Advertisement



  1. Things you need to know about the new ‘Conversations’ PM system:

    a) DO NOT REPLY TO THE NOTIFICATION EMAIL! I get them, not the intended recipient. I get a lot of them and I do not want them! It is just a notification, log into the site and reply from there.

    b) To delete old conversations use the ‘Leave conversation’ option. This is just delete by another name.
    Dismiss Notice

Linn K5 & K9 confusion

Discussion in 'classic' started by lilolee, Oct 18, 2020.

  1. Craig B

    Craig B Re:trophile

    You're welcome, Capt.

    The Goldring 1000 series models start out with elliptical (1006) and progress through variations on hyper-elliptical and fine-line types. Your 1022 featured a Vital PH (polyhedron, i.e. hyper-elliptical bordering on fine-line type with added benefit of uber-low tip mass due to the diamond block being both nude and rectangular in cross-section rather than square, i.e. half the mass).

    Again, what would have contributed to any sense of exaggerated surface noise here will have been mostly down your 470pF NA322 cards, as Goldring's recommended input loading capacitance is 150 - 200pF (including tonearm wiring), which would bring the electrical resonance peak way down into the aforementioned 'presence region' whilst at the same time increasing its amplitude.

    If you do decide to stick with the Shelter and fit a JICO SAS replacement stylus, I'd suggest holding off on any NA322 input cap surgery until such time as you decide to change out the Shelter altogether (such as giving the old K5 a go with a fresh AT-VM tip on, for example). Reason being that any MM cartridge that works well into higher capacitance may be perceived as sounding less good into considerably lower capacitance (possibly rolled-off and/or dull sounding by comparison).
     
    Last edited: Nov 25, 2022
  2. The Captain

    The Captain ~~~~~~~~~~

    @Craig B Thanks for this, it's all quite advanced for me to understand though. I'm still back trying for the life of me to figure out this wretched SAS shape, & how it sits in the groove. I must get past this stage. I'm determined to.

    Ok on the box chart (I couldn't add, but you kindly did for me).. the 1st row has a series of tip shapes, but all are almost indistinguishable from each other. This isn't helpful at all. I can see a slight thinner no.2. Nothing more.

    The all important 2nd row, is where all my confusion is. Reconciling this shape (like a ufo shape)... with... the tip shape directly above it. There is no correlation, whatsoever in shape. But both are cross-sections.

    This gives you an idea of how stuck I am. To further this confusion, the cross-section ufo shape is not determined from which angle it is taken. For eg, I can take a cross section of a car, from the side/ the top/ the front. If I have no prior knowledge of what a car is supposed to look like, I need to ask " which angle is this cross-section taken from please?'" in order to extract meaning. If I don't have this extra info, the image remains arbitrary, meaningless.

    Now, your craigworm, implies 2 things which contradict each other ( or do they). The top part shows the cutter shape a 'v'. This -implies therefore- the worm is viewed from an angle. We are looking ACROSS it, because if we were looking directly DOWN onto the worm, the cutter shape would resemble (presumably) a 'o'. So... we're looking across then. Ok so I look at the nearest tip shape on the worm, the microline, & imagine I'm looking across it at an angle: but it's shape is utterly incompatible with the groove shape. Right, so if I consider perhaps the worm is meant to be viewed from ABOVE instead... the strange shape is -also- incompatible with the groove (now it's just an arbitrary ufo shape). Or, if I'm looking across it, it becomes some strange tip shape with 'side bits' (which seems ludicrous a shape to sit in a groove).

    So I sum up my confusion thus;

    A = the shape of the SAS directly above it in 1st row.
    B = what the craigworm implies the stylus shape to be, sitting in the groove (from an angled perspective).

    [​IMG]
     
  3. daytona600

    daytona600 Registered User

    [​IMG]
    Ortofon’s Replicant 100 diamond, known for its thin and light profile and extraordinarily large vertical contact surface. Since the Replicant 100 is closest to the shape of the cutting stylus, it can trace with accuracy unparalleled by any other stylus in existence. Special polishing of the diamond along with the use of a Boron or Diamond cantilever offer remarkable transparency, speed, and responsiveness beyond that of any other combination.

    major/minor radii
    Line contact longer the contact path the better 23 - 100 Ideal
    opposite of a Cutting head most / all lathes use ortofon cutting heads since the 1940s
    Cutting head like a " Chisel " for cutting grooves in the lacquer ideal styli will be closest to this without actually re-cutting the groove
    HE = Hyper Elliptical
    FE = Fine line
    SH = LC Shibata
    LC - Jico/Ortofon extended or super Line contact
    LC Styli are Nude, grain-oriented natural diamond not Synthetic or Grown diamond
    with Boron , Zirconium , Ruby or Diamond cantilevers

