[BaMorin]

Trying not to steal Waynr's thread on alignment......so here goes

There has been a bazillion posts on various forums about an issue that I don't think is fully understood, and maybe not looked at from a different concept.  And that is Grado and IGD.

Does it happen?    yes

Is it a fault with Grado.....ummm ..... I'm not convinced.
why I'm not convinced is the various reasons normally given. Some if not most of those reasons are folks just repeating what they've read.
I can't understand the idea that a 7X3 diamond on one brand is different than the same cut 7X3 on another.
Bonding and ETM......the diamond and the bond account for less that 8% of the effective "tip" mass, which is really the effective mass of the sum total of the diamond, cantilever, generating device (MM, MC, MI)
I have had a few tables, one in particular mentioned in another thread that would not track a Grado. It was an absolute mass/geometry mis-match that couldn't be cured.
Some of what I think people are hearing as IGD is the cart is picking up noise in the vinyl as it nears the spindle. Damping of the vinyl is my first guess. as that part is closest to the label cut-out....how well is the inner part dumping the vibrations of the album? Is the grado actually trying to reproduce that vinyl distortion? Bearing noise from the spindle/drive system not having time to be dispersed or damped?
I have had other carts that appear to have less "IGD", but they also have less of the microdynamics that create the grado house sound. Which brings me right back to square one...is the Grado exposing an issue the other carts can't.....were those other carts designed to shun the micro dynamics (tracing)
I'm not trying to compare a $13.00 FTE+1 to a $5,000 MC here.....but carts that sit in a similar price range.
Antiskate and IGD......what most people overlook is the bias in "most" arms increase as it travels towards center. How does this happen? Simple, the arm wires are winding up creating a negative (outward) torque. Some arms are still designed to set bias by the wires, the AR XA did just that.

We'll start here..........I'm sure this will get someting going   

[Wayner]

Here are my first thoughts. I have often wondered if the Grado is actually doing it's job, and exposing either vinyl dynamic compression or record wear or anti-skating flaws or all three. As the LP winds it's way to the center, the RPM stays the same, but the amount of travel in the RPM decrease and thus, the music slowly compresses (same music content, less groove space to put it) and I mean that in length of vinyl groove distance.

The other problem is that the dopes that design the LP, always seem to put the most dynamic music at the end, where the compression is at the worst. I still don't have a great answer for it.

Wayner

[TheChairGuy]

We'll start here..........I'm sure this will get someting going   

Not as much as you're used to, Marc...in every good, conceivable way

No need to 'duck' here at The Vinyl Circle at AC 

John

[Mitsuman]

No IGD with my longhorned Grado Gold1, since I aligned it with the Loefgren B template. Before that I had a slight amount. 

[DaveyW]

In my experience the diamond has a huge influence on the overall performance of Grado carts, especially re. IGD.

Try as I might, I really struggled to get any of the pre 1 designation Prestige (and preceding high output carts) to master inner grooves, any natural sibilance was exaggerated with a slightly grainy presentation.

The nude (original) 8MZ and MCZ plus Marc's Reference Sonata 1 faired much better.
Even the latest (bonded) 8MZ does a notably better job of inner tracks - I assume that this is the basis of the latest Gold 1 offering, but not certain?

Basically I've found the finer the Grado diamond the better the inner groove control.

This is evident with either Baerwald or Heybrook nulls.

Here's a selection of images at 100x magnification

Gold



MCZ



Reference Sonata 1



Each of these track inner grooves better than the one before, to the point where the RS1 is as good as anything I've heard.

Cheers
Dave

[blakep]

No IGD with my longhorned Grado Gold1, since I aligned it with the Loefgren B template. Before that I had a slight amount. 

What alignment were you using before?  Of the big three (Stevenson/Baerwald/Lofgren), Lofgren or Lofgren B actually has the worst inner groove distortion performance.

[Wayner]

 
But, the Lofgren B has the lowest overall tracking distortion (sacrificing higher numbers in the IGM area).
Baerwald averages about .43%, while Lofgren B is at .39%. Of course these values are splitting hairs and as you can see by the chart above, each has it's own plus and minus effects in the playing area.

Wayner

[blakep]

But, the Lofgren B has the lowest overall tracking distortion (sacrificing higher numbers in the IGM area).
Baerwald averages about .43%, while Lofgren B is at .39%. Of course these values are splitting hairs and as you can see by the chart above, each has it's own plus and minus effects in the playing area.

Wayner

What you have said above is true, of course, but this thread is specifically about inner groove distortion and I simply found it odd that one might experience no inner groove distortion or less inner groove distortion with an alignment that actually has the worst performance in this area.

[Mitsuman]

What alignment were you using before?  Of the big three (Stevenson/Baerwald/Lofgren), Lofgren or Lofgren B actually has the worst inner groove distortion performance.

I was using Stevenson previously. 

[Otis]

...I simply found it odd that one might experience no inner groove distortion or less inner groove distortion with an alignment that actually has the worst performance in this area.

The longer the record, the more true this is - on those were the groove nearly runs into the label, i.e. 60mm, Stevenson is best, but only on the inner groove area. Great for old-fashioned conical styli, but unnecessary for modern MLs. However, with most records being 'cut' shorter than that, Stevenson tends to put the inner null in the runout groove.

Lofgren B tends to place the inner null a few mm further out - where most records really live.

[PeteG]

I’ve only used my VPI template don’t know who’s alignment it is but when I set up my former two Grado’s (Sonata, Master) I always had a little IGD, but with my new Benz wood it’s all but gone using the same template. Reading the different treads, I might try a new alignment.

[TheChairGuy]

I know its not feasible for all, or maybe even most, but moving to an arm longer than 9" renders a lot of these tracing issues moot

A 10.5" arm offers ~12% better tracing (that is, that much less distortion due to tracing) and a 12" in the vicinity of 20%. The longer the arm, the less important the overhang issue becomes...tho, azimuth (or, yaw) and tracking force still matter, however.

I know some of you guys actually like diddling around with tracking arrangements, to each is own, but for the masses set it (with ease) and forget it is the prevailing sentiment. Unfortunately, there are few if any decks w/arms under $2000 that have something longer than 9" arms for many.

There's the VPI Classic at USD$2750 and the Well Tempered Simplex at ~$2400...besides those (and some used TT's), I'm not aware of any

I agree with Dave W above and have found abundantly true.....for some reason with Grado's (unknown to me exactly why?) that going to nude and exaggerated tips eliminate the entire tracking issue - even on 9" arms.  Grado Gold, Gold1 and Green, on decks with 9" arms, all experienced distortion with stock tips even - tho the Longhorn mod almost banished it on its own.

Merry XMas to all those celebrating today (or yesterday if California is dozens of hours behind you!)

John

[rcag_ils]

What's Heybrook null? I have an Heybrook turntable, does it mean I have to use the Heybrook null?

[blakep]

The longer the record, the more true this is - on those were the groove nearly runs into the label, i.e. 60mm, Stevenson is best, but only on the inner groove area. Great for old-fashioned conical styli, but unnecessary for modern MLs. However, with most records being 'cut' shorter than that, Stevenson tends to put the inner null in the runout groove.

Lofgren B tends to place the inner null a few mm further out - where most records really live.

I agree with you that Stevenson is a bit of dinosaur alignment, dating back to an era of longer sides and conical styli and that its minimal benefits are far outweighed by more serious drawbacks.

I do find, however, that a lot of my vinyl has groove well into the 63-64 mm area and some into or beyond the 60 area (with the Stevenson inner null around 60 and the Lofgren around 70). When I tend to hear IGD (which is extremely rare-maybe 3 or 4 records in my collection), it tends to be very deep into the record with very dynamic passages. In that situation, which is when you will tend to hear IGD the most, Lofgren is by far the weakest alignment with respect to IGD.

But your point is well taken; if one has a collection in which most of the records have dead wax much beyond 66 mm or so, Lofgren would be pretty much ideal.

[Wayner]

Blakep, that is kind of where I'm at. Most of my collection rarely goes to the extreme inner area and if you look at the grayed out area (at 60mm) is probably like .3% more then the Baerwald (but your right that it increases sharply), but I seldom hear IGM on the Longhorns. In fact, I think I notice it more specifically with one or two of the tables I have. There maybe other forces at work, causing IGM, other then alignment.

Wayner

[BaMorin]

Blakep, that is kind of where I'm at. Most of my collection rarely goes to the extreme inner area and if you look at the grayed out area (at 60mm) is probably like .3% more then the Baerwald (but your right that it increases sharply), but I seldom hear IGM on the Longhorns. In fact, I think I notice it more specifically with one or two of the tables I have. There maybe other forces at work, causing IGM, other then alignment.
Wayner

Which is to the gist of my original posting.

[Wayner]

I have been fooling around with SRA (stylus rake angle) and have also talked to Grado about this. I have set it with a 2 degree forward tip (recommended by Grado) and this may improve the tracking at the IGM area. Unfortunately, this means 8mm rise of the ass end of the tonearm (from being parallel), and many TTs can't get there. I wish someone with a Grado set-up, having trouble with IGM would try the 2 degree SRA and give a report.

Wayner

[BaMorin]

I have been fooling around with SRA (stylus rake angle) and have also talked to Grado about this. I have set it with a 2 degree forward tip (recommended by Grado) and this may improve the tracking at the IGM area. Unfortunately, this means 8mm rise of the ass end of the tonearm (from being parallel), and many TTs can't get there. I wish someone with a Grado set-up, having trouble with IGM would try the 2 degree SRA and give a report.

Wayner

Or a wedge at the front of the cart/headshell. Although this idea will not change tracking force (static) it will change tracking force (dynamic) by increasing the MOI.

[orthobiz]

Fave method of adjusting the stylus rake?

Paul

[Wayner]

If you have a tonearm with adjustable VTA, that is the place to do it. You really should look at your stylus to see where it is at when loaded in the groove first, to determine how much additional tip needs to be done. I have an unusual magnafier and I also used my zoom on my tripod mounted camera to take a picture of the stylus, sitting in the groove. I made a print of that, and used a protractor (aslo drawing some lines) to determine where the stylus was, and where I wanted it to go.

I used to think that if the arm was parallel, that the stylus would be at the correct SRA, but that has proved to be false. Cart manufacturers seem to have it at zero when the arm is parallel. Just remember (on a 9" arm) that for every 1/4 degree, the arm's ass end has to go up 1mm. So in the case of your Grace 707 arm on your Sugden TT, that condition now may not be a bad thing, but your skipping problem needs to be figured out. (azimuth?).

Wayner