of the cutting chisel, but aggravating on the shorter radii of the record. Thus having ONE cause.


That "he" is me, Arnold B. Krueger.

I see you are playing with personalities rather than deal with the question that I asked.

Here it is again:

"Inner groove distortion has two major causes, only one of which is addressed by linear tracking tone arms. This is fact. You can't play divide and conquer unless you actually conquer both of them."

The two causes of inner groove distortion are:

(1) Cartrdige not being held tangent to the groove

(2) Wavelengths on disk shortened by smaller groove radius

Linear tracking can address (1) but not (2).

Pinch effect is only part of (2).


Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Fedot L
post Sep 13 2010, 13:26
Post #15





Group: Members
Posts: 109
Joined: 2-January 10
Member No.: 76586



QUOTE (Arnold B. Krueger @ Sep 13 2010, 10:19) *
What he's saying is that…

QUOTE (Fedot L @ Sep 12 2010, 13:39) *
Who is that “he”?

QUOTE (Arnold B. Krueger @ Sep 13 2010, 10:19) *
I see you are playing with personalities rather than deal with the question...

I see it’s quite mutual.
QUOTE (Arnold B. Krueger @ Sep 13 2010, 10:19) *
…the question that I asked.
Here it is again:
"Inner groove distortion has two major causes, only one of which is addressed by linear tracking tone arms. This is fact. You can't play divide and conquer unless you actually conquer both of them."

The question that I already answered. There is no “inner groove distortion”. What is popularly called “inner groove distortion” is not “inner groove distortion”, but the distortion proper to the playing of ANY groove by a stylus that has not, and cannot have, the profile of the cutting chisel, but aggravating on the shorter radii of the record. And called “tracing distortion”.
QUOTE (Arnold B. Krueger @ Sep 13 2010, 10:19) *
The two causes of inner groove distortion are:
(1) Cartridge not being held tangent to the groove

Cartridge not being held tangent to the groove is not a cause of the tracing distortion that some people call "inner groove distortion", because such a bad cartridge adjustment causes considerable horizontal angle errors and in “outer”, and in “medium”, and in “inner” grooves.
QUOTE (Arnold B. Krueger @ Sep 13 2010, 10:19) *
(2) Wavelengths on disk shortened by smaller groove radius

The tracing distortion that some people call "inner groove distortion" is present on ANY groove radius played by styli, and being caused by the difference between profiles of the cutting chisel and of ANY stylus, that have not, and cannot have, the profile of the cutting chisel. This distortion increases with groove radius decrease, because, you are quite right, of wavelengths on disk shortened by smaller groove radius, thus making the stylus more and more incapable of following the grooves’ micro-convolutions.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
doctorcilantro
post Sep 13 2010, 13:54
Post #16





Group: Members
Posts: 33
Joined: 2-July 09
Member No.: 71158



QUOTE (Arnold B. Krueger @ Sep 13 2010, 10:19) *
QUOTE (Fedot L @ Sep 12 2010, 13:39) *
QUOTE (Arnold B. Krueger @ Sep 11 2010, 10:02) *
QUOTE (doctorcilantro @ Sep 10 2010, 22:17) *
So now you're suddenly equivocating 'inner groove distortion' with 'tracing distortion'? One being a function of tonearm alignment, and the other due to stylus shape. Not new concepts, and often addressed by today's designers.

What he's saying is that inner groove distortion has two major causes…

Who is that “he”?
As for me, I never said this. Once more, I’ve repeated in this post above that what is popularly called “inner groove distortion” is not “inner groove distortion”, but the distortion proper to the playing of ANY groove by a stylus that has not, and cannot have, the profile of the cutting chisel, but aggravating on the shorter radii of the record. Thus having ONE cause.


That "he" is me, Arnold B. Krueger.

I see you are playing with personalities rather than deal with the question that I asked.

Here it is again:

"Inner groove distortion has two major causes, only one of which is addressed by linear tracking tone arms. This is fact. You can't play divide and conquer unless you actually conquer both of them."

The two causes of inner groove distortion are:

(1) Cartrdige not being held tangent to the groove

(2) Wavelengths on disk shortened by smaller groove radius

Linear tracking can address (1) but not (2).

Pinch effect is only part of (2).

@ Fedot

I quoted you above, confusing your comments with those of Pepzhez, thus was very confused. Thanks for your insights.


@ ABK

Sorry for any confusion, my spacebar tore off my laptop and I was being lazy. I was speaking to Fedot (mistakenly) as I simply thought it was unclear what he meant, or rather what I'm glad we are now discussing. I understand you can't write a dissertation and it's fair to summarize your experience with these technicalities, but it seemed to me (most likely simply as a result of my ignorance on these matters compared to you) you had wrapped everything into vinyl = distortion = bad. I understand vinyl has very real and measurable defficiencies, I just wonder how audible these defficienices are.

What are some of the systems you have used or tested in the last 20 years?

So tracing distortion and pinch effect are aggravated at the inner grooves; for "music" or a sine wave?

Is it true as the groove speed decreases distortion rises? The wavelength shortens, and coupled with shape of the "inadequate" playback stylus, we get tracing distortion? Is this audible enough to detract from the fidelity in a meaningful way given an optimized setup (contact line stylus, tangential tracking). Many modern records, on 2 LPs seem to be cut a 10 minutes per side, or cut at 45rpm (which I assume would help?)


thanks for all the great discussion so far

This post has been edited by doctorcilantro: Sep 13 2010, 14:12
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Leigh
post Sep 13 2010, 15:24
Post #17





Group: Members
Posts: 9
Joined: 17-June 08
Member No.: 54447



QUOTE (Arnold B. Krueger @ Sep 13 2010, 05:19) *
The two causes of inner groove distortion are:

(1) Cartrdige not being held tangent to the groove

(2) Wavelengths on disk shortened by smaller groove radius

Linear tracking can address (1) but not (2).

Pinch effect is only part of (2).


Yes. (2) is not hard to understand at all if given even a small amount of thought. Take one revolution of an LP and measure the length of the vinyl groove the needle passes through. It's simply 2*pi*r where r is the radius (distance from the spindle to the location of the needle). As you approach the end of an LP side you have all that musical information squished into a smaller amount of groove length. It is difficult if not impossible to have the same amount of fidelity in the last song on a side compared to the first. As I understand it, cutting engineers reduce the high frequencies in songs towards the end of a side to reduce the chance of "overloading" the stylus. This in and of itself isn't distortion, but it is a reduction in fidelity and one of the reasons vinyl drives me nuts. Some needle designs are better than others in "tracking" correctly. "Microline" styli seem to do a good job. I am immensely pleased with the Audio Technica AT440MLa in this regard. It has virtually eliminated that spitting sound on vocal S's etc., which is what I most closely relate to IGD, and it's reasonably priced (non-audiophile price).
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
doctorcilantro
post Sep 13 2010, 15:50
Post #18





Group: Members
Posts: 33
Joined: 2-July 09
Member No.: 71158



QUOTE
The top two rows of values in Table 1 are taken from Shure literature and some of the reviews that were published when the V15/III was released. Shure used to publish ‘trackability’ graphs, etc, that showed the peak modulation velocities their cartridges could track. The data shown is for a playing weigh of 1 gram. Knowing the velocity and frequency we can calculate the acceleration required. Then use this to work out the maximum allowed stylus curvature and tip mass which would allow the stylus to perform as specified. Shure themselves claimed that their V15/III stylii had a tip mass of no more than 0·4 milligrams. Their chief engineer of the time also wrote an article that appeared in Hi Fi News[1]. This said that they had surveyed a number of LPs and that the highest accelerations they could find were around 1500g, so they designed the V15 series to track these discs. From the values in the above table we can see that the requirements include a tip mass of less than or equal to 0·6 milligrams and a minor radius of less than or equal to 3·5 microns. If the V15/III stylus had a higher mass or radius it would be unable to perform as specified across the frequency range and right to the end of an LP side.

In fact although the Shure VN35MR stylus for the V15/III had a ‘Micro Ridge’ with a claimed radius of 3·5 microns, earlier stylii had larger contact radius values. For example the VN35E was an elliptical shape with a minor radius of 5 microns. The measurements Shure quoted were often obtained using 45 rpm test discs, and using test tones recorded well away from the end-of-side region. Increasing the rotation rate from 33 to 45 rpm stretches the modulation out along the groove, reducing the curvature of the bends. At the end of an LP side it means that a stylus contact radius of 4·7 microns would allow the V15/III to fully meet its specifications.

And as you can see from Figure 5, if we keep away from the end of the LP side we don’t need such a small tip radius. So although the VM35MR shape might have coped with 1500g accelerations right up to the end of side, the VN35E and some of the earlier shapes may not.

Overall, the above tells us that if we wish to be able to play real-world LPs without mistracking we really need a tip mass of around half a milligram or less, and a minor radius of curvature (or equivalent) of around 3-4 microns or less. Larger values may be fine for most of the playing time of most discs, but could run into trouble in extreme cases. In theory, even lower masses and curvatures may seem desirable, but in practice they may only be needed for test tones, not music. Indeed, the cutter used to create the groove shape may have had an effective contact radius of a few microns, so it simply makes no sense to try to reach a stylus radius smaller than this. More extreme modulation may simple never appear on real-world discs of music. Although who knows, maybe it does – at least up until it is played for the first time!...

So although theory tells us we’d need to cope with 6000g and very tight curves to obtain a 0dB 20kHz test tone, the reality seems to be that practical LPs of music don’t normally have modulations which reach such extreme levels. This agrees with the results in the previous article and explains the difference between the theoretical requirements and reality!


http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/HFN/LP3/aroundthebend.html

My emphasis added. It would seem given modern contact line styli, audiophile pressings ("10 minute sides" or 45rpm), linear tonearms, low effective tip mass, etc. etc. all could add up to effectively mitigate IGD (tracing distortion) to a great degree???
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
cliveb
post Sep 13 2010, 15:54
Post #19


WaveRepair developer


Group: Developer
Posts: 838
Joined: 28-July 04
Member No.: 15845



QUOTE (Leigh @ Sep 13 2010, 15:24) *
As you approach the end of an LP side you have all that musical information squished into a smaller amount of groove length. It is difficult if not impossible to have the same amount of fidelity in the last song on a side compared to the first.

Does anyone know if there have ever been experimental LPs that were cut "inside out" - starting at the centre and moving towards to outer edge. For some classical music, where the beginning is quiet and the climax has all-guns-blazing, I'd have thought that might help.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Leigh
post Sep 13 2010, 18:49
Post #20





Group: Members
Posts: 9
Joined: 17-June 08
Member No.: 54447



QUOTE (cliveb @ Sep 13 2010, 10:54) *
QUOTE (Leigh @ Sep 13 2010, 15:24) *
As you approach the end of an LP side you have all that musical information squished into a smaller amount of groove length. It is difficult if not impossible to have the same amount of fidelity in the last song on a side compared to the first.

Does anyone know if there have ever been experimental LPs that were cut "inside out" - starting at the centre and moving towards to outer edge. For some classical music, where the beginning is quiet and the climax has all-guns-blazing, I'd have thought that might help.


It's easy to press an LP that way. I can't recall off the top of my head any specific examples, but some LPs have been released that way but as a novelty.

I can't find the link, but there was an early phonograph design where constant linear velocity was maintained. Obviously, the record would spin faster and faster as the needle made its way to the center (or slower as it moved away from the center if it were designed that way), and the record would have to be cut this way also. However this would obviously lead to much less program time per side. I would imagine getting the speed/pitch right would be a real challenge with a design like this.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
pdq
post Sep 13 2010, 21:24
Post #21





Group: Members
Posts: 3394
Joined: 1-September 05
From: SE Pennsylvania
Member No.: 24233



QUOTE (Leigh @ Sep 13 2010, 13:49) *
I can't find the link, but there was an early phonograph design where constant linear velocity was maintained. Obviously, the record would spin faster and faster as the needle made its way to the center (or slower as it moved away from the center if it were designed that way), and the record would have to be cut this way also. However this would obviously lead to much less program time per side. I would imagine getting the speed/pitch right would be a real challenge with a design like this.