    23uM for HE Astatic,
    38uM for HE in Shure V15V-P e
    40uM for FL Ortofon OM30 Fine Line
    50uM for SH Shibata on the Ortofon 2M Black
    70uM for Stereohedron
    70uM for VDH
    70uM for LC Ortofon the Fritz Gyger 70 [FG70]
    75uM for LC SAS Jico .
    80uM for LC Ortofon Fritz Gyger 80 [FG80]
    100uM for LC Ortofon Replicant.
    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]

    The groove is what it says: the groove. Take a wooden stick and pull it through soft mud after rain – this is exactly what is duplicated at vinyl records. The cutting lathe directly cuts the signal from analog to the groove which results in up and down and side to side variations in the movement of the writing stylus (or reading during playback). On the picture you can also notice black spots, i.e. material impurities that affect the sound quality.
    The stylus is the only thing that is in direct contact with a record - the reading accuracy of the stylus dictates how “the data” are retrieved from the record. Depending on the shape of the stylus (see picture) and how much it is polished the cartridge designers achieve optimized contact between the stylus and the groove.
    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]
     
  4. Craig B

    Craig B Re:trophile

    I see where you a coming from now, Capt.

    A = what the tip looks like in the groove from front on, as though we are looking through the edge of the record. What architects would call 'elevation' view, or 'side on'. What they are mostly attempting to illustrate here is how the sides of the stylus tip make contact with the groove walls. With 'fine-line' classification tip profiles, there is a vertical elongation of contact area with the groove (whereas, the 'point-contact' types tend to concentrate contact into a small dot). Advantages of this elongation include less groove wear due to spreading the contact pressure over a broader area (vertically, at least). Also, fine-line types tend to ride over groove wear that has been caused by years of play with 'point contact' types and/or mis-tracking. Old records can suddenly sound new again, let alone have more going on in the upper frequency range, and/or convey an improved sense of 'atmosphere' (whether this be real or contrived).

    B = a top down view of stylus sitting in the groove, what architects refer to as 'plan' view, as though all were transparent and only represented by outlines. Think of this like a knife tip pointing downward into a narrow channel (i.e. 'craigworm') but perpendicular to the direction of same (so not a 2D 'V' but three elongated squiggly lines representing a 'V'-shaped trench). For this perspective one might visualize how the narrower (i.e. sharper) profile sides might better fit into, and, therefore, trace the complex groove undulations, all the more-so as recorded frequency rises (i.e. barely visible ripples even with a microscope), not to mention, things getting increasingly packed tighter together as the groove radius decreases. So, not the SAS cross-section within a 'V' from side on, but SAS cross-section sitting in a long 'V'-shaped channel that it must 'trace' the sides of, with the whole acting like a two-sided feeler gauge (i.e. the finer the tip profile, the more accurately the details can be measured).
     
    Last edited: Nov 25, 2022
  5. Craig B

    Craig B Re:trophile

    This particular graphic (culled from @daytona600's post above) is rather telling, as it illustrates how the various tip profiles make contact with the groove wall(s). The blue rectangles represent a vertical slice of one side of a groove wall, with the white shapes within indicating the shape of the record cutter vs. the various stylus 'footprints' on the wall (i.e. with the narrower fine line types being closer to the record cutting tip, and therefore better able to fit into what the cutter can cut).

    MicroRidge/MicroLine/SAS (all more alike than different) aren't included, however, their footprints are closest to that of the cutter on the left, only not as tall.*

    Then you get the front on views on the right with the shaded areas representing the vertical contact surface differences (i.e. with the fine line types spreading the load better with elongation).

    [​IMG]

    * Another advantage of the MicroRidge types are that they maintain their shape for a lot longer than do others. Audio-technica, for example, claim 1000hrs for their ML vs, circa 300hrs for elliptical. If one factors this into cost per hour usage, there can actually be a savings over the long haul with MicroRidge types relative to even the best nude (i.e. none bonded) ellipticals.
     
    Last edited: Nov 25, 2022
  6. The Captain

    The Captain ~~~~~~~~~~

    @Craig B Thanks for ploughing through my post: it seems, thank goodness that you understand why Im confused.

    From the 2 subsequent replies though, I am unfortunately even -more- confused, because now the ortofon diagrams white upon blue background shapes, are 1) totally new to me (apart from the circular one), & 2) like my ufo shape, they bear absolutely no relation to their individual profiles, in the next image showing these tips in the groove. So what on gods earth these new bizarre alien shapes are now.. tbh I'm just getting SO frustrated with this.

