[abernardi]

Well, I got my Furutech AG-12 cable sorted out.  It was indeed defective and the seller very graciously took it back.  The new one arrived Friday and I got to spin some vinyl for the first time in at least 20 years! 

I was always into hi-fi, but I never played records as an audiophile.  I tried to make digital work and have put it aside for the moment after some bitter disappointments.  But vinyl is a very different proposition, it's so physical!  I could hear right away that I have a lot of work to do to get it to sound good.  I listed my components in my profile under "My System" if you're interested.

Right now it's sounding like a record player with all the drawbacks I've always disliked about record players.  Actually worse because the rest of my system is so refined.  Right now the mids and upper mids are almost phasey, like it's coming out of a horn.  The highs retreat, the cymbal splashes aren't splashing at all, they're fizzing.  The detail is fuzzy and very little decay.  The low end is rich but not well defined, and smeared.  Rumble on one album was huge, maybe the pressing because it was ok on the others.  Surface noise is very noticeable and distracting, though I understand the cartridge is very unforgiving.  So it's clear to me that the number one issue I need to address is resonance.

Earlier when I was trying to solve some infuriating problems I was having with my digital sourced system, I completely reconfigured everything, adding different components, swapping things out, etc.  With all the uproar, I took out all my isolation feet/cones/pads/etc and threw them all in a big baggie while I was moving everything around.  I've LOST the friggin baggie!!!  What the hell??

Anyway, my friend and analogue guru recommended I get a good 2-3" piece of butcher block, put it on cones, then put the turntable on cones on the butcher block to start.  In the meantime I'm getting a DIN-RCA adapter and going to burn in the tonearm cable around the clock for a while because from what I hear, that cable is noted for being awful out of the box and needs to be broken in.

I'm currently using a passive volume control as my preamp, which I don't really need as the EAR 834P has a volume control.  Can anyone tell me about this volume control?  I've had a few other components with volume controls that came before my preamp and I would usually just turn the pot all the way up for the best results.  In fact in one component, turning the volume all the way up literally took it out of the circuit.  With one other component, the manufacturer recommended turning the pot all the way up would get it close to a standard line level and sound best if using a preamp.  I can't find any info regarding that with the 834P.  Anyone know about this?

[neobop]

Curious mix of equipment.  Your tonearm cable costs more than your cartridge.  Oh, I forgot, you got a counterfeit cable off epay and had it replaced instead of cancelling your charge?  Smart move.    
It says on Furutech site don't buy from Japanese re-sellers.  Maybe not Japanese? 

I'll venture a wild guess, your analog guru never heard this combination of components, picking out "best buy" stuff like from a catalogue?  What does it say in the 834P manual about the volume control?  Just on the output?   This piece uses SUT for MCs and has up to 70dB gain.  You might have a mismatch with the OC9II, but doing a quick search I found out very little about the EAR specs.  What impedance does it present to a MC cart?  What is the input capacitance?

The OC9II is rather famous for interacting badly with some phono stages, sounding overly bright, forward and with prominent glare.  This is often caused by an RF type of self noise interacting with shunt capacitance and intermodulates down in the audio band.  Lowering capacitance might help, but the usual cure is lower load resistance. 

In the mean time, it sounds like your arm is too low in the back.  If you put the cart tail down for tonal issues, it's making it worse.  It will take some time to break-in and you'll have to suffer through it awhile.  I suggest using both volume controls for now.  Try finding a sweet spot on the 834 (2 o'clock?). Attenuators tend to roll off response somewhat, but you should experiment. 
Maybe it will settle in and you won't have to do much more.  If it continues to sound bad, we'll need some answers about the 834.
neo

[shaizada]

There is really nothing "CURIOUS" about this well matched equipment.  The tonearm cable is a high quality cable that will not be the limiting factor even if the OP ever decided to upgrade his setup.  That is the idea...try to buy once and have your newly bought piece stick around long enough to NOT be a hindering factor with upgrades.  I have a $17,000 interconnects hooking up a $13,000 preamp to a $16,500 monoblock amp setup.  This is how it sounded the best...does that make it a "curious mix" for you sitting miles away never ever having heard this setup?

The OC9 MKII was a $700 cartridge retail.  The Furutech AG12 Din tonearm cable retail is $544
http://www.thecableco.com/Product/AG-12

How is that a mismatch?!