Actually quite the opposite is true. If currently LPs have to rotate at 33 1/3 in order to have sufficient fidelity at the innermost groove, then that is much faster than it needs to be at the outermost groove. This would result in increased capacity.

This is very reminiscent of Laser Discs and their CAV vs. CLV modes.

I completely agree about the difficulty of getting the speed/pitch right.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
splice
post Sep 13 2010, 23:15
Post #22





Group: Members
Posts: 119
Joined: 23-July 03
Member No.: 7935



QUOTE (cliveb @ Sep 13 2010, 06:54) *
Does anyone know if there have ever been experimental LPs that were cut "inside out" - starting at the centre and moving towards to outer edge. For some classical music, where the beginning is quiet and the climax has all-guns-blazing, I'd have thought that might help.


The BBC "Transcription Series" (radio programs that were recorded on disc for distribution to affiliates for later broadcast, such as syndicated serials) were cut alternately "outside in" to "inside out". (The first disc in the set would play "outside in" as usual, then the second disc in the set would play "inside out".) This avoided the sudden change in sound quality that would otherwise occur when changing discs. Broadcasting studios usually used spherical stylus profiles for reasons such as longer stylus and disc life, reduction in surface noise and ease of cueing, but the profile made inner groove distortion worse.


--------------------
Regards,
Don Hills
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Leigh
post Sep 13 2010, 23:49
Post #23





Group: Members
Posts: 9
Joined: 17-June 08
Member No.: 54447



QUOTE (pdq @ Sep 13 2010, 16:24) *
QUOTE (Leigh @ Sep 13 2010, 13:49) *
I can't find the link, but there was an early phonograph design where constant linear velocity was maintained. Obviously, the record would spin faster and faster as the needle made its way to the center (or slower as it moved away from the center if it were designed that way), and the record would have to be cut this way also. However this would obviously lead to much less program time per side. I would imagine getting the speed/pitch right would be a real challenge with a design like this.

Actually quite the opposite is true. If currently LPs have to rotate at 33 1/3 in order to have sufficient fidelity at the innermost groove, then that is much faster than it needs to be at the outermost groove. This would result in increased capacity.

This is very reminiscent of Laser Discs and their CAV vs. CLV modes.

I completely agree about the difficulty of getting the speed/pitch right.

I was thinking that if the magic of vinyl is on the outer edges, then in order maintain that magic you'd have to have the linear velocity of the outer groove as the baseline, not the inner groove, and hence you'd have less program time per side.

It's all academic, though, as nobody is going to do anything like this!
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Axon
post Sep 14 2010, 05:05
Post #24





Group: Members (Donating)
Posts: 1984
Joined: 4-January 04
From: Austin, TX
Member No.: 10933



Yikes, this topic again?

OK, so that reminds me. Since we're well past April, I've finally gotten off my duff and uploaded my tracking error simulator paper from last year: here. (Suitably modified to avoid confusion with the AES preprint.) Those of you curious about the finer points of tracking distortion as it relates to inner groove distortion are highly encouraged to read it.

Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Axon
post Sep 14 2010, 05:52
Post #25





Group: Members (Donating)
Posts: 1984
Joined: 4-January 04
From: Austin, TX
Member No.: 10933



QUOTE (Fedot L @ Sep 12 2010, 12:39) *
The so-called "inner groove distortion" is not a function of tone-arm alignment. Any pivoting tone-arm alignment leaves variable horizontal tracking angle errors and in “outer”, and in “medium”, and in “inner” grooves.

I'm kinda confused by what you're saying here (and in other posts). If you're saying that when IGD is demonstrated to exist, an improved stylus is a much more effective solution than a realignment, you're very right. If you're saying that tracking distortion can never be the cause of IGD, or that it is not inversely proportional with radius, or that it is not a nonlinear distortion in the same way that tracing distortion is nonlinear, you're very wrong.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post

2 Pages V   1 2 >
Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 



RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 30th August 2014 - 12:21