I own both a unipivot and linear air-bearing tonearm - Scheu Tacco & Cartridge Man Conductor, respectively. For what it's worth, I found the Conductor to be easier to fine tune than the unipivot, but that partly has to do with Scheu's design. Musically, they are two different beasts, both very satisfying.
I own a Grado "The Statement" like Mepearson, spectacular cart when dialed in. I also have a Denon DL-103D. |
Wow Phil, thanks for the great ride through a specific point of time in audio history. Reading your post really allowed me to feel a small portion of what it must have been like at the time - very exciting.
Unfortunately, it's just left me wanting to hear more! |
Aaaah, to be able to afford a high quality table with two tonearms, a phono w/ dual inputs, and two of each cartridge. Then, I could directly compare linear-tracking versus other types.
Now, what about "Bi-Axis Inertia Controlled Dynamic Balance Type Tonearm" like the Dynavector DV-507 mkII? |
How about the Dynavector DV-507 mkII? How does that, and it's "Bi-Axis Inertia Controlled Dynamic Balance ", rate against the other top pivoted arms? |
02-19-10: Rauliruegas
This alone characteristic where IMHO the pivot tonearms are superior makes a difference: this bass range frequency is the foundation of the music and it is here where tiny differences makes the difference of course if we own a system that can play clean in that bass frequency range. 02-19-10: Mepearson
Well Raul, I own a system that "can play clean in that bass frequency range." While many of us may have components capable of producing these low frequencies - I'd guess very, very, few have rooms with dimensions and/or extensive acoustic treatments that allow the accurate reproduction of those lower frequencies. |
Agreed, Raul. But clean reproduction of the fundamental note and it's harmonics, across the entire frequency range, is a direct function room dimensions and acoustic treatments. I'd guess that most rooms are subject to serious modal ringing and suckouts without such treatment. Multiple subwoofers placed unevenly around the room can help mitigate much of the problems, but ~4 are often necessary. Offhand, something like reviewer Mike Levigne's room is what would be needed to for truly accurate response. It would be interesting to see frequency and decay plots of different reviewer's and audiophiles rooms. I think people would be extremely surprised to see what's really going on in their rooms. |
02-21-10: Dertonarm
we can still strive for perfection in audio reproduction even if we will never approach it...Not sitting in an acoustical perfect room should in no way keep one from trying to bring or lure the best possible performance from its equipment. Absolutely, I agree. I'm just pointing out that accurate reproduction of low frequencies(actually all) is probably pretty rare without proper room dimensions and/or extensive acoustic treatment. What we perceive to be "clean bass" and what actually is, can be two different things. Sounds like Mepearson has done of a good job of getting his room out of the way of the music. From personal experience, I had a hell of time trying to tame my old 25'x16'x8'living room(just for music) by speaker positioning alone. I had free will to place everything wherever I wanted in the room(being single and all). And that was with dual subwoofers placed non-symmetrically around the room. I never really won the acoustics battle. After looking a photos of a lot of professional reviewers rooms, I have to seriously question their ability to discern individual audio component frequency reproduction anomalies from their acoustic environment. And when they talk about the accuracy, or inaccuracy, of low frequency reproduction...Well, the brain is obviously a very powerful machine. |
02-22-10: Larryi
However, the pivot and fulcrum mechanical advantage means much less force is needed to move the arm around the pivot point as compared to dragging a very heavy (in the horizontal plain) linear tracking arm. Again, this is just the THEORY; whether this actually translates into a meaningful issue is another matter. Exactly, I wonder if this is really significantly so in the real world? Is there even a way to measure this lateral force/stress on the cantilever/motor assembly? |
Has anyone compared recent linear and pivot tonearms on a 2-arm TT at the same time w/ the same cartridge for an A/B comparison? What did you notice?
I guess the affiliated question would be - are there cartridges that work equally as well on the two? Even within the pivot world, some carts sound better on one arm than another.
In the case of lateral force issues mentioned about linear arms, is this more a of mechanical/longevity concern or one of noticeable sonics, too?
Has anyone ever had a cartridge wear out more quickly or be damaged by this lateral force of a linear arm?
I find this whole discussion very, very, interesting and educational and would like to thank all the experienced participants for helping those of us novices understand the issues in layman terms. |
02-25-10: Dertonarm
We need to eliminate the progression from the stylus.
This can be done, but will be really expensive, as it can not deal with linear progression, but need to be in short-time-loop with the real groove-spacing of the LP on the platter...Once this is done, the full theoretical advantage of the linear tonearm will be obtained.
What still will be an issue after that problem is eliminated, remains the less than perfect stiffness and hardness of the bearing. Technically, there are several readily-available solutions used in other industries that make these tracking/error/stiffness concerns a non-issue. Atmasphere has discussed them before in other threads. Surprisingly, he suggested the same components that I had decided on, myself. The real work is in the control system for the mechanisms. |
03-01-10: Dertonarm
I haven't seen yet a linear tonearm really taking into account the way the suspension system of any cartridge is working. Great explanation of the lateral forces, Dert. It would be interesting to know if this heightened lateral force in linear trackers results in increased distortion and/or cartridge suspension/motor wear & damage. It would be nice to hear from cartridge manufacturers if they'd noticed any wear on their retip/repairs unique to carts used with linear arms. While that force may be greater, it may not actually affect performance/longevity in the real world. Although, I'd find that hard to believe if it is as significant as it seems. |
Hi Danwkw,
Correct me if I'm wrong, but you tried the same cart on two different tables and arms, but never on the same table with both arms?
So, your test was PC-1/Conductor/Das Laufwerk, then PC-1/Ortofon AS-212/Acoustic Solid Wood?
But never PC-1/Conductor/Das Laufwerk, then PC-1/Ortofon AS-212/Das Laufwerk or PC-1/Ortofon AS-212/Acoustic Solid Wood, then PC-1/Conductor/Acoustic Solid Wood?
That's two completely different turntable designs of completely different materials (Scheu's delrin/acrylic vs Acoustic Solid's wood/aluminum).
How do you separate out the the influence of the turntable from that of the tonearms in that test?
BTW, I own a Scheu Premier MK2 w/ the upgraded 80mm platter and their flagship Tacco tonearm AND the Cartridge Man Conductor linear-air bearing arm. Unfortunately, the Premier I own is not a 2-arm version, so I can't do both at the same time.
I wish I could, then I'd just get another Denon DL-103D and see for myself, or a couple of Music Makers. |
02-26-10: Danwkw
Yes, Darkmoebius, Scheu with Conductor and Acoustic Solid with Ortofon I forgot to mention that the Das Laufwerk is a dream table for me, I would love to own one(especially in slate). I also came very, very, close to owning an Acoustic Solid "One" a few years back, but could not find a reliable way to have it crated and shipped cross country. Both are great manufacturers. |
02-27-10: Dertonarm
I would even say it neglects fundamental aspects of mechanic and physic. But nothing in physics can be obvious enough not to be questioned if it doesn't fit the preference of an audiophile. Must have been a test of true insight and scientific brilliance.
Oh my. Main Entry: snarky Pronunciation: \ˈsnär-kē\ Function: adjective Etymology: dial. snark to annoy, perhaps alteration of nark to irritate Date: 1906 1 : crotchety, snappish 2 : sarcastic, impertinent, or irreverent in tone or manner — snark·i·ly \-kə-lē\ adverb |
03-01-10: Frogman
Never have I experienced a problem with cartridge/cantilever wear that I can attribute to the arm. That, is the million dollar question. Unless this greater lateral force can be proven to cause increased distortion or cartridge wear, it is really a non-issue outside of the theoretical realm. In which case, it all boils down to what sounds best in each particular system and owner's mind. I think I might make a few inquiries tomorrow with some reputable cartridge manufacturers/repairers to see if they've noticed excessive or unusual wear due to linear tracking arms. |
Dertonarm, I wrote: "That, is the million dollar question. Unless this greater lateral force can be proven to cause increased distortion or cartridge wear, it is really a non-issue outside of the theoretical realm" Now, in this particular case, there are two possible outcomes to this "million dollar question": 1) the increased lateral force does not produce increased distortion and/or cartridge wear, 2) the increased lateral force does produce increased distortion and/or cartridge wear If outcome #1 is true, then I think that such force is a non-issue and it all comes down to personal preference as to what sounds best. But, if outcome #2 is true, then I(obviously) think that such force IS AN ISSUE beyond personal preference of sound. I don't think many people want to intentionally subject their cartridges to excessive wear/damage. I hinted that I might contact manufacturers/repairers because they would be the best suited to judge if, and when, a cart is out of spec or damaged - not just from a technical perspective, but also from a statistical one because their sample pool is likely to much larger than that of an individual audiophile. |
03-04-10: Hiho
I forgot the mention another solution such as the Thales arm that is a combination of pivot and linear tracker by self adjust to tangency in a PASSIVE system. Very clever indeed. Thanks for the mention of the Thales tonearm, I'd never even heard of it - some very interesting reading. |
03-05-10: C1ferrari
The Thales arm reminds me of the Garrard Zero table/arm combo that I had in college I was just reading this website which gives does a decent job of describing the Garrard Zero 100 & 100SB turntables/tonearm and how the Thales type arm derives from that. |
03-05-10: Atmasphere
The Sayles arm looks brilliant. Now can we have a version that puts the bearings in the plane of the LP? Question for the engineers/techies: does the composite of the three points of movement in the Thales arm ( shown here) somehow create a theoretical bearing in line with LP? Especially since one is above the plane of the record and another well below the plane as shown in this picture? |
|
Ok, I phoned techs at both Grado and Soundsmith (since they also do retipping) if they have found that linear tracking arms cause excessive wear and/or damage to cartridges.
Both techs were fairly clear in saying "no", given that the arms are properly set up(level, etc). The only caveat offered is that there could possibly be more issues with highly compliant carts as compared to medium compliant ones.
If anyone is in the same time zone as the European and Japanese cart manufacturers(ZYX, Dynavector, Shelter, Koetsu, Van de Hul, Benz Micro, etc) give them a call see what they have to say.
I just want to know if premature or excessive wear/damage due to modern linear arms is common since I own both linear and pivoted arms. |
03-11-10: Mepearson
The counter-argument is that people who have long term experience with a cartridge used in an air bearing arm that has shown no visible symptoms of damage may not believe that the theoretical problem exists. I don't think that accurately summarizes the counter-argument. I think most(or all) of us agree/accept Dertonarm's excellent description of why linear arms must exert greater lateral force on a cartridge's cantilever and motor assembly. The question for us is: Does this greater force result in premature wear or excessive damage to most cartridges? Dertonarm has offered his personal, subjective, experiences as proof that they do. Others, you included, have offered their own personal, subjective, experiences that it doesn't. At this point, I'd only like to know from cartridge manufacturers or retippers what their observations are since they talk to hundreds of owners and see a lot of worn/damaged carts. I would guess that in a significant number of cases, they speak to or correspond with cart owners as to what type of arm they are using. Perhaps, over the years, they have had a number of carts returned for service with deflected cantilevers, improperly worn stylus, or damaged motor assemblies and a significant number of those owners used linear arms. Maybe they have not, and that would be telling in it's own right. I can assure you that if the Grado tech said they had noticed a large number of repairs for linear owners over the years, I would not use my "The Statement" on my Cartridge Man Conductor arm. I love that cart and it was an expensive purchase, for me. Even still, if I hear from a number of other manufacturers that linears cause more damage, I will stop using the Conductor. |
Correction: Instead of saying At this point, I'd only like to know from cartridge manufacturers or retippers what their observations are I meant to say "At this point, the deciding factor for me is the observations of cartridge manufacturers or retippers" with regard to real world wear and tear on carts. |
Aaah, duly noted. Sorry about the mistake, Mepearson.
I'm really ambivalent on the subject as far as sonic performance, whichever works best. My pivot arm actually costs more than my linear, so it's not a matter of defending a precious investment. |
03-11-10: Mepearson
As far as cartridge manufacturers giving us any meaningful info on this debate, I am old enough to be cynical enough to think that we couldn't depend on it. Aside from the issues that manufacturers may