I own lots of Furutech cables and that was before they started getting some press, reviews etc.  They offer amazing sonic return and tend to not be a hindrance to the signal.  I have heard this cable many times and wanted to OP to have a solid analog foundation to build upon.  This setup was put together on experience, not a "best buy" catalog....it would be best if you NOT "venture a wild guess". Quality analog sound reproduction is a labor of love and synergy with a given system, not a system of wild guesses.

The step up transformer in the EAR 834 is a 1:10 setup up ratio.  At around 2:30pm on the volume dial, you effectively bypass the volume control.  But it is best to experiment what gives you the best signal in relation to the volume control on the preamp.  Also, the tubes being used in the unit is an unknown at this point....they make a huge difference to the sound. 

The step transformers can be "thought" has having a resistive load of 40 ohms.  The recommended load on the OC9MKII is 20 ohms.  However, transformer loads do NOT behave like resistive loads.  Anyhow, for arguments sake, the additional 20 ohm discrepancy should theoretically provide a more "open" sound. 

The arm, table and cartridge are setup perfectly with a parallel VTA at the moment. 

But please, continue guessing whats wrong and I am sure....we will eventually have it figured out

[neobop]

What makes you think Abernardi has a Furtutech cable?  If you go down a few threads you'll see it's counterfeit.  The first example had the DIN plug jacket on backwards.  Fleabey seller wouldn't take it back until shown this.  How likely is it that a cable would leave Furutech like that?
http://www.furutech.com/2013/02/02/1698/
"Caution* ebay, Amazon and Rakuten resellers are not authorized Furtutech dealers"

AT carts are heavily discounted in the US.  The OC9II is sold for less than $350 for many years.  I imagine Abernardi paid more for the counterfeit cable than the cart. 
http://www.lpgear.com/product/ATC01.html

You can rant and rave all you like about your $17K cables.  What good is that for Abernardi? 
neo

[shaizada]

You are correct about the issue with the Furutech cable.  Could be a counterfeit, I can't speak to that.

Clearly, you can troubleshoot this system with many guesses, so I suggest you keep doing that...clearly much more helpful than my supposed "rant and rave".

Unreal...

Adam, have a look at this thread:
http://www.audiocircle.com/index.php?topic=136921.0

[neobop]

Abernardi,
After 20 yrs w/o vinyl you have a challenging situation.  BTW, do you have an RCM? 
If after break-in you're still getting the sound you described or similar, besides tweaking cart alignment, VTA, tube rolling etc. loading is the only option.  Although Shaizada says it's 1:10 and 40 ohms this might depend on vintage.  EAR site offers no information.  Owners:
http://forum.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/fr.pl?eanlg&1132839979&openfrom&1&4#1

If you need to load it down, use parallel resistors on the primary, not the secondary.

Good luck,
neo

[abernardi]

Ok boys, play nice please.  Thanks to both of you for your input.  I'm slowly settling into this thing and have a steep learning curve to tackle.  Once I isolate the turntable I'll look into the rest.  I'm afraid I'm not well versed in impedance/capacitance/loads, etc.  I've tried to learn, but it's not sticking in this old brain.  I do recognize the brightness you describe Neo.  I changed the 834p setting to MM and that helped, but of course at the cost of gain.  And yes, I just picked up a RCM and cleaned my first record tonight.  So onward with the adventure....

[kingdeezie]

Abernardi,

Having just gotten back into vinyl myself, I'll throw my two cents into the pot to maybe help you out.

For starters, great job on the RCM! This is not a popular opinion, and some people will likely say that I am crazy, but you should clean the record before you play it every time.

Number one, it keeps the record as clean as reasonably possible. In doing so, I have been told, and believe that this helps increase both the life of your records and your stylus.

Number two, it sounds better. Its a quick experiment, but next time you go to listen to a familiar record, play it straight out of the jacket. Then, scrub it and RCM, and play again. You should notice a nice little increase in SQ.

As for the EAR, its interesting that you note that the MM input sounds better than the MC. I think some of the SQ issues that you are noting, might be due to phono preamp break in.

I am assuming that the EAR uses internal transformers for the MC stage. They can tend to sound brittle and harsh without some time on them. They might need 100 hours or so to start to smooth out. I would try and just keep playing records on the MC side, and see if it begins to improve at all.

Now for the LEAST popular opinion I have....

I would look into a different cartridge, to be bluntly honest.

When I get back into analog a couple years back, I bought into the hype. Everyone, including even Keith Herron (Herron Audio), was talking about how excellent the OC 9MK3 was.

So I strapped one onto my turntable, and let it play for 30 hours.

The sound was almost exactly like you are describing. The highs were hashy, the bass was bloated, and the midrange was thin. I had the cartridge set up by a professional.

I was so confused. Why was the cartridge so well regarded by everyone, and my experience so poor? I gave it to a friend to try in his system, and his reaction was the exact same.

Perhaps the cartridge needs a specific tonearm, or likes a specific kind of phono preamp, but I couldn't get the cartridge to ever sound good.

I replaced it with a Dynavector, and I am much happier.

It is my (likely unpopular as well) opinion that the cartridge plays a significant part in the sound quality of an analog rig.

Analog is a difficult nut to crack, and can be super frustrating. But, it is excellent when its set up, and working properly.

I would give the phono preamp some more time to break in (if it was new to begin with), and start thinking about a different cartridge. I personally like the Dynavectors. I think the 10x5 might be a good option to try. Of course, I'll always have a soft spot for the 20X. I remember it to be a rocking cart. Big tone. Big texture. Big Dynamics.

In any event, good luck and enjoy the ride. 

[neobop]

Abernardi,
One thing you should understand, a phono cart often has a long break-in.  This is always the case with AT.  The OC9II might take up to 100 hrs. 
Once settled in and with the right preamp it has ruler flat response.  It's a detailed, accurate cart.  That's why it's recommended, but it is prone to the ills previously described, with the wrong set up. 

I don't know how this will ultimately work out, maybe 30 or 140 records from now it will sound great.  Maybe not.  Sounding better going into the MM section is reason for hope.  Here is an explanation for loading a SUT:
http://www.rothwellaudioproducts.co.uk/html/mc_step-up_transformers_explai.html
If it's gobbly gook scroll down to listening tests and empirical results.   

A problem is, we don't really know what the MC input impedance is.  Stereophile measured > 500 ohms, the guy from EAR said 125, Shaizada said 40.  Unless they changed the transformer I suspect Stereophile is correct, but this is conjecture on my part.  For now, I suggest getting some hours on it and see what happens.  Also, since it's sounding better going into the MM it might be better without the passive preamp.  Did you try plugging your amp into the EAR?  Just make sure the 834 is turned on before the amp, and is on when you turn off the amp.  With a passive you don't have to think about that. 

You might want to consider another cart even if it's only a backup.  Get a nice MM w/replaceable stylus.  The DV10X5 is a step down IMO.  The pitfall is to abandon the OC9 before you really know what it can do.  30 hours isn't enough to tell, not on an OC9. 
Regards,
neo

[kingdeezie]

 
You might want to consider another cart even if it's only a backup.  Get a nice MM w/replaceable stylus.  The DV10X5 is a step down IMO.  The pitfall is to abandon the OC9 before you really know what it can do.  30 hours isn't enough to tell, not on an OC9. 
Regards,
neo

Not to derail the thread, but I have to strongly disagree here.

30 hours for a cartridge should be plenty of time to make a cart listenable. While there will certainly be changes up to 100 hours, you should have a healthy indication of what the OC9 "can do" before that point. 

The Dynavector 17D3 which replaced it, and actually has the same MSRP (the OC9 gets heavily discounted at purchase), completely outclassed it hour one.

100 hours of vinyl listening is a significant amount of time for most of us. To waste 5-10 percent of the carts life (depending on how well one cares for records and stylus) on waiting for any cart to start sounding decent seems like a waste of time.

Just figured I would try and save the OP the hassle of having to waste 100 hours of his listening time, hoping he eventually likes the sound of a cart.

 

[neobop]

Not to derail the thread, but I have to strongly disagree here.

30 hours for a cartridge should be plenty of time to make a cart listenable. While there will certainly be changes up to 100 hours, you should have a healthy indication of what the OC9 "can do" before that point. 

The Dynavector 17D3 which replaced it, and actually has the same MSRP (the OC9 gets heavily discounted at purchase), completely outclassed it hour one.

100 hours of vinyl listening is a significant amount of time for most of us. To waste 5-10 percent of the carts life (depending on how well one cares for records and stylus) on waiting for any cart to start sounding decent seems like a waste of time.

Just figured I would try and save the OP the hassle of having to waste 100 hours of his listening time, hoping he eventually likes the sound of a cart.

But you'll never really know, will you?

"When I get back into analog a couple years back, I bought into the hype. Everyone, including even Keith Herron (Herron Audio), was talking about how excellent the OC 9MK3 was."

Should we value your experience over Keith Herron, or try to understand why your results were less than satisfactory?   Seems ironic - you say a SUT might take up to 100 hrs, but not a cartridge. 

At the beginning of this thread I mentioned preamp interaction.  If you do a search you'll find threads going back 5 or 6 yrs about results and loading the OC9.  A user on VE was loading < 20 ohms to get rid of glare.  MC response does not change with load like a MM.  Whether you load 100 or 47K ohm, amplitude response is the same.  What changes is openness, stage vs focus.  The glare is a separate issue and is caused by preamp interaction I mentioned previously.  Even though a MC has low inductance it will interact with shunt capacitance and create a tank circuit just like with a MM, only at a higher frequency.  The result is possible overload/oscillation at this out of band frequency which intermodulates into the audio band and creates glare.

Some carts famous for doing this are the DLS1, DL304 and others with relatively high impedance/inductance.  The DLS1 does this with one of my phono stages.  It's not a bad cart.  It's a very nice cart, just a bad match up.  The solution is resistance loading or using another phono stage. 

A popular myth is that capacitance doesn't matter with MCs.  Capacitance contributes to this condition.  It lowers the frequency of this overload and makes it more likely to be a problem. 

A cart like the OC9 isn't everyone's cup of tea, but given the 834 response it could be an excellent combo if it works out. 

neo

[louie3]

"A popular myth is that capacitance doesn't matter with MCs.  Capacitance contributes to this condition.  It lowers the frequency of this overload and makes it more likely to be a problem."

Thank you.

"It's not a bad cart.  It's a very nice cart, just a bad match up."

It is really a shame more folks simply don't understand this, and it is as true of the genius reviewers as it is with us rank amateurs.

[neobop]

For those who want to look into this further there's a thread on Agon addressing this.  Poster Atmasphere is Ralph Karsten of Atmasphere Electronics:
http://forum.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/fr.pl?eanlg&1424065925&openfrom&1&4#1

neo

[kingdeezie]

But you'll never really know, will you?

"When I get back into analog a couple years back, I bought into the hype. Everyone, including even Keith Herron (Herron Audio), was talking about how excellent the OC 9MK3 was."

Should we value your experience over Keith Herron, or try to understand why your results were less than satisfactory?   Seems ironic - you say a SUT might take up to 100 hrs, but not a cartridge. 

neo

Generally, IME, I have never had a component go from really bad to good with break in. I usually appreciate the sound, and it gets better. The AT was just flat out poor from jump street.

As for valuing people's experiences, on a subjective matter, based on their profession, I'd have to disagree. Do you own Herron gear? What if you bought his amps, or preamp, and didn't care for the sound? Does that make you wrong, because Herron designed it, and his experience means more than yours?

Have you sold any gear because you didn't like it? Well, you were wrong to do so, because the person who designed its opinion is more valid than yours.

Lets also not forget that Herron is trying to sell a phono preamp. Demonstrating that you can get good sound from his phono, with a reasonable cart, seems like a great business strategy to me. 

And, while I did note, that perhaps my results were because of a poor phono preamp mismatch (I was using a Pass Labs XP-15 at the time), changing out phono preamps to accommodate a cartridge that frequently retails for 40-60 percent (wonder why?) off its MSRP seems absolutely asinine.

Why spend hundreds, or thousands, and go through all that trouble to make a decent cart sound marginally better? Not worth the trouble, when there are plenty of options that might more readily bring satisfaction.

In any event, to each his own. Glad you like the AT. 

Hopefully the OP finds happiness with his system.

[neobop]

Generally, IME, I have never had a component go from really bad to good with break in. I usually appreciate the sound, and it gets better. The AT was just flat out poor from jump street.

As for valuing people's experiences, on a subjective matter, based on their profession, I'd have to disagree. Do you own Herron gear? What if you bought his amps, or preamp, and didn't care for the sound? Does that make you wrong, because Herron designed it, and his experience means more than yours?

Have you sold any gear because you didn't like it? Well, you were wrong to do so, because the person who designed its opinion is more valid than yours.

Lets also not forget that Herron is trying to sell a phono preamp. Demonstrating that you can get good sound from his phono, with a reasonable cart, seems like a great business strategy to me. 

And, while I did note, that perhaps my results were because of a poor phono preamp mismatch (I was using a Pass Labs XP-15 at the time), changing out phono preamps to accommodate a cartridge that frequently retails for 40-60 percent (wonder why?) off its MSRP seems absolutely asinine.

Why spend hundreds, or thousands, and go through all that trouble to make a decent cart sound marginally better? Not worth the trouble, when there are plenty of options that might more readily bring satisfaction.

In any event, to each his own. Glad you like the AT. 

Hopefully the OP finds happiness with his system.

Why do you persist?  Okay, we get it, you dislike the OC9III based on your 30 hrs with it.  If you do a search about cartridge break in you'll find many opinions to the contrary:
http://www.needledoctor.com/Clearaudio-Cartridge-Break-in-Record

http://www.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/fr.pl?eanlg&1422312011&&&/Does-a-phono-cartridge-have-a-break-in-p

http://forums.stevehoffman.tv/threads/how-much-time-needed-for-a-cartridge-to-break-in.213408/
It just happens that the OC9 has a long break in.

Do you really think it would be in Keith Herron's interest to recommend a POS?  User can return an item including a phono stage.   Go to AudioKarma, Asylum, or any other major forum and ask about the OC9.  You'll find some who don't like it and some who love it.  Don't take my word, find out for yourself. 
I don't follow your logic about selling an item you don't like.  Keith Herron didn't design the OC9.  What has that have to do with anything? 
I have no idea if there's a problem with Pass XP15 and OC9. Problem is, either do you.  Maybe with a lower resistance load and/or break in, it would sound great, maybe not. 

I don't own and I'm not recommending the OC9.  It happens to be what Abernardi has, and he's trying to work things out.  I think everyone understands your opinion, but now you're getting counterproductive.  This isn't about you and your Pass.  If Abernardi decides he wants a different cart I'm sure he'll consider your recommendations.
neo

[abernardi]

Great stuff, thanks everyone.  I have a lot of reading to do.  The 834p was used, but I don't know if the original owner was using an MC cart so it's possible the SUTs do still need to be burned in.  I'll ask him.  In my experience, even with used equipment, there seems to be a break in period when I put it into a new system, I think for some reason the system as a whole has to settle in.  I also heard there's some difference between the OC9II and OC9III, and that many prefer the II.  I don't know if that's a factor in comparing the SQ impressions.  Footers and butcher block is coming soon and I'll keep spinning records.  Woohoo!

[abernardi]

Just a quick update.  I haven't been able to devote much time to this, too much life in the way!  I installed 4 metal cones, point down under the tt onto a 3" maple butcher block, sitting on 4 herbie's feet.  This is helping.  The lows and mids have tightened up significantly, especially the mids.  I thought it would be the low end.  I get more definition from my digital source still in the low end.  The highs are still fizzy, almost phasey and a bit of sibilance.  I'm going to take out the passive volume control and go straight into my active crossover and see if that helps.  Still have to check the tube in the phono pre, finish all the research you guys are pointing me to.  But for the first time, while not as pure or extended as my digital front end, some of the analogue "rightness" is coming through and that's what I'm after, particularly in large orchestral and searing electric guitars - - go Huey Lewis!  More to come.

[shaizada]

Good to hear that you are getting closer!

Please check on the tubes in the phono section.  Without any way of knowing of their quality or age, I think it might be safe to just replace them all out with some nice tubes.  Have a look at this thread for ideas:

http://forum.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/fr.pl?aamps&1252978974&openfrom&1&4#1

Also, if you want more definition and solidarity, look into some cones coupling the EAR 834 Chassis to the base.  What do you have the EAR 834 sitting on right now?  EAR equipment responds readily to vibration control of the units.  Same philosophy applies, hard coupling for more definition/delineation etc. and soft coupling (elastomer based products) to relax the sound and warm it up.  From what I am understanding in your post, I think you need some hard coupling for more definition, clearer bass etc.  Look at the tubes as well.

Thanks for the updates bud...it should be well worth it in the end!