So who has tried one?
Much discussed on other forums, this gadget, to my ears, can bring so many variables into your turntable. From amazing detail which can be unmusical to sweet mellowness. And all stops between.
A tweaker's prayer answered.
Anyone on this forum using one?
Don, really rainy downtown York
Tiger Paw sKale
Moderator: Staff
Well, I put this topic up a week or so ago as the forum had been a bit quiet, and wondered what you Linn sages might be thinking about this new toy. I have written my initial impressions on another forum, but will set out my current thoughts to try to get more informed debate going.
I have an Ittok LVII and a Dynavector DV-20x2 on my LP12 (Circus, Tramp2, Linto 1).
When I bought it, David, from the Sound Organisation, York, offered to come and fit it for me. I have put his offer on hold, preferring to have this fun myself. But it has not been as straightforward as I had hoped.
Roger, of Tiger Paw, told me during a telephone conversation that the benefits of this counterweight over the original are threefold: firstly, its mounting hole is off-centre so it hangs below the arm, reducing the centre of gravity of the counter-weight mass. Among arm designers, this is supposed to be "a good thing." Secondly having the counter-weight mass near to the bearing means that the mass of the counterweight has to move around less as the arm tracks the records. More smiles among arm designers I gather. Thirdly, there are sonic advantages in the way this counterweight has been designed to sit on the arm to reduce "resonant" reflections.
Having the sKale near to the bearing is not always the best setting - results can sound sweeter if you pull the sKale away from the bearing by a few millimetres. It becomes clear that there are three ways of approaching the task of installation:
Firstly, there is what might be regarded as the conventional method. For this you set the arm's own adjustment to zero. Then you carefully waggle the sKale up from the back of the arm until the arm remains free in the air, like a see-saw not touching the ground at either end. The you simply adjust the tracking pressure on the arm as you would if you were fitting a standard Ittok counter-weight. Then dial in the tracking weight you want on the arm's scale.
The second method is to set the arm's adjustment to zero, and use only the positioning of the sKale to arrive at tracking weight of 1.9gms. This means that the spring mechanism in the arm is not used at all, and the digital scales is necessary for all tracking weight adjustments. This could have the benefit that the arm's spring does not add any sonic characteristics of its own to what is going on. On the other hand, the presence of a slack spring in the arm could produce detrimental effects.
The third method is to choose exactly where you want the sKale to be positioned on the arm and use the spring to arrive give the correct tracking weight on the digital scales. This will have the disadvantage the arm's tracking force dial will almost certainly be very misleading. But is seems to me that this, third method, is the only way those users who insist on the sKale sitting as closely to the arm bearing as possible will be able to reliably use.
Getting the sKale to sound good is a bit of a black art - so much so that I do not think it is helpful for me to suggest some settings here, as a starting point.
I have tried all the three above approaches, with varying results - records sounding dull, over-bright, over-detailed (but without musicality), and "lovely" - like and expensive cartridge upgrade.
On the whole, I have found my best, more consistent results have come from setting things up so that the arm's own scale reads accurately, i.e. it shows 1.9 gms when tracking at 1.9 gms. In other words adjust the arm so that it floats on zero tracking force when setting it up. Which is what the setting up instructions for an Ittok say you should do:
"It should be noted that the counterweight is used only to balance the arm, never to apply tracking force. Tracking force is applied by a spring that is controlled by the tracking force arm adjustment dial. Because of this, the arm is always dynamically balanced and any disturbances that reach the arm will tend to affect both the rear portion of the arm and the front portion of the arm equally, thus minimizing their effect."
I have thought about the consequences of not doing this, and look for some of you techno-Linnies for an answer. One thing about not setting the arm up properly, and effectively not use the spring, which concerns me is this: what is going to happen to a slack (presumably) helical spring laying inside a tone arm? I have a helical spring on my guitar amplifier reverb unit! Some expert views here would be helpful.
Similarly some auditioning feedback from those of you who can employ the tune-dem method would be interesting.
Whatever the final analysis of this interesting product will be, I think it is at worse "work in progress". Certainly all established members of the Linn vinyl community must at least give the sKale a listen.
Don, sunny downtown York
I have an Ittok LVII and a Dynavector DV-20x2 on my LP12 (Circus, Tramp2, Linto 1).
When I bought it, David, from the Sound Organisation, York, offered to come and fit it for me. I have put his offer on hold, preferring to have this fun myself. But it has not been as straightforward as I had hoped.
Roger, of Tiger Paw, told me during a telephone conversation that the benefits of this counterweight over the original are threefold: firstly, its mounting hole is off-centre so it hangs below the arm, reducing the centre of gravity of the counter-weight mass. Among arm designers, this is supposed to be "a good thing." Secondly having the counter-weight mass near to the bearing means that the mass of the counterweight has to move around less as the arm tracks the records. More smiles among arm designers I gather. Thirdly, there are sonic advantages in the way this counterweight has been designed to sit on the arm to reduce "resonant" reflections.
Having the sKale near to the bearing is not always the best setting - results can sound sweeter if you pull the sKale away from the bearing by a few millimetres. It becomes clear that there are three ways of approaching the task of installation:
Firstly, there is what might be regarded as the conventional method. For this you set the arm's own adjustment to zero. Then you carefully waggle the sKale up from the back of the arm until the arm remains free in the air, like a see-saw not touching the ground at either end. The you simply adjust the tracking pressure on the arm as you would if you were fitting a standard Ittok counter-weight. Then dial in the tracking weight you want on the arm's scale.
The second method is to set the arm's adjustment to zero, and use only the positioning of the sKale to arrive at tracking weight of 1.9gms. This means that the spring mechanism in the arm is not used at all, and the digital scales is necessary for all tracking weight adjustments. This could have the benefit that the arm's spring does not add any sonic characteristics of its own to what is going on. On the other hand, the presence of a slack spring in the arm could produce detrimental effects.
The third method is to choose exactly where you want the sKale to be positioned on the arm and use the spring to arrive give the correct tracking weight on the digital scales. This will have the disadvantage the arm's tracking force dial will almost certainly be very misleading. But is seems to me that this, third method, is the only way those users who insist on the sKale sitting as closely to the arm bearing as possible will be able to reliably use.
Getting the sKale to sound good is a bit of a black art - so much so that I do not think it is helpful for me to suggest some settings here, as a starting point.
I have tried all the three above approaches, with varying results - records sounding dull, over-bright, over-detailed (but without musicality), and "lovely" - like and expensive cartridge upgrade.
On the whole, I have found my best, more consistent results have come from setting things up so that the arm's own scale reads accurately, i.e. it shows 1.9 gms when tracking at 1.9 gms. In other words adjust the arm so that it floats on zero tracking force when setting it up. Which is what the setting up instructions for an Ittok say you should do:
"It should be noted that the counterweight is used only to balance the arm, never to apply tracking force. Tracking force is applied by a spring that is controlled by the tracking force arm adjustment dial. Because of this, the arm is always dynamically balanced and any disturbances that reach the arm will tend to affect both the rear portion of the arm and the front portion of the arm equally, thus minimizing their effect."
I have thought about the consequences of not doing this, and look for some of you techno-Linnies for an answer. One thing about not setting the arm up properly, and effectively not use the spring, which concerns me is this: what is going to happen to a slack (presumably) helical spring laying inside a tone arm? I have a helical spring on my guitar amplifier reverb unit! Some expert views here would be helpful.
Similarly some auditioning feedback from those of you who can employ the tune-dem method would be interesting.
Whatever the final analysis of this interesting product will be, I think it is at worse "work in progress". Certainly all established members of the Linn vinyl community must at least give the sKale a listen.
Don, sunny downtown York
Welcome to the forum, beck!beck wrote:There is nothing new under the sun. After listening to the original and the sKale it is clear that the sKale is another member of the "out of tune" club of new exiting stuff that "improves" the sondek.
Could you tell us a bit more about the comparison you made? It seems there is more than one way of installing it, according to donuk in his post above. I expect the manufacturer to have a clear recommendation of how to optimally install it. Which is the right one? Perhaps someone can clarify.
If a tonearm has a spring for applying tracking force, it should always be used for this purpose. Just like it says in the Ittok set up instruction you quoted.donuk wrote:I have thought about the consequences of not doing this, and look for some of you techno-Linnies for an answer. One thing about not setting the arm up properly, and effectively not use the spring, which concerns me is this: what is going to happen to a slack (presumably) helical spring laying inside a tone arm? I have a helical spring on my guitar amplifier reverb unit! Some expert views here would be helpful.
If performance improves when not using the spring, the tonearm is faulty. Either that particular arm or, if it applies to all arms of that model, the design of it.
As ever, Mr L, you put it eloquently.
The point you make is exactly as I understood things from the Ittok manual, which I quoted.
From my own experimentation, the sKale sounds "best" when the arm is set up - i.e. all the tracking force comes from the spring - as per the manual. Which means that in the standard sKale kit, there are only four possible exact positions (by various combinations of the two add-on weights.
I am aware from chatting and reading forums, that some people are ignoring this advice. That is, they are positioning the counterweight near to the fulcrum, and adjusting the arm's scale to achieve correct tracking force.
At the moment, pending more informed information and advice, I have returned to the Ittok's original counter-weight, and am hearing an uncoloured natural sound again.
I am still looking for enlightenment. I understand there are a lot of folk out there, whom one would presume to have good ears, who are delighted with the sKale.
But not me, so far. Like a lot of tweaks and add-ons, it produces a noticeable presentation of the sound (certainly more detail). But after a while you realise that your feet are no longer tapping.
don, rather overcast downtown York
The point you make is exactly as I understood things from the Ittok manual, which I quoted.
From my own experimentation, the sKale sounds "best" when the arm is set up - i.e. all the tracking force comes from the spring - as per the manual. Which means that in the standard sKale kit, there are only four possible exact positions (by various combinations of the two add-on weights.
I am aware from chatting and reading forums, that some people are ignoring this advice. That is, they are positioning the counterweight near to the fulcrum, and adjusting the arm's scale to achieve correct tracking force.
At the moment, pending more informed information and advice, I have returned to the Ittok's original counter-weight, and am hearing an uncoloured natural sound again.
I am still looking for enlightenment. I understand there are a lot of folk out there, whom one would presume to have good ears, who are delighted with the sKale.
But not me, so far. Like a lot of tweaks and add-ons, it produces a noticeable presentation of the sound (certainly more detail). But after a while you realise that your feet are no longer tapping.
don, rather overcast downtown York
I don't think Beck actually experimented with a Skale in his own system. As far as I can tell his impression of the product is based on a needle drop a member of the Linn forum put out.
http://forums.linn.co.uk/bb/showthread. ... #pid208870
Is this an accepted practice on this forum as I thought I recall other products being dismissed based on needle drops as well?
http://forums.linn.co.uk/bb/showthread. ... #pid208870
Is this an accepted practice on this forum as I thought I recall other products being dismissed based on needle drops as well?
I've listened to a bunch of needle drops and my opinion is that they are a fantastic tool for evaulation - provided they're made with care and precision!
It's essential that the equipment under evaluation is set up properly - otherwise the comparison can be skewed.
It's necessary to narrow things down to one parameter: A versus B. Or one "bunch" of parameters: An optimised A+B+C versus an optimised D+E+F. All other things should remain the same, otherwise one doesn't know what one is actually comparing. This sounds easy, but in real life, it's common to be careless and think "that detail doesn't matter".
It's necessary for the recording to be good enough. The ones I've heard have been really good, making small differences obvious.
This sums up to: The skills of the person arranging and recording the needle drops are vital. Listening to needle drops made by someone I don't know anything about tells me nothing.
It's essential that the equipment under evaluation is set up properly - otherwise the comparison can be skewed.
It's necessary to narrow things down to one parameter: A versus B. Or one "bunch" of parameters: An optimised A+B+C versus an optimised D+E+F. All other things should remain the same, otherwise one doesn't know what one is actually comparing. This sounds easy, but in real life, it's common to be careless and think "that detail doesn't matter".
It's necessary for the recording to be good enough. The ones I've heard have been really good, making small differences obvious.
This sums up to: The skills of the person arranging and recording the needle drops are vital. Listening to needle drops made by someone I don't know anything about tells me nothing.
Sorry for the late reply. I made my mind up about the sKale by listening on the linn forum to recorded samples with and without the sKale. It was obvious to me that the sKale pushed the music out of tune.
I have been experimenting with my sondek for a while now changing the stand it sits on. Going from heavy metal to lightweight audiotech stand(from out of tune to in tune).
When listening to music from a sondek being forced out of tune every small change you make makes a difference in sound. A sondek playing in tune is more robust to changes.
Out of tune experimenting often gives you a more "brillant sound" but in the end frustrations with the tune makes me turn back to linn.
I have been experimenting with my sondek for a while now changing the stand it sits on. Going from heavy metal to lightweight audiotech stand(from out of tune to in tune).
When listening to music from a sondek being forced out of tune every small change you make makes a difference in sound. A sondek playing in tune is more robust to changes.
Out of tune experimenting often gives you a more "brillant sound" but in the end frustrations with the tune makes me turn back to linn.
Playing cd’s…………
+1, based on the needle drops that is. I can understand why people prefer the Skale though - it does something nice to the sound, especially the treble, to my ears at least.beck wrote:I made my mind up about the sKale by listening on the linn forum to recorded samples with and without the sKale. It was obvious to me that the sKale pushed the music out of tune.
In the process of optimising the sound from my sondek I have often been tempted by tweaks that made my sondek sound spacious and brillant just to end up unsatisfied because the music was pushed out of tune.
I realise how tempting "out of tune" sound is. Many hifi products produce "out of tune" sound and many sell in great numbers. It can be love at first listen but I end up unsatisfied.
Many recordings even on vinyl are out of tune so why all the fuss!
In the end it is up to you to decide. I have made up my mind. Regards
I realise how tempting "out of tune" sound is. Many hifi products produce "out of tune" sound and many sell in great numbers. It can be love at first listen but I end up unsatisfied.
Many recordings even on vinyl are out of tune so why all the fuss!
In the end it is up to you to decide. I have made up my mind. Regards
Playing cd’s…………
I would stretch that even further to even suggest that MOST hifi products are optimised for an "out of tune" sound. It seems that most people designing hifi have lots of ideas about how hifi shall sound and optimises the products for that instead of listening to how well the product recreates a tune.lejonklou wrote:+1beck wrote:I realise how tempting "out of tune" sound is. Many hifi products produce "out of tune" sound and many sell in great numbers. It can be love at first listen but I end up unsatisfied.
Has anyone out there, besides Beck, actually heard one?
I must admit - without wishing to be too critical - I do not think it is very fair to dismiss a product on the basis of needle droppings. I have difficulty in the idea of using a lesser medium to evaluate a superior medium. It's a bit like using a printed paint chart to evaluate the quality of house paint. Of interest perhaps but of no absolute value in my humble opinion.
Don
rainy downtown York
I must admit - without wishing to be too critical - I do not think it is very fair to dismiss a product on the basis of needle droppings. I have difficulty in the idea of using a lesser medium to evaluate a superior medium. It's a bit like using a printed paint chart to evaluate the quality of house paint. Of interest perhaps but of no absolute value in my humble opinion.
Don
rainy downtown York
Donuk, please read my first post.
My main interest is not Tiger Paw and the sKale. I am certain they make nice products.
My main interest is the fact that the hifi industry still can't fantom the real discovery Ivor made when he started building turntables.
My main interest is not Tiger Paw and the sKale. I am certain they make nice products.
My main interest is the fact that the hifi industry still can't fantom the real discovery Ivor made when he started building turntables.
Last edited by beck on 2012-10-28 12:52, edited 2 times in total.
Playing cd’s…………
This thread by the person providing the needle drops doesn't give me a lot of confidence.lejonklou wrote: It's essential that the equipment under evaluation is set up properly - otherwise the comparison can be skewed.
Listening to needle drops made by someone I don't know anything about tells me nothing.
http://forums.linn.co.uk/bb/showthread.php?tid=6532