|
Vinyl Asylum Welcome Licorice Pizza (LP) lovers! Setup guides and Vinyl FAQ. |
|
In Reply to: RE: What do you know about the Piccolo Zero Transimpedance head amp? posted by 13th Duke of Wymbourne on September 24, 2025 at 13:43:33:
I did get sucked into the hoffman thread.... mainly because I planted the bug in Herb's bonnet and Jim reached out to me to confirm.
I think loading dynamically decreases (make stiffer) compliance with larger signals at higher frequencies having the most dramatic effect. These are the very signals and frequencies that cause mistracking. As frequency go down, the signal amplitude gets smaller so the velocity gets down to the point where it is easy to track independent of amplitude and the back EMF due to loading is small by comparison.
If you consider the info Moncrief presented on this topic, there is a decided difference in the 1/3X loading compared to the 3X loading. The test signal he used is a typical two tone test where he measures IMD. It just so happens that the CBS test record of the two tone (400+4kHz) signals states that the imd value is a measured metric of tracking ability so I don't consider it too much of a stretch to connect the two and say that loading improves dynamic tracking ability.
It may be a crude comparison but I see loading as a kind of limiter for mistracking. When the large velocities that cause mistracking occur, the back EMF due to Lenz's Law momentarily clamps down which keeps the diamond in better contact with the groove that is trying to force it to mistrack.
The key factor here is that velocity and acceleration for the signal cut in the groove at a given amplitude increases with frequency. It may seem like having variable compliance is a bad thing but I think most will agree that mistracking is the greater of the two evils.
dave
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- RE: What do you know about the Piccolo Zero Transimpedance head amp? - dave slagle 16:09:49 09/24/25 (13)
- Typo in my previous message - 13th Duke of Wymbourne 19:42:48 09/24/25 (12)
- RE: Typo in my previous message - dave slagle 13:15:12 09/25/25 (11)
- RE: Typo in my previous message - 13th Duke of Wymbourne 13:30:11 09/26/25 (10)
- RE: Typo in my previous message - dave slagle 09:25:13 09/30/25 (9)
- Amplitude to velocity and back to amplitude - 13th Duke of Wymbourne 17:22:49 09/30/25 (8)
- RE: Amplitude to velocity and back to amplitude - dave slagle 08:18:02 10/01/25 (7)
- RE: Amplitude to velocity and back to amplitude - 13th Duke of Wymbourne 18:51:32 10/01/25 (6)
- RE: Amplitude to velocity and back to amplitude - dave slagle 08:12:48 10/16/25 (3)
- RE: Amplitude to velocity and back to amplitude - 13th Duke of Wymbourne 18:16:13 10/18/25 (2)
- RE: Amplitude to velocity and back to amplitude - dave slagle 10:14:04 10/19/25 (1)
- RE: Amplitude to velocity and back to amplitude - 13th Duke of Wymbourne 16:41:20 10/19/25 (0)
- correction - 13th Duke of Wymbourne 19:56:28 10/01/25 (1)
- One more thought - 13th Duke of Wymbourne 08:04:48 10/02/25 (0)