    The only thing I can positively take, from these two replies, as grateful I am for them, is that the "ufo" shape.. you say is a view from above. Further than that I'm still utterly lost.

    Apologies, Capt
     
  7. Craig B

    Craig B Re:trophile

    No worries, let's try an analogy using knives instead of boobs.

    If we view the tip of a dagger from flat side on we can see how each sharp edge curves in to a point at the very tip where these two edges meet. This would be akin to viewing the various stylus shapes from front side on as they sit in the groove, with the major radius R being what determines the curvature of the sides that make contact with the groove walls in the vertical. If we were to cleanly snap the tip of the dagger off near to the end and look at the outline of the break (i.e. a cross section of the blade) we could observe how it doesn't just taper along the sharp edges to the tip, but there is also a tapering in from the middle to each sharp side too. This would be akin to the minor radius r of a stylus tip which determines how accurately a given profile is potentially able to trace the actual path of the cutter head.

    Getting back to stylus shape cross section patterns, a circle represents the cross section of a conical/spherical ('cut through' at the mid point of where groove wall contact is made), in this case with both R/r being the same value, which even at 0.6mil would be quite dull compared to the near knife edge of the record cutter tip. By comparison, an ellipse represents the cross section of an elliptical (oval), with r being smaller than R (usually facilitated by grinding the forward and rearward faces of a conical flat), and on they go with more complex grinding patterns employed to approach the cutter shape without actually making a 'cutter', rather a better 'feeler'.

    To mix our metaphors, SAS/MicroRidge/Microline/et al are Stay Sharp knives that cut right to the heart of what is on record. Well, they are best able to measure it anyway.
     
    Last edited: Nov 25, 2022
  8. The Captain

    The Captain ~~~~~~~~~~

    @Craig B I'm really sorry, but even your two paragraphs here are too complicated, I can't understand the analogies. I've been thinking hard of barbara's breasts, even googled 'faye dunaway breasts' & even that didnt help.

    A spherical IS understandable, because a circle is simple. When it comes to an ellipse, & onward though, these are -not- simple shapes. Im sure a designer would concur.

    I did tho understand my SAS ufo shape, which you said was a top-view. But if I then apply this same topward perspective to daytona's white-on-blue shapes, I'm all at sea again, because now a brand new teardrop shape is deemed an eliptical (so the only plausible thing, is the perspective has changed for these- but from which perspective? & I'm back at square 1). Where on gods earth this teardrop suddenly appears from is perplexing.

    I need to try & simplify right down. I have my ufo shape. I then need to imagine how this manifests into a stylus shape, in 3D. Ok, I can only visualise it in actual 3D, to it having some sort of two L&R strange thinner "wings", which are in contact with the two groove walls. Now, assuming this is correct (?) how then do much thinner diamond sections, have a longer lifespan, than sphericals or elipticals, if far less diamond is there to be worn away-?

    (Most rational answer must be... I'm completely wrong/ all at sea still, & no L&R two wings exist at all).
     
  9. Craig B

    Craig B Re:trophile

    Your Google ad banners are going to be interesting this weekend. :eek:

    Your L&R wings analogy is right on. As to longer lifespans, despite the contact patches being much thinner laterally, they end up having increased contact surface area due to them being so elongated vertically (i.e. if we simplify it down to area of a rectangle then H x W). Here is where the last 3 rows of the table come into play (play, get it?). 'Contact with records' depicts a side on view of each tip profile as it sits against the groove wall, with the small circle of conical through to the elongated 'wing' of SAS illustrating the area of contact. Below these are listed 'Contact surface' which would be better described as 'contact area'. The drawings aren't perfectly to scale, but it is important to note that SAS/MicroRidge/et al also have 'depth' to their contact patches (your 'wings') that allow these extended line contact patches to maintain their profile for up to more than three times as long as more 'standard' point contact types like conical and elliptical (which will have long since gone 'flat').

    [​IMG]
    P.S. That last row is contact surface height to width ratio, taking the dimensions from 'Contact with records' and dividing the contact patch height by width.
     
    Last edited: Nov 26, 2022
  10. The Captain

    The Captain ~~~~~~~~~~

    @Craig B

    Aha! Great! I'm getting there at last- thanks so much for your patience. And for your breasts.

    JesusH.. if only the Contact With Stylus row had "/Side View'" added I could have had a flamin chance to understand it all! This row had as much meaning as outer Mongolian to me, let alone the rows below it.

    Now, the Contact surface row is legible. The last row is a bit tricky, but not to worry. I'm on board with the basics.

    Capt.
     
    Craig B likes this.
  11. The Captain

    The Captain ~~~~~~~~~~

    @Craig B (i didn't really gOOgle dunaway's frontage to aid my way! Or fawcett's either:).

    I'm in a much better position to think about this stylus upgrade now. One thing as a minor puzzle tho.. why if the two wings being much thinner than an eliptical, would this type have a longer lifespan? IE Surely it's easier to grind down thinner material.

    Thanks Capt
     
  12. daytona600

    daytona600 Registered User

    Elliptical / SAS
    Jico Diamond tips differ in the shape and timbre changes according to that. How about changing your stylus by the music genres?
    1. Conical
    The Conical stylus is the most standard stylus type.DJs prefer this. Product lifetime is about 200 playing hours.
    2. Elliptical
    The Elliptical tip is good at reproducing high frequency area. Product lifetime is about 150 playing hours.
    3. Shibata
    The Shibata stylus can play 4-channel sound on quadraphonic records.Product lifetime is about 400 playing hours.
    4. Hyper Elliptical
    The Hyper Elliptical stylus is thinner than the Elliptical stylus. This gives additional frequency response. Product lifetime is about 400 playing hours.
    5. Super Analog Stylus (SAS)
    The SAS is the JICO’s original model. That tip resembles the cutting stylus and can trace record grooves precisely. The SAS is excellent at reproducing both high and low frequencies. Product lifetime is about 500 playing hours.
    In recent vinyl boom, the number of people purchasing analog records have been increasing rapidly. And we think many people don’t know how the sound is generated from the vinyl, if they like listening to it. The record player and the speakers are important for good sound, but actually, the stylus affects the sound as well.


    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]



    [​IMG]
    [​IMG]
     
  13. The Captain

    The Captain ~~~~~~~~~~

    Hi daytona,

    excellent- all becoming clear now. These are great pics. Appreciate your patience too.
     
  14. Craig B

    Craig B Re:trophile

    The 'wings' may be thinner but they still have more diamond area in contact with the groove due to their elongated height. Also, there is quite some extra depth of diamond to wear through before the 'line' is lost.
     
  15. daytona600

    daytona600 Registered User

    SAS almost like a Philips Screwdriver Round with Ridges on the side Aka Mircoridge
     
  16. The Captain

    The Captain ~~~~~~~~~~

    Gotcha. Now this is all becoming interesting as a design to me you see. I do like to know how things work prior to buying something, if I can.

    Ok lastly, if I could just keep you on board for a tad longer; is the better option in your opinion to go Shelter 201 body & upgrade to this Jico SAS/B (B = boron) stylus, or other interesting 'exotic' stylus idea, using the K5 body-?

    Thanks, Capt
     
  17. daytona600

    daytona600 Registered User

    MM cartridge ranges all basically the same generator with better styli/Cantilever as you move up the range
    201 badged for Shelter. 1000s of makes of cartridges made by 3 suppliers over the decades
    K5 badged for Linn

    SAS worth it $4000 Jico uses the same stylus/cantiver
    SETO-HORI REMODEL – JICO (jico-stylus.com)
    [​IMG]
     
  18. The Captain

    The Captain ~~~~~~~~~~

    Aha, well I never knew this. 3 suppliers? Crikey they must get some work then..

    I'm entering a whole new world here tbh. Before a few days ago, I had never known such stylus shapes existed. Well well isn't this interesting. I didn't really actually pay attention to what an elliptical actually was, such that there is no shape info, or shape explanation even on a new denon dl110 booklet with the cartridge for eg ( nor my 201 now). I didn't even know there were other types than these & spherical ones tbh, such that I was never likely to enter into any 'top tier' stylus type: even MC Ive not done due to the naim boards needed too, adding +£80 now or so to try the idea.

    So is this stylus shape 'progression' exactly the same for MC's as MM's then? I get the philips 'driver analogy now. Lost on me before.

    Thanks Capt.
     
  19. daytona600

    daytona600 Registered User

    Ortofon , AT & Nagaoka made the vast majority of cartridges
    Spherical/Elliptical on entry level products only
     
  20. The Captain

    The Captain ~~~~~~~~~~

    Daytona, this 'Jico' brand, which I think is an aftermarket affair.. has it got a good reputation for build quality? IE the tip to shaft bond seems all stylus' achilles heel.

    One thing I'm always sh*tting bricks over, is cleaning, even my current 201 £90 stylus. I'd imagine the SAS wings might 'scrape' a fair bit of crud along it's merry way.. are these prone to needing cleaning more do you know?
     

Share This Page





Advertisement


  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice