Many LPs are incompatible with normal cartridges - can't be played without sibilance

The OP indicates playing the same pressing with a different cartridge resolved the issue.

 

Well, all bets are off when dealing with used records. They could very well be damaged from previous mistracking.

I like your posts above, Luke, and one shouldn't have to rely on the rest of the system to try and mitigate poor sibilance reproduction. Reducing system response at particular frequencies, for instance. The problem should be attacked at the source - mistracking of sibilant engravings in the groove walls.

I don't really feel that stylus profile is THE most important factor in poor sibilance tracking. Back when conical and simple elliptical profiles were all that were available, good siblilance reproduction was entirely possible and, in fact, the norm with high compliance cartridges. It is more with the suspension design and tip/cantilever mass which, of course, affect compliance which I believe is the major factor. The needle has to move easily to be able to track those engravings. Too stiff and it's going to bounce around not following the wall or plow through the undulations.

Doug

 

My humble experience:

If “sibilance” in question is on all records (which is not the case of the topic starter), there is something wrong with the stylus wear, cartridge alignment and/or non-linear distortion in the signal path or maybe, excessive VTF causing deformation of the groove by the stylus while playing.

If “sibilance” in question is on some records (which is the case of the topic starter), and others are O.K., it’s the records’ material or pressing defects.

I’ve specially listened, through headphones and LSs, to some of my records of good quality, including “50 years old” ones, with a “hyper-elliptical” stylus, with VTFs of 1,0…1,25 g (that I usually do), no sibilance.
And I’ve heard many samples of digitized records of high quality from the Net without any “sibilance”.

 

Again, as the OP pointed out, the same records played cleanly with a different cartridge.

A bit more reading here:

http://www.sickoftalk.com/whyvinyl_two.html
http://forums.audioreview.com/showthread.php?t=19899

 

Well, where is a contradiction with my post: some cartridges play without non-linear distortions, some do it with.

All what I've written, is my practical experience that I described: high quality equipment, well adjusted, plays high quality records without any excessive “sibilance”.

 

I was just about to quote the same thing when you posted!

I will read those articles with enormous interest.

I'm not sure I understand why some folks seem so determined not to believe that some particularly challenging LPs can present tracking problems for some cartridges, resulting in sibilance. I'm not saying this in an argumentative way - I genuinely don't understand why it's so hard to accept. It's not as though it hasn't been very well documented, and as the extract quoted by lukpac shows, it's very well understood by the people who actually cut LPs for a living. Or is it that the sceptics are just doubting my personal experience with the AT440MLA? Again, I could understand that if I was a lone voice just making some stupid wild claim after trying out a new cartridge. But look at all the other people who have had a similar experience with this particular cartridge and who have posted on other threads and on other forums. Heck, look at the reviews on Amazon, all 42 of them:

http://www.amazon.com/Technica-AT44...MK3A/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1310069753&sr=8-1

No, I didn't believe them either until at last I gave in and tried this cartridge. This is not about the AT440MLA, which probably isn't a very good cartridge by audiophile standards, but the important point is that, as Uncle Al says above, at the moment it's probably the lowest-priced entry point to really great tracking ability and for that reason has proved an eye-opener - ear-opener, I should say - to large numbers of people who previously thought sibilance was a necessary evil.

I still think it's possible that the reason people don't agree on this is that they have widely varying degrees of sensitivity to the particular frequencies and sounds involved in sibilance. I've no idea whether that's true or not - it's just an idea. Even if it were true, it would not imply any criticism of people who didn't hear sibilance as much as other people. It might just as easily imply that those who did hear it were over-sensitive to those particular sounds.

 

This.

 

And I think the opposite.

Subjective perception of ANY quality of sound reproduced by a sound system is based on those widely varying degrees of sensitivity to particular frequencies and sounds, and involved not only in sibilance but in ANY HFs in the program. And then, the sound “replayed” is compared in the aural memory with the natural sound heard around. And a sound replayed with normal degree of any kind of HFs NOT DISTORTED, including “sibilance” in question, should seem normal.

To me, the problem of “sibilance” in sound systems is the problem of DISTORTED sibilants. No distortion – no “excessive” “sibilance”.

 

I knew people who would not play Carpenters records at all because of 'sibilance'.

But that wasn't anything wrong with the equipment, it's just that they found they didn't like the universal close microphone recording used on Karen.

 

Yes, there is quite a range of sensitivity or concern about sibilance. Some hear it but don't place as high priority on avoiding it as others. I assumed you were among the more sensitive to the problem.

Given that virtually all of the better cartridges use some form of narrow profile styli, I agree that there must be an advantage to that shape in terms of accurately tracking a groove. I just would not jump to the conclusion that ONLY cartridges with such profiles can track well enough to avoid such problems. Your experience certain suggests that that might be the case, but, this is too small a sample, and your experience with sibilance with the other cartridges could be attributable to a number of other causes than the stylus shape.

It happens to be the case that all of the cartridges I like do use some form of microridge-type styli. My own experience makes me inclined to agree with you about the merits of this type of styli, but, I would not go so far as to say it is the only kind of styli that can track properly.

 

Here’s a flac of three different cartridges playing the same clip. This is the last song on side two of “From This Moment On” cut by Classic.

The first one is a Benz Ruby2 then an Argo-I and finally an old Onyx with a DIY retip. They were all played on my LP12 with a Sumiko MMT arm into an Inspire GT sound card with built in phono stage and a step up transformer.


This record has been played a hundred times because I use it for evaluating setups.

http://www.mediafire.com/?e450n9t23ur9ukb

 

Amazing how much cleaner the Argo-I is regarding sibilance compared to the other two. Thanks for the clip - very interesting!

For the sake of curiosity, what are the ballpark prices for the three carts?

 

I’m not sure, The Argo I got for the trade in price of $950 a few years back. The other two are really old but were real expensive for whoever bought them new.

I would be interested in hearing the same clip from the CD if anyone has the time.

 

The AT440MLA is pobably one of the cheapest cartridges out there with a very good tip and exceptional tracking ability. There are however other cartridges at various price ranges that do not exagerate or reproduce sibilance from my experience. They are not exclusively Line Contact types but often some variation on the eliptical profile. I think a combination of good set up, correct arm cartridge matching plus phono pre amp loading come into play. I doubt there are many if any cartridges that are incapable of tracking an audiophile cut lp from serious cartridge manufacturers today.

I think the previous cartridges though inferior to some extent to the AT where not an ideal match for your equipment. If you look at the Art Of Sound forum you will find posters with serious kit that use conical stylii (DL103) or Nagoaka cartridges. I have not seen any problems of this nature highlighted. May be worth posting your experience there to get some very knowledgable feedback on the subject from people with experience of trying many arm and cartridge combinations. There are a lot of tweekers and designers including enthusiasts that use a wide selection of cartridges that they interchange.

 

Yes! That's me!! Well, nearly. I do find Karen's esses hard to take but I think I'm well on my way to working around it. I think those very hot esses were causing SOME sibilance problems on my previous cartridges but the distorted edge has gone with the AT440MLA. The esses I'm left with are still too strong for my ears but I'm soon changing to a Class A amplifier which based on my trial run will solve that remaining problem. BTW, in case anyone's wondering, I did try the class A amplifier with my sibilant LPs and that wasn't a solution - it didn't alter the character of the distortion at all.

Yes, I agree! I didn't mean to imply that I thought line contact styluses were the only solution to sibilance distortion. I don't think that and I'm very interested in hearing more about cartridges that have great tracking ability with other profiles.

I think of the AT440MLA as a quick fix, something that, at very little cost, has given me just a taste of what's achievable with a really good cartridge. And that's what I bought if for, really - to see if a cartridge really could make that much difference. Now I know it can, I need to start searching for a cartridge I really like. The AT440MLA is wonderful value for money but even though it allegedly has a flat frequency response, it has too much top end for my delicate ears and certainly not enough bottom.

Yes, I agree with all of this except the very last bit. I certainly agree that any good cartridge from a reputable manufacturer should be able to track an audiophile LP, and I remember saying the same thing on a Dark Side of the Moon thread that we both posted on (as well as at the start of this thread), but the Dark Side of the Moon 30th anniversary edition is a good example of how it's not the case in practice - you only have to look at the very large number of people who report sibilance with that LP. In fact it's the audiophile LPs that seem to be the toughest test of cartridges - they seem to give far more problems than ordinary LPs from the past, which is perhaps not surprising since LPs of the past were made for a mass market made up of people with predominantly low-quality cartridges.

Of course, if you're still running that Audio Technica AT-OC9, it's not surprising you don't have sibilance problems since it's a superb tracker by reputation!

I'll have a look at that forum you mentioned.

DaleH, I wasn't able to play those clips straight away but I'm working on it.

 

OK, I just got them to play. It's great that you posted those - a clip is worth a thousand words. It's a real torture track by the sound of it and I can see why you use it as a test. The first and third carts clearly couldn't hack it. The middle one did far better but it's interesting that even that one couldn't quite cope with the "success" at the start of the middle section. It would be fun to hear an AT440MLA attempting this track.

 

Karen's esses do just fine on my Technics SP-25 motor unit, Audio-Technica ATP-16T tonearm and Stanton 681 EEE-S II. And it tracks 99% of discs at 1.25 grams VTF all day long.

 

I have used 3 cartridges since purchasing 30th DSOTM 2 of which are microline of some kind and one elliptical. (Ortofon MC25FL, Dynacector 20XL, OC9MLII. ) No sibilance on any. I did say serious cartridge manufacturers so was refering to specialists and obviously no extreme budget or vintage designs. I think some complainers were using cartridges in the later catagories and we cannot be sure how well set up their equipment is.

Couldn't get those clips to work but can't see why a pricey cartridge would be developed and manufactured without thorough testing on difficult records. There is always the possibility of QC issues I suppose. BTW I will agree about Karen Carpenter but that is the recording not mistracking. Difficult to smooth out recorded sibilance but some cartridges help by not overemphasizing it. Just don't think you should be hung up on ML profile as a cure since as you have found they can be bright. Hence some people's preference for warmer older designs. A warmer (valve) phono pre amp may help or adjustment of phono stage loading if that is possible with your equipment.

 

The term audiophile is like the term 'remastered'. It doesn't mean anything in the long run. Most 'audiophile' LPs in my experience are EQ'd differently and don't sound better than the better / best originals.

The mass manufacturing of LPs was more predominant over here than in the UK incidentally. Your post suggests the sound or quality was compromised on older LPs when its really the other way around, usually.

 

I agree with this. There is always the assertion that the mass production of LPs in the US by the major labels almost universally produced crap.

It isn't really true and most of the records produced back then sound a lot better than is generally accepted.

What is all the more incredible is the millions and millions of records they made while maintaining a relatively low return rate.

I bought the Jimi Hendrix "Valleys of Neptune" album and it is excellent but I have heard other fairly recent releases or repressings that didn't impress me.

And I have never had a problem with Karen's esses either. Oh, oh, did I just admit that I sometimes listen to the Carpenters? That would have been unacceptable back when I was young. A guy was liable to get his *** kicked for an admission like that!

Doug

 

So true. "Audiophile LP" is a marketing term.

 

The problem is *not* that the end result is brighter than it should be. The problem is *distortion*. I can turn up my treble knobs to 10, and while sibilant passages might get painful to listen to, they will still be clean. The problem is when they are not traced properly on the record itself, and is a problem regardless of how much your treble is turned up (or how bright your cartridge is).

Sibilance isn't the problem. Distorted sibilance is.

 

I was talking about recorded sibilance not distortion ! Read Back2Vinyl's last post to which I refer. Can't comment on why you suffer from distorted sibilance. Of course if you actualy listed your equipment ?

 

back2vinyl was talking about distortion:

More "mellow" equipment can tame *sibilance*, but it can't fix *distortion* because of sibilance.

 

I agree and I think it explains a lot about the problem.

First, nearly all the sibilance problems I run into are with new/reissued LPs. It's very rare in my experience to run into sibilance problems with older LPs, whether from the US or UK.

Why would this be? For the very reason you say. "Audiophile" LPs are very often only better than old ones to the extent that they're pressed on better quality vinyl. Other than that, they are as you say just remastered with different EQ choices. But how are those EQ choices different from the old ones? Since the 1980s the fashion in audio has been for a much brighter sound than previously and modern-day reissues usually have a much more demanding top end than the originals. (I far prefer the warmer sound of old.) My feeling is that all this extra stuff going on at the top end is precisely the thing that's given rise to the sibilance problems, either because cartridge design hasn't kept pace with the change in mastering styles or perhaps simply because the amount of top end now being EQd into LPs is beyond the capacity of everyday cartridges to track properly.

BTW Steve I think is a sworn enemy of brightness so the above wouldn't apply to his mastering but I did quote him at the beginning of this thread as saying that his mastering placed special demands on cartridges that ordinary cartridges might not be able to meet. Here's what he said again: