Results 1 to 15 of 15
  1. #1
    AR Newbie Registered Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    3

    Cartridges with brush good for subsonic problem?

    I have a little bit of an issue with speakers. My old Energy 22's are very sensitive to subsonic frequencies. From what I read it was a design tradeoff they made to get the impressively (for a 7 inch) deep bass that these speakers have. Anyhow, on my Ariston, I get a lot of pumping of the woofers.
    I have done some reading on the subject and seen some recommendations for a cartridge with a brush to help minimize this. Was thinking of either a Shure V15-V or one of the top range Stantons (881?).
    Anyone have any thoughts on these? Recommendations?

  2. #2
    Audio Hobbyist Since 1969 Glen B's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    536
    Quote Originally Posted by itsme
    I have a little bit of an issue with speakers. My old Energy 22's are very sensitive to subsonic frequencies. From what I read it was a design tradeoff they made to get the impressively (for a 7 inch) deep bass that these speakers have. Anyhow, on my Ariston, I get a lot of pumping of the woofers.
    I have done some reading on the subject and seen some recommendations for a cartridge with a brush to help minimize this. Was thinking of either a Shure V15-V or one of the top range Stantons (881?).
    Anyone have any thoughts on these? Recommendations?
    The brushes may help to damp some infrasonic energy but your best bet is a preamp with an infrasonic filter.

  3. #3
    AUTOBOT BRANDONH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    GRANBURY, TX
    Posts
    553
    Quote Originally Posted by itsme
    I have a little bit of an issue with speakers. My old Energy 22's are very sensitive to subsonic frequencies. From what I read it was a design tradeoff they made to get the impressively (for a 7 inch) deep bass that these speakers have. Anyhow, on my Ariston, I get a lot of pumping of the woofers.
    I have done some reading on the subject and seen some recommendations for a cartridge with a brush to help minimize this. Was thinking of either a Shure V15-V or one of the top range Stantons (881?).
    Anyone have any thoughts on these? Recommendations?
    Glen B is correct you need a rumble filter or an amp with a subsonic filter and set it to 20
    here is a fairly affordable rumble Filter http://www.kabusa.com/rf1.htm#CTOP
    my system
    Technics SL-1210M5G
    OC9/MLII
    Marantz AV8003
    Oppo BD-83
    Yamaha C-70
    Crown MA-12000i
    Emotiva XPA-5

  4. #4
    Forum Regular Woochifer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    SF Bay Area
    Posts
    6,890
    The Stanton longhair brushes are purportedly for dust pickup and static discharge, whereas the brush that Shure mounts on their carts functions as a stabilizer that assist with tracking. As others have said, neither will do much for the subsonic rumbling -- that's just an artifact of the vinyl medium. The short of it is that in order to filter out the subsonic information, you need a subsonic filter. Aside from add-on devices or going with a crossover or subwoofer, you could also look into vintage preamps/integrateds. When vinyl was king, subsonic filtering was a very common feature on preamps, integrateds, and receivers. And even now, subwoofer amps will often include a filter to minimize the cone movement below the tuned port frequency (the point at which the driver unloads and no longer has the back pressure from the port available to dampen the cone movement).
    Wooch's Home Theater 2.0 (Pics)
    Panasonic VIERA TH-C50FD18 50" 1080p
    Paradigm Reference Studio 40, CC, and 20 v.2
    Adire Audio Rava (EQ: Behringer Feedback Destroyer DSP1124)
    Yamaha RX-V800
    Dual CS5000 (Ortofon OM30 Super)
    Denon DVD-758 (DVD-1940ci)
    Sony Playstation 3 (MediaLink OS X Server)
    Sony ES SCD-C2000ES
    JVC HR-S3912U
    Directv HR22
    Oppo Digital HM-31
    Logitech Harmony 650
    iPad 3


    The Neverending DVD/BD Collection

    Subwoofer Setup and Parametric EQ Results *Dead Link*

  5. #5
    Can a crooner get a gig? dean_martin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    Lower AL
    Posts
    2,922
    The Bellari VP129 phono pre has a rumble filter that cuts off low frequencies at 20Hz (this is where the tech guys jump in and correct my ignorance, if needed). I haven't needed it at all, but it's there and I guess it works. Anyhow, this tube phono pre was $199 and was supposed to go up to $249, but probably can still be found for the old price. It sounds great in my system and should work with any mm cart and most high-output mcs.

  6. #6
    Music Junkie E-Stat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    5,469
    Quote Originally Posted by itsme
    Anyhow, on my Ariston, I get a lot of pumping of the woofers.
    I would begin by looking at the cause of the subsonics. I, too have an Ariston (RD-11s) and do not get subsonic garbage. What arm and cartridge are you presently using? Perhaps your combination is a poor match in terms of resonant frequency.

    rw

  7. #7
    Super Moderator Site Moderator JohnMichael's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Central Ohio
    Posts
    6,239
    It is important for the compliance of a cartridge work well with the tonearm's mass. A high compliance cart in a heavy arm as well as a low compliance cart in a light arm will cause subsonic problems. High Fidelity mag used to print a graph that showed a range of compliances and tonearm masses and the low frequency resonance they will generate. If memory serves 8-10 HZ is the ideal you want to acheive for good bass and minimal excitement by warps. I will try to find that graph.
    JohnMichael
    Vinyl Rega Planar 2, Incognito rewire, Deepgroove subplatter, ceramic bearing, Michell Technoweight, Rega 24V motor, TTPSU, Funk Firm Achroplat platter, Michael Lim top and bottom braces, 2 Rega feet and one RDC cone, Benz MC Gold, GSP Fanfare 3 w/PSU1
    Digital
    Sony SCD-XA5400ES SACD/cd, Marantz SA 8001
    Int. Amp Krell S-300i
    Speakers
    Mobile Fidelity OML1's/Bell'O 224 stands
    Cables
    AQ Rocket 33's, Diamondback XLR's & IC's

  8. #8
    AR Newbie Registered Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    3
    Well, I think I may have figured out one of the issues...
    Looks like the suspension in my cartridge has collapsed. Only tracking at 1.8 grams, but the cantilever is almost pushed up against the body of the cartridge. Probably not good for the setup....
    I have a Empire 4000S and a AT 140L (?) sitting around somewhere. Maybe time to try one of those. I think the AT was designed for a low mass arm. Maybe the Empire?

  9. #9
    Super Moderator Site Moderator JohnMichael's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Central Ohio
    Posts
    6,239
    Anyone interested in choosing the correct cartridge for their tonearm for reduced subsonic problems here is a link that may be useful. www.theanalogdept.com
    Then click on Alignment FAQ when that opens choose Cartridge/Arm Matching.
    JohnMichael
    Vinyl Rega Planar 2, Incognito rewire, Deepgroove subplatter, ceramic bearing, Michell Technoweight, Rega 24V motor, TTPSU, Funk Firm Achroplat platter, Michael Lim top and bottom braces, 2 Rega feet and one RDC cone, Benz MC Gold, GSP Fanfare 3 w/PSU1
    Digital
    Sony SCD-XA5400ES SACD/cd, Marantz SA 8001
    Int. Amp Krell S-300i
    Speakers
    Mobile Fidelity OML1's/Bell'O 224 stands
    Cables
    AQ Rocket 33's, Diamondback XLR's & IC's

  10. #10
    AUTOBOT BRANDONH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    GRANBURY, TX
    Posts
    553

    Thanks for the link

    Quote Originally Posted by JohnMichael
    Anyone interested in choosing the correct cartridge for their tonearm for reduced subsonic problems here is a link that may be useful. www.theanalogdept.com
    Then click on Alignment FAQ when that opens choose Cartridge/Arm Matching.
    Thanks for the link grat analog site!
    my system
    Technics SL-1210M5G
    OC9/MLII
    Marantz AV8003
    Oppo BD-83
    Yamaha C-70
    Crown MA-12000i
    Emotiva XPA-5

  11. #11
    Aging Smartass
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Moore, SC
    Posts
    998
    I wanted to chime in here on the merits of the brush on Pickering and Stanton cartrdiges. I was the National Sales Manager for Pickering in the late 70's, and rejoined the organization throughout the 90's as the Vice President of Sales and Marketing for Stanton, until the company was sold to a new owner in Florida.

    The brush used on both cartrdiges was a personal "thing" of mine, as I'd never had a problem using it when I first joined Pickering, and was astonished at how the audio salespeople across the entire U.S. felt it nothing short of an audio travesty. I asked the engineers of the company/companies to either provide useful data as to the value of the brush assemblies, or to do without it all together if need be. The result was a pamphlet, "The Do's and the Don'ts of the Dustamatic/Longhair Brush." It was quite an eye-opener.

    The biggest problem with the brush assemblies was that most audio salesmen refused to read instructions, believing they "knew better.'' As such, few if any realized the need to add an additional 1 gram to both the tracking force and anti-skating settings to compensate for the brush assembly, which weighed 1 gram in and of itself. Properly set, the brush never interfered with tracking, and offered some very real and tangible benefits.

    The brush was never designed to clean a dirty record, but rather, to help keep a clean record clean. The bristles were deliberately designed to be too large to fit into a record's groove, and their rubbing action against the record's surface created a small static charge that worked like a mini vacuum cleaner. The design of the all-metal cartridge body, with a ground strap attached to one of the ground pins effectively discharged this static to ground without any consequence.

    The brush also reduced low frequency resonance (not rumble) and, to me this was best of all, dynamically stablized the tonearm to dramatically improve the tracking and playback of warped records. Indeed, a given Pickering or Stanton cartridge, set to track at 1 1/4 grams without the brush assembly that wouldn't play certain warped records, tracked and played those records flawlessly when the asembly was in place, and the proper gram/anti-skate settings were used.

    At one point in time, Discwasher introduced an add-on "Dynamic Stablizer" that the user attached to the front of his/her tonearm, and in my discussions with the folks at Discwasher (I was with Pickering at the time) they readily acknowledged that PIckering and Stanton knew what they were doing with the brush assemblies.

    Unfortunately, as the mind-set of Pickering and Stanton (until its sale in the late 90's) was never to reveal anything technical due to an irrational fear of giving away trade secrets, little useful information was ever given out about what made any of the cartridges, or the brush asemblies "tick."

    'thought the folks logged onto this site would find this interesting and useful.

  12. #12
    Audio Hobbyist Since 1969 Glen B's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    536
    Quote Originally Posted by emaidel
    I wanted to chime in here on the merits of the brush on Pickering and Stanton cartrdiges. I was the National Sales Manager for Pickering in the late 70's, and rejoined the organization throughout the 90's as the Vice President of Sales and Marketing for Stanton, until the company was sold to a new owner in Florida. .............................

    ..........'thought the folks logged onto this site would find this interesting and useful.
    Nice "history lesson." During the '80s and early '90s I used the Shure M97HE (if I correctly remember the model #) that had the Dynamic Stablizer ) followed by Stanton 881S, 881S mkII and 981HZS, all with the longhair brush and can attest to their effectiveness.

  13. #13
    Forum Regular royphil345's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Posts
    709
    Your problem is possibly being made worse by less than ideal turntable isolation. Would suspect this if the problem becomes disproportionately worse at higher volumes.

    Have also found that the cartridges with the brushes / dynamic stabilizers DO help control subsonic noise. The Shures seem to have a firmer suspension than most other high compliance cartridges to begin with, which I believe helps.

    The KAB rumble filter is very good and also a way to go.

    I really didn't care for the sound of the V-15VxMR. Like the tonal balance of the M97xE better. Although, many audiophiles would probably find it to be not quite revealing enough. Would be tempted to try the Stanton over the V-15VxMR. Haven't heard the Stanton though.

    Actually, If anyone wants a V-15VxMR cartridge body (no stylus) let me know and it's yours.
    Last edited by royphil345; 03-08-2006 at 11:56 PM.

  14. #14
    Forum Regular royphil345's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Posts
    709
    Free V-15VxMR cartridge body is gone.

  15. #15
    AR Newbie Registered Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    3
    Thanks for the awesome info!
    Was just wondering what recommendations you had in regards to the Stanton models. I have heard some very good things re. the 881. How would it compare to the ubiquitous Shure V15?
    Thanks for any help you can provide!


    Quote Originally Posted by emaidel
    I wanted to chime in here on the merits of the brush on Pickering and Stanton cartrdiges. I was the National Sales Manager for Pickering in the late 70's, and rejoined the organization throughout the 90's as the Vice President of Sales and Marketing for Stanton, until the company was sold to a new owner in Florida.

    The brush used on both cartrdiges was a personal "thing" of mine, as I'd never had a problem using it when I first joined Pickering, and was astonished at how the audio salespeople across the entire U.S. felt it nothing short of an audio travesty. I asked the engineers of the company/companies to either provide useful data as to the value of the brush assemblies, or to do without it all together if need be. The result was a pamphlet, "The Do's and the Don'ts of the Dustamatic/Longhair Brush." It was quite an eye-opener.

    The biggest problem with the brush assemblies was that most audio salesmen refused to read instructions, believing they "knew better.'' As such, few if any realized the need to add an additional 1 gram to both the tracking force and anti-skating settings to compensate for the brush assembly, which weighed 1 gram in and of itself. Properly set, the brush never interfered with tracking, and offered some very real and tangible benefits.

    The brush was never designed to clean a dirty record, but rather, to help keep a clean record clean. The bristles were deliberately designed to be too large to fit into a record's groove, and their rubbing action against the record's surface created a small static charge that worked like a mini vacuum cleaner. The design of the all-metal cartridge body, with a ground strap attached to one of the ground pins effectively discharged this static to ground without any consequence.

    The brush also reduced low frequency resonance (not rumble) and, to me this was best of all, dynamically stablized the tonearm to dramatically improve the tracking and playback of warped records. Indeed, a given Pickering or Stanton cartridge, set to track at 1 1/4 grams without the brush assembly that wouldn't play certain warped records, tracked and played those records flawlessly when the asembly was in place, and the proper gram/anti-skate settings were used.

    At one point in time, Discwasher introduced an add-on "Dynamic Stablizer" that the user attached to the front of his/her tonearm, and in my discussions with the folks at Discwasher (I was with Pickering at the time) they readily acknowledged that PIckering and Stanton knew what they were doing with the brush assemblies.

    Unfortunately, as the mind-set of Pickering and Stanton (until its sale in the late 90's) was never to reveal anything technical due to an irrational fear of giving away trade secrets, little useful information was ever given out about what made any of the cartridges, or the brush asemblies "tick."

    'thought the folks logged onto this site would find this interesting and useful.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Latest AudioReview Articles

Hot Deals

Latest News

AudioReview on Facebook