2. analog
  3. 1266367593

Are linear tracking arms better than pivoted arms?

My answer to this question is yes. Linear tracking arms trace the record exactly the way it was cut. Pivoted arms generally have two null points across the record and they are the only two points the geometry is correct. All other points on the record have a degree of error with pivoted arms. Linear tracking arms don't need anti-skating like pivoted arms do which is another plus for them.

Linear tracking arms take more skill to set up initially, but I feel they reward the owner with superior sound quality. I have owned and used a variety of pivoted arms over the years, but I feel that my ET-2 is superior sounding to all of them. You can set up a pivoted arm incorrectly and it will still play music. Linear tracking arms pretty much force you to have everything correct or else they will not play. Are they worth the fuss? I think so.
mepearson

Showing 3 responses by cjfrbw

cjfrbw
148 posts
 
"See - in most every high-end device there are 2 or 3 custom-built/designed and extremely expensive parts that are built by a division of the NASA or at least by a very special secret JAN-company which usually would never manufacture them due to cost reasons."

Don't forget the magic pixie dust.
cjfrbw
148 posts
 
There is as much if not more subjectivity with "real" as there is with "sounds good". If you really want the ravings of the self anointed, the "absolute sound" guys take the cake.
At least the "sounds good" guys know what they like, the "absolute sound" guys can be parading royalty, dictating to the heathens.
cjfrbw
148 posts
 
The "absolute sound" guys are like the celebrity gossips who claim to know what celebrities are thinking and feeling, without the celebrities themselves chiming in to say what is really going on. Exquisite BS.
The "absolute sound" implies that a listener goes to live music, has a perfect tape recorder in his/her head that allows perfect recovery of the original event, then can perfectly compare it with a reproduction, without consulting the original musician who performed the piece who actually knows the sound of his/her own instrument for comparison.
I would imagine most musicians would find an "absolute sound" type critic pretty laughable. I imagine that Brad Pitt or Angenlina Jolie would react in dismay at the typical gossip monger claiming to know their thoughts, feelings and intentions.
You hear musicians all the time who lament that recorded sound never captures the essential character of their instruments. Even head bangers are upset when their ripping, tearing, metallic chaos is improperly rendered by recorded sources. A musician who has a good idea of what his own instrument is supposed to sound like, may not have a very good idea of what everybody else's instruments are supposed to sound like.
Add to this mystery the spices added by the engineers of the recording booth, then the "absolute sound" critic is engaging a solipsistic pretense that a particular individual can discern any kind of "absolute sound".
It may be easy to distinguish the sound of a Yamaha piano from a Steinway from a recorded source, but that doesn't mean that a recording sounds like either absolute instrument.
Many "absolute sound" guys tend to go to live performances of classical music, and then decide that because they have elevated sensibilities by doing so, they then are on a higher plane when judging stereo systems and components.
The best stereo system for rendering the sound of an oboe might be a pair of oboe shaped speakers. Those speakers might be incredibly dismal at portraying any other kind of music, or hopeless at portraying groups of musicians in space.
So whether the "absolute sound" exists as a theoretical construct, the barriers to attaining such a condition are so relentlessly unfavorable that those who claim this skill are more in the category of the "smug delusional" than the "absolute sound."
More to discover