Hi Chris, I think the decoupling offered by the wood plate is a very drastic solution, applied in desperate situations. My concern is about the strength & tightness of the surface that couples the arm pillar with the arm pod.
I'm sure it works OK, but from the theoritical point of view, I would be more comfortable if you choose a more solid upper fixed point, in order to modify the ET arm pillar, as if it is one piece with the first block of the arm pod. Even if it is applied at the bottom* (the decoupling by wood), may not be necessary -in your case- considering there is a film of air in between the arm tube & the arm pillar.
* Steel at the top plate, your own Al main block, Brass as a foundation or intermediate level. Especially the discs that rests the spikes must have great hardness. You can close the microscopic open moleculars between the metal surfaces simply by applying some silicone oil without bonding or bolts. Easy if you uplevel your main wood shelf with a second & preferably denser platform only for the TT and so, you will have the apparent hight for steel, brass & discs. Just a thought. |
Whilst Chris' Guide to making your own armpod is admirable, he appears to have concentrated on his ET parallel-tracking arm which I feel is different to the majority of pivoted arms? When I designed my armpod, I attempted to make it 'universal' in that it could accommodate all the vintage pivoted arms I could find and all the modern ones as well. The major differences between the vintage arms and the modern ones are most likely to be the fact that vintage arms have a bottom plug-in din phono cable which needs to enter the armpod. There is also the 'barrel' of the arm-base to accommodate the rising VTA mechanism and this varies in diameter for all arms. Some modern arms have this 'barrel' as well although their wiring usually exits the arm on top of the arm-base rather than under it. The largest diameter 'barrel' I could find was that of the Copperhead arm and a hole of 55mm diameter could accommodate that. I later found that the VTA barrel of the FR-66s arm was exactly 55mm diam so I'm not sure if this would easily fit? To accommodate all the different diameters of the arm bases available, an independent top-plate is used to 'attach' the arm to the pod. HERE |
Dear Geoch - it was my intent for the next project to replace my solid aluminum armboard with a brass one and maybe add a panzerholtz tonearm plate on top. From your last post - do you feel this would be worth the expense and effort?
Pictures of my setup were in my link in my last post.
Appreciate any thoughts on this ?
Cheers Chris |
Dear Banquo - my comment was a general one to anyone reading our thread and to those that have emailed me for a copy of my guide. Thank you again for reviewing it.
Since your feedback - I also sent a copy to Raul, Halcro, Nandric, and Lewn for their comments late yesterday. Again if anyone else wants to see it just email me.
I have had a number of people request copies of the guide already. Some in Malaysia and the UK. I do say in it to use aluminum and not steel as it is magnetic. My first one was steel nice and heavy but it is now a bookend. I will be adding more pictures to the guide.
Dear Nandric - I have already posted a link to my set up in an earlier post. The armboard can be seen closer here.
http://www.canuckaudiomart.com/view_userimages.php?user_id=5181&image_id=41886
Note: This guide is strictly to help those that may want to try this out and not a professional document. It is just the way I chose to do it and it worked for me. I am one of those people that like getting to the point and not making things more complicated than they need to be. This was the intent in my approach. |
Dear Nicola, The British TT manufactures says "there is no such thing like mass damping". But the high mass of Brass is indeed very good for this purpose (arm pod) because of it's stability. The "damping" properties of Brass realised by Goldmund on their Steel/Al/Brass chassis construction because of the synergistic differential inherent molecular structure between them, that resulting to the decreased speed of resonances when collected from Steel and directed through Al to the final lower lever platform of Brass and from there to the ground. The Goldmund's material sequence is a way different approach than Vidmantas'. He is looking to provide a clean upper level for the armboard by progressively decreasing the incoming resonances from floor & air. The cork decoupling level is used as an isolation point between the materials. Critically examination of these 2 different solutions opens up many queries concerning the natural predisposition of metals, transmitting energy with different speed and also ringing on a different frequency to each other in order to weak the intruder resonance. I used to have many top range Goldmund products and I could not verify the validity of the Steel/Al/Brass for a general purpose, not even for component chassis construction that Goldmund claims successful results. If this approach works, depends by other things of major significance like the matched coupling to the matched shelf of the matched foundation rack. And because life is too short (Thank you Chris for this I always tend to forget it) I think I'm gonna take a second thought to Vidmantas' outlook as I'm starting to feel more close to the "isolation" idea as the most capable & effective if one wants to arrive in time (and catch up the limited time that left), and listen some music instead of argue endlessly for the imaginable ideal. After all the result is what counts. But I have to get over the cork thing first. Perhaps it can provide a torsion breakdown moment. (although I know first hand it is effective) |
Hi all,
One suggestion for an arm pod that I am about to fabricate from a proto-type that I designed. I purchased a solid brass pivoting arm board manufactured from tw acustics of raven tables.
Using a pivoting arm board will allow you ease of flexibility during set up especially with 9 inch arms and any tables with a chassis top deck like the Technics SP 10 MKII.
Also if desired the added use of a tone arm heavy nut as used with some models of Micro Seiki, Fedility Research just to name a couple.
i plan on using laminated layers of B-25 panzerholz and a 30 mm thick length of brass tapped and threaded for the arm board.
The feet I have not settled on as of yet.
As for the platform which all this will rest on will have to be inert. I can forsee problems with out door variable climate change/ house hold humidity, the platform will expand and contract enough in some cases to throw out the tone arm and cartridge set up.
This is just my 2 cent contribution.
Cheers
|
Dear Banquo, In the first place I got the meaning of 'the
plate' that Ct0517 is talking about. He means 'the rack' on
which the TT sits. Well on my rack there is a sand filled
SHELF on which my Kuzma Stabi reference and my arm pod sit.
The sand in the shelf has a demping function and solid brass as a alloy or amalgam has also a good demping function. My Reed arm pod has different layers of different
materials with the intention to get the arm pod acousticaly
dead. I don't believe that a solid piece of metal is acousticaly dead but the weight of such a piece of metal
may function as such. Ie that is what those heavy TT's are
about: you always need more weight. To put it the other way
'the heavier the better'. Otherwise one need to use springs as is the case by many TT's.
Regards, |
Dear Ct0517, The problem by an description is the fact that
we are not able to 'visualize' the construction. What is: 'the key is getting your tonearm base on the plate?' Assuming an arm pod next to the TT what kind of plate you
are talking about? If you presuppose the usual arm base which is on any TT we all are able to think of some other
kind of material for the purpose. My point is this. For the tonearms like Triplanar ,without a collar , one can use
a cylinder of, say, brass and drill 3 holes with thread on
each side. But for the tonearms with an collar this will not do. BTW the most tonearms are with a collar so one need to get them trough the arm pod and connect them with
the phonocable 'inside' the arm pod. There is alas no way an DIY can mill such a 'hole' in a solid brass cylinder. The plate on such an'drilled out' cylinder is of course very easy. One can use an acryl plate and drill a hole for any tonearm with an collar.
Regards, |
As the guide says - the key is getting your tonearm base on the plate. What do your tonearms arms sit on now? Are they attached directly to the plinth or on a separate plate that attaches to the plinth. Assuming that this is directed at me, the actual answer is that I don't have my turntable right now. I've never had a plinth for my sp10 though. The first go around I just bought some 10" rectangular oak boards at HD, drilled some holes and mounted the tonearm that way. It sat next to the TT. Sounded great but looked like crap. After seeing Halcro's design, I decided to have similar pods fabricated. One pod has been made and another ordered, and neither has a separate tonearm plate in the design. The arms will sit directly on the pod with holes appropriately drilled on top and bottom. Note: cutting a slot on the bottom so that one can connect the tonearm cable was evidently a huge pain--and probably not recommended. My second pod will have the tonearm sit directly on the pod as well, but the top hole will be cut wide enough to accommodate various tonearms (didn't think of that the first go around, Nandric). For each tonearm, he will fabricate a new 'collar' so that the base of the tonearm will fit snugly into the pod's hole. So, I guess that collar will act like your plate. For the second pod, I proposed that he fabricate separate plates that would be mounted on an adjustable rod connected to the pod, but he said that that would be more difficult. I didn't argue. Dear Nandric: do you believe making the pod out of brass makes a significant difference? If so, perhaps I'll tell him to do that if he hasn't already made it. I see though that brass is pretty expensive compared to SS. |
During my project keeping it simple was the objective and not having to get machinists or other people involved. It was a DIY project to see if I liked the sound. My next step would have been to make a nicer arm pod with the help of a machinist and other folks. It sounds so good to me however that this will not be necessary. This approach allowed me to get intimately involved with the materials and setup.
As the guide says - the key is getting your tonearm base on the plate. What do your tonearms arms sit on now? Are they attached directly to the plinth or on a separate plate that attaches to the plinth. For me I had hardwoods that I had already experimented with when I used a plinth. Common options are maple, oak, birch, acrylic, but even panzerholtz or metal can be considered. I went to home depot and picked up 3 and 4 inch wide solid pieces of wood in varying thicknesses and cut the length from it required for my tonearm. The entire lenghths of the wood themselves were about $8.00.
Both the tonearm bases for my ET and VPI JMW 12" arm are shaped like a closed letter U so a rectangular piece of wood worked well.
As per the instructions in the guide I left extra wood on each side for two machine bolts - this is how the tonearm plate attaches to the actual armpod. Then the shape of the armpod becomes your choice as long at the plate fits within it.
The tonearm gets attached to the plate first - then the plate is simply attached to the armpod with the two bolts. The guide stresses making sure your plate is thick enough to accept the tonearm bolt/s without protruding thus allowing a flush fit with the armpod.
|
Dear Banquo, A local machinist with an CNC lathe would be ideal. In particular for the tonearms with a collar because
such an armpod need to be milled from,say, solid brass. Ie
a 'sandwich' arm pod with different layers is more difficult to make. For such a machinist our 'DIY' person needs only a good drawing with exact dimensions because the
machinist can order any kind of material for the purpose.
This kind of 'construction' will need a plate with the hole
for the arm with the obvious advantage : different plates=
different tonearms. For the plate one can use acryl, aluminium, steel, etc. but I personaly would use solid brass for the 'base' because of the weight (demping).
Regards, |
An alternative to DIY or a mass manufacturer is locating a local machinist who can do the work. That's what I did. The machinist marks the middle ground between the other two options. My guy didn't charge me much more than the DIY option and mine required much more elaborate machining--it's all in one piece with no separate arm board. Having said that, if I had thought of Ct0517's 'simple' method, I would have probably opted for it. Of course, the simple method requires one to have an arm board, which I didn't have. |
Dear Nandric - I agree with you - my statement should have been clearer and implied "the end cost to us" when we finally get the product. I realize in a small market like this it must be very difficult for the manufacturers. |
Dear Ct0517, I agree in general about the 'extravagant prices' in analog domain but disagree that manufacturers are the primary cause. Those from abroad hardly get 30% of
the selling price. First there is the import duty +VAT,then
the importeur and then the dealer. Above this also the value of the national currency. I got my Reed arm pod for
less then $500 thanks to the EU and absence of dealers.
Regards, |
Dear Geoch
No offence taken.
Life is short and this hobby is one of the avenues that has allowed me get into the right frame of mind to help deal with my real family and work challenges. We have all probably done what others would call "extreme things" in our hobby. I have a problem with speakers. 7 pairs in 3 systems and I just brought home Wayne PK Quad 57's to try out.
Those of us using this approach will not be offended if you try it and do not like it in your set up. We are content. Unless you can suggest a better way and we will be all over it. I know I would be.
When you go to some of these web sites and see what just a couple of manufacturers charge for these isolated armpods. They are thousands of dollars with no cartridge. |
Geoch,
I see your reservations and hope you ultimately resolve them to your satisfaction. However, in line with Ct0517's comment, I would stress that your ssuggestion that "our limited knowlege about interactive materials & mechanics & thats the reason we accept the isolation as 'the only way' (but is not the right one)" is off the mark.
No one is suggesting that this is the "only" way. Those of us who have tried it do, however, suggest that it is "THE BEST WAY WE HAVE EVER TRIED AND/OR HEARD." |
Dear Ct0517,
Of course it sounds great, the best we've heard till now, e.t.c. But still, it is just a way of giving a fight with what we have, and the results are quick and the success is great... And we are in danger to follow the wrong direction because of this.
Please let me apologise. It was not my intention to provoke or showing disrespect. I admire no less than you the experimentation. |
Dear Geoch - regarding your comment on the armboard. This thread has really nothing to do with our knowledge on this or that - the thread is about people in this hobby trying something and letting their ears decide if it sounds good to them.
To them it has provided priceless passion and satisfaction.
Do you not trust your ears ? For amount of effort and time this takes to setup your response is well "just watching your findings " ?
All high end manufacturers use this concept. |
I tend to disagree regarding the space between the musicians on stage. My estimation is that with every added gain stage, the apparent body of every individual instrument, becomes bigger. I confirm that the perception of ambience becomes more impressive also and the music surrounds the listener.
But these bodies starting to touch each other closing the empty space between them. This fact alone is enough to put me in doubt about the validation of my (monoblock, batt. PSU, single stage, DHT, with Hytron OOA) active line stage and so, I've disconnected it permanently in favour of a buffered pot. These days I'm in search for a high output cartridge, in order to investigate if this apply also to the phonostage and is worth to retire my (dual-mono, batt. PSU, current mode, with Tele CCa) active pre-pre.
Some speakers don't like this approach, sounding dry & empty, as like they loosing harmonics. But at the same time, the depth, illumination, clarity and especially the definition of every instrument & every single note, becomes unveiled & exposed and maybe not so appealing in their nudity. In my search for an antidote, I've found the VDH "The Mountain" interconnect between pre/power (RIAA/power in my case) that recovers the presence by attaching importance to the substance of each note.
Regarding the armboard, I'm taking Lew's side & just watching your findings for the moment. I believe that we are not capable of integrate it to the bearing's chassis due to our limited knowlege about interactive materials & mechanics & thats the reason we accept the isolation as the only way (but is not the right one). |
ArmPod Instructions - 1,2,3
This is for those that have been reading this thread, are interested in trying this out, but may need some help with it.
I have put together a short document to help with it. You are welcome to it - just send me an email and I will forward you a copy.
It covers.
1) How tall does the armpod need to be.
2) What shape do you want your Arm Pod to be ?
3) Acquiring materials
4) Tools for Holes
5) Drilling Holes on Metal
6) Assembling the ARMPOD
Thx for the pre-edits and feedback Banquo.
This project rates a 3 / 10 difficulty - about the same as assembling IKEA furniture, will cost you $100 and can get completed in a weekend. You can even get someone else to do the drilling of holes for you. I bet you will be so happy with it (sonically) that you may not even want a more expensive one unless you need some eye candy.
I was going to put some bullets into a post here but quickly realized that wasn't going to cut it.
Cheers Chris |
Pryso,
Apologies, it should have read: "Mighty oak trees from small acorns (rants) grow".
I tend to be posting before 7am local time and I think this is affecting things. Apologies and thanks again. |
Pryso,
Thanks for your valued reflections. I think they develop another dimension of Raul's reference to the distinction between the close mic'ed recording (as relayed to the home stationed audiophile) and the sitting position of the live spectator. I slightly drifted from the point in my initial reply to Raul. However, I find it fascinating.
I'm not sure who came first, HP or Martin Colloms, but the issue about soundstage as a criteria for judging ones hifi has been a fairly standard one since them. I do think your reflections on the importance of sitting position are critical for the general issue of perceptions of staging.
Beyond that, I think that your reflections on the impact of new recording techniques (some popular experiences of which I am still recovering from) provide much food for thought.
Might oak trees for small acorns (rants) grow.
Thanks |
Raul,
Just to add that I am aware that I have drifted somewhat from your response in my reply but would note that my comment is based on my slight preoccupation with acoustic spaces and psychoacoustic factors.
I think the issues of distinct venues and quality of performances on distinct occasions still undermine my moments of certainty that I have captured "a" live event. This rears its head in my concern over distinction between listening rooms and performance venues in my reply. Of course, as your response points out, that is only one aspect to consider when addressing the authenticity of our hifi experience. |
Raul,
I totally agree and, I suppose, have tried to suggest some of that in my comments. I suppose I did not really note the importance of differences between the individual listening room and concert hall on scale/volume and acoustic behaviour and how this alone impacts on attempts to exactly reproduce the live experience of a large number of recordings. I have tried to reflect on this on other threads but not so well in my above outburst, which was fueled largely by tiredness and irritability I think.
Nevertheless, my views that there are clear distinctions and that there are inevitable psychacoustic factors when reproducing performances through hifi are getting form and clarification through some of the interesting responses that it is raising and yours is a well considered and much appreciated one.
Many thanks again |
Ralph, I believe there is one more factor in the perception of three-dimensionality or spaciousness -- how close one sits for a live performance. One season as an experiment I chose different seating locations for each of a half-dozen concerts by our local symphony. The variations in sonic effect were sobering. Unless I was front-center, I din't hear the live spatiality I hear in some recordings.
I think a major influence in the awareness/desirability of soundstage and spaciousness was Harry Pearson at TAS. Those descriptions could be counted upon with every review he wrote. Then I learned that his preferred seat at Carnegie Hall (and I must suppose other venues) was row 2 or 3, dead center. Well, that explained a lot.
Now, how ironic that most older recordings were made with 1-3 primary mics which were better able to capture the natural sonic space of the program, even when home audio equipment did not product it so well. But currently with (some) improvements in the equipment which better allow spatiality to be reproduced, everything is multi-multi mic'ed and channel mixed so that artificial reverb must be added to provide any sense of three-dimensionality. |
Dear Dgob: What we hear at home through our each one audio system is what microphones " heard " and that are way near the " stage/venues " that our seat position in the music hall.
In the other side the " micros " are not only sensitive but with wider frequency range that ours ears. As a fact there are many reasons why we heard what we heard at home against in live concerts and its differences.
regards and enjoy the music,
raul. |
Atmasphere,
Thanks for your thoughts on the matter and - I think - I agree. My early morning comments were confused at best. Acoustic space/venue; the method of delivery (location and quality of microphones, amps and/or speakers); proximity to performers and the quality of the relevant recording are the most important things concerning imaging and staging. My distraction was with psychoacoustics and what we listen for when playing hifi.
Ironically, I suspect it was the question of un-natural recordings that initiated my outpourings here: I have recently been treated to a diet of some overly produced (what I am reliably informed is) popular music with my children - Madonna most memorably. I think we can put aside 'system limitations concerning low level and ambient detail' here: not withstanding your interesting experiences and views.
More awake and a little less short
Thanks |
It seems that in a live performance one is very rarely (if ever) as acoustically aware of space between musicians or their three dimensionality. My suspicion is that hifi compensates for the visual stimuli that is provided in a live performance with the over emphasis of these audible features. Small ensemble acoustic or vocal performances might be the occasional exceptions to this. Its been my impression that there are several things that can contribute to this- how a recording is made (many are un-natural) and how well its details are reproduced. For this subject though, let's throw out the un-natural recordings, at least for now. What I have have found is that as a system looses the ability to reproduce low level detail (and consequently ambient information) the result is that the musicians in the ensemble tend to have a quality if a cardboard facsimile rather than the real person. So spaces between the instruments are larger, making the individual instruments seem to be in greater relief. Now as the system attains greater ability to reproduce ambient information, that information tends to flesh out the performers and fill the spaces in between. This causes the soundstage to *seem* less distinct, until one realizes how much more reflection information is being reproduced! Of course in a real music situation, the ambient information is seamless with the instruments themselves, but I think a lot has to do with the space in which the music occurs. Having done a lot of recording and listening in such spaces locally, I don't think I can agree with the comments in quotes, at least with the recordings I have heard- I hear the imaging information quite easily in those rooms and halls, whether live or recorded! |
Raul,
Thanks and I look forward to reading it. I have also posted a comment on my System page about which I have questions. It would be interesting to hear other views on my uncertainty. Anyway, a paraphrase of what I posted there is:
"Following my above appraisal of the detached and nude set up, I should just add that I feel slightly sensitive to (or curious about) the psychoacoustic elements in hifi. For example, I am not certain if the issues of soundstage and of imaging are genuine/completley authentic.
It seems that in a live performance one is very rarely (if ever) as acoustically aware of space between musicians or their three dimensionality. My suspicion is that hifi compensates for the visual stimuli that is provided in a live performance with the over emphasis of these audible features. Small ensemble acoustic or vocal performances might be the occasional exceptions to this.
Just food for thought and a reflection on the hifi norms to which I refered in my above appraisal.
Thoughts welcomed" |
Dear Dgob: I will do it, I share your same interest on the subject.
regards and enjoy the music,
raul. |
Dear Lew, Thanks for your kindness but I have a fitter(?) or technician with an lathe who already made some tonearm
parts for me. Besides if I needed an second arm pod I would
order by Vidmantas. But I can at last give you some advice.
Because we both own the Reed and the Triplanar I know what
you need to do if you intend to experiment with the'nacked objects'. You need just a bar of brass ,10cm wide, with 3
holes with thread on each side. Your sevings will be such
that you can afford the most exotic spikes one can imagine.
Regards,
Regards, |
Raul,
I would dearly love to give it another whirl and so any feedback might enduce me to do so.
Thanks |
Ebm if interested email me
I will let you know the steps to produce a basic arm pod / board for your setup. |
In the US there is an on-line business that can sell you a solid brass, bronze, stainless steel, or alu cylinder in your choice of diameters and pre-cut to your desired length (=height). Here is one page of their website that I have been looking at for armboard material:
http://www.onlinemetals.com/merchant.cfm?id=809&step=2&top_cat=79
Nandric, if you want me to buy a brass cylinder for you and ship it to you, I will be happy to do that. Or perhaps they will ship to you direct. |
Dear Dgob: I can see why you ask for other opinions on the MF-100.
regards and enjoy the music,
Raul. |
|
My apologies Banquo.
Actually I sort of understand how you feel as I travel between two properties weekly these days and only have vinyl set up at one. My TNT is too cumbersome to move there.
Considering the material needed for an armpod can be picked up, cut and ready to go by evening I am seriously considering another DD unit to set up plintless there with armpod.
|
Lewm,
I have posted a couple of photo's of the arm tower arrangement under the headings 'Arm Tower AS' on my System page. |
Dear Lew, I think that an arm pod for a 9'' tonearm is more
difficult to make then for 10'' or 12'' arms; one need to
cut the part near the platter. But more interesting is the
question about the material and construction. On my Kuzma
Stabi Ref. Kuzma used a sandwich of two layers acryl and
one of aluminium between them for the plinth and two layers for the armbase; aluminium (1x), acryl (1x). But for
his XL model he used only brass. The XL is all about the
mass (demping?) but the esthetics was obviosly also important. I wish I could afford one. BTW the TT and the arm pod are seldom offered second hand in contrdisticion to
the linear arm. As I mentioned elswhere my Reed arm pod is
made from different layers : steel (2x);cork (2x); granite
(2x) and acryl (1x). So it seems to me that there are 3
possibilitys: mass demping, no demping and sandwich constructions of various kinds.
Regards, |
Lewm,
I will post photo's of the arm tower as soon as I can and let you know.
If you look at the design of Halcro's armpod, you can see how an off-set mounting hole can allow great flexibility (even more than my current arrangement) for mounting and locating any tonearm. Something for the future maybe. |
Banquo363/Chris.
Apologies for the mix up on the AT616 and arm tower issue: a mix of old age and inattentiveness I fear.
Lewm,
Both my arms are 9" or less and work perfectly on the Technics SP10 Mk2. Don't let concerns about size stop you trying this all out. It's definitely worth it. |
Dear Lewm/Pryso: Thank you, appreciate that.
regards and enjoy the music,
Raul. |
A 9" arm can work but some acrobatics need to take place. IIRC, part of my pod needs to be directly below the sp10's skirt in order for it to work.
Dgob: I was the one who wanted to try an AT 616 underneath my pod. It was just a thought since I have an extra footer and wanted to make use of it. I haven't tried it yet since my TT (and I) is in purgatory.
Chris: don't tease me. Since I took my TT in for repairs, I have bought the AT 616's, another tonearm, 3 carts, 2 tonearm wires, 4 headshells, and had 2 pods designed and fabricated all geared towards a sp10 that may or may not ever be repaired. Deadline is the end of this month. Either I get it back or I go shopping for another one (hope that one works!). |
Raul, and others interested in low cost laser levels -
This site offers a model that looks like mine with a slightly different model #, CL6062. Price is $19.95 There may be other sellers.
http://www2.dealtime.com/lazerpro-cl2062/products |
Good info Lewn - I dont have a 9" arm. A dis-advantage of the ET arm is it sits too close to the platter and does not allow for a ring - if u wanted to experiment. |
Chris, FYI a Triplanar, and probably other 9-inch tonearms where the pivot is offset to the right of the vertical mounting shaft (e.g., 9-inch Reed or Talea), is virtually unusable with SP10 due to that "skirt", unless you can tolerate a really weird angle when the tonearm is at rest such that it extends over the right front corner of the chassis. Yes, a straight-line tonearm like yours does work fine with SP10, plinth or no plinth.
Raul, for the heck of it I went to the Home Depot website. There I searched under "laser level" and found 5 pages of choices at prices ranging from less than $20 (per Pryso) to more than $1000! |
Dear Lewn you wrote.
BUT, what tonearms are you guys using? Given the rather large square "skirt" that surrounds the platter of the SP10 and the space needed for an outboard arm pod, it would seem to me that this can only be done with tonearms that are at least 10-inchers and longer, pivot to stylus. Yes?
I would think anyone pursuing this wants the advantage of using any arm they want. My VPI pivot arm is 12 so I cant verify this but considering there is no real estate constraint here other than your actual platform, your armpod need only be big enough to accept the bolts that the tonearm attaches to and you can place it anywhere on your platform that it lines up. Maybe Raul, Dgob, or Banquo can verify the 9 tonearm ?
I realize there are some on this thread that do not support the ET and/or linear air line bearing arms in general so I am saying this for those reading with ETs as there are quite a number of us out there.
This combo sp10 / ET arm is a natural fit as both have straight edges. Alignment could not be any easier. The ETs multi adjustments allow it to be mounted on whichever side of the sp10 you may want it on. If you look at my link in the previous post you will see it was on the other side when I used a plinth. The space between the sp10 and ET arm collar is 2 credit cards.
Dear Nandric that Kuzma XL air line tonearm you mention sure reminds me of another tonearm?
Dear Dgob I agree with what Rail said about using the 616s for an arm pod they squish when pressed much like the feet of my VPI TNT table. I would have tried it anyway if I could to hear regardless there are no rules of engagment here but my armboard is 12 inches long and 4 inches wide on 3 spikes. Note the ET arm will fit easily on a heavy brass 3 inch or bigger round armpod.
FWIW - AT616 versus my previous setup Mapleshade Spikes - too close to tell really but the 616s are adjustable so there - I believe any real $$ should go into a better armpod anyway supporting the theory 75% armpod 25% plinthless DD TT as the reason for the sound improvement.
Cheers Chris |
Raul, From where you are, I would go on-line at Sears or Home Depot or even eBay, and just order by mail. If that's not possible, let me know. |
Dear pryso: Where can I find it?, thank you in advance.
regards and enjoy the music,
Raul. |
Dear Nandric, For what it's worth, there is no argument (because I have stopped arguing), and there is no winner (because the outcome is subjective). If you've noticed, I am not posting here as regards my opinion on outboard tonearms and plinth-less SP10s. (The SP10 and Henry's Victor seem to be the two tables for which there are subjective data, plus Nicola's Kuzma.) Further, I will keep my mouth shut until I try it myself.
BUT, what tonearms are you guys using? Given the rather large square "skirt" that surrounds the platter of the SP10 and the space needed for an outboard arm pod, it would seem to me that this can only be done with tonearms that are at least 10-inchers and longer, pivot to stylus. Yes?
Dgob, I wish I could see a photo of your set-up. |
