The Importance of Anti-skate, Do decks without it skew left? Options

[Knowzy]

In our last conversation, we came up with three increasingly strignent criterium for selecting a decent USB turntable:

1. Ceramic cartridge never!
2. Anti-skate
3. Direct drive (remember, these are sub-$1,000 turntables)

I'm having particular trouble explaining the anti-skate requirement.

Here's what I'm hoping HA can answer:

• Do turntables without anti-skate, such as the Audio-Technica LP2D-USB, truly have no compensation and ride the inner groove like a surfer catching a wave?
• Someone at the Vinyl Engine suggested that the weight of the "high mass" tonearms found on such TT's essentially force the stylus into the middle of the groove. Thoughts on this?

I need some compelling reasons to choose a deck with anti-skate, especially for people who don't plan on replacing the cart.

There's already a good reason to choose a TT without anti-skate: Newbies don't need to learn how to balance their tonearm.

Thanks!

[Axon]

So, I haven't had a whole lot of experience in the low end market, but I can tell you that the MMF5 I own is a complete toy when it comes to wow and flutter. I think there was about 20% odds of hearing it with any solo piano work I played on it. And if a $600 belt drive can't get it right, then......

So all I'm saying is, the situations could be more complicated. Obviously belt drives as a rule are cheaper to manufacture than direct drives. But direct drives also have negative feedback (typically) and belt drives don't (maybe at the $1000 range but certainly not here).

This post has been edited by Axon: Oct 2 2008, 17:27

[WmAx]

So, I haven't had a whole lot of experience in the low end market, but I can tell you that the MMF5 I own is a complete toy when it comes to wow and flutter. I think there was about 20% odds of hearing it with any solo piano work I played on it. And if a $600 belt drive can't get it right, then......

So all I'm saying is, the situations could be more complicated. Obviously belt drives as a rule are cheaper to manufacture than direct drives. But direct drives also have negative feedback (typically) and belt drives don't (maybe at the $1000 range but certainly not here).

Time to sell that MM and get a SL-1200mkII w/arm upgrade.

Personally, I do use a belt drive, and it's speed is rock steady with no audible fluctuation, but it's one near the $2k mark, and I have measured it myself to verify the speed stability. Though, it's still not quite as good in speed stability as a Technics SL1200MKII. But I also have a superb tone arm. I was originally going to end up buying a SL1200MKII, but I must admit, the physical beauty(Marantz TT-15SI made and engineered by Clearaudio in Germany) combined with the superlative engineering on the one I purchased won me out and made me waste money.

-Chris

This post has been edited by WmAx: Oct 2 2008, 17:56

[Axon]

Time to sell that MM and get a SL-1200mkII w/arm upgrade.

Already did.

Well, I actually haven't done any arm work yet - many people are coming out in favor of the stock arm over the Rega mods, in fact, and I have done some ABX testing with recordings with the KAB damper engaged/disengaged, and came to the conclusion that I couldn't tell a difference. So I'm running 100% stock. And I'm gifting the MMF5 to somebody who will likely not care about that sort of thing.

Personally, I do use a belt drive, and it's speed is rock steady with no audible fluctuation, but it's one near the $2k mark, and I have measured it myself to verify the speed stability. Though, it's still not quite as good in speed stability as a Technics SL1200MKII. But I also have a superb tone arm. I was originally going to end up buying a SL1200MKII, but I must admit, the physical beauty(Marantz TT-15SI made and engineered by Clearaudio in Germany) combined with the superlative engineering on the one I purchased won me out and made me waste money.

-Chris

If I had that kind of money, I'd probably do the same thing.

This post has been edited by Axon: Oct 2 2008, 22:33

[WmAx]

Time to sell that MM and get a SL-1200mkII w/arm upgrade.

Already did.

Well, I actually haven't done any arm work yet - many people are coming out in favor of the stock arm over the Rega mods, in fact, and I have done some ABX testing with recordings with the KAB damper engaged/disengaged, and came to the conclusion that I couldn't tell a difference. So I'm running 100% stock. And I'm gifting the MMF5 to somebody who will likely not care about that sort of thing.

I looked at that dampener. The only thing that dampener can effect is tracking. I do not see how it can have any appreciable effect on the primary arm resonance modes. To have effect on the primary modes, a dampening system has to be placed in a primary junction of the modal behavior. The silicone bath and paddle system is neither the correct mechanical impedance to match with the arm resonances, nor is it even intended to do so. It's just a tracking dampener.

The RB300 arm measures far better than the SL-1200MKII type arm, btw. I have seen measurements showing around 20dB difference across some wide bandwidths.

-Chris

[Axon]

I looked at that dampener. The only thing that dampener can effect is tracking. I do not see how it can have any appreciable effect on the primary arm resonance modes. To have effect on the primary modes, a dampening system has to be placed in a primary junction of the modal behavior. The silicone bath and paddle system is neither the correct mechanical impedance to match with the arm resonances, nor is it even intended to do so. It's just a tracking dampener.

Ah, good point. I had wondered at some point about why the damper was considered so good for improving treble response (and a lot of people do comment on that) if it was nowhere near a vibrational mode on the arm. So its main use is to reduce tonearm/suspension resonances, which of course is generally not a huuuge issue.

The RB300 arm measures far better than the SL-1200MKII type arm, btw. I have seen measurements showing around 20dB difference across some wide bandwidths.

I've seen the old Hi-Fi world measurements that clearly indicate the RB300 is superior in terms of vibration response, but the units for that were not specified. Are there any other measurements you know of?

Besides that: I haven't seen any serious analysis relating the resonant properties of the tonearm to audible differences in the sound, beyond what is implicated by a simple frequency sweep. And my understanding of the sweeps is that it's quite plausible to not have audible issues nowadays with a modern, high-compliance cartridge in the midrange, especially when speakers are not used. Am I mistaken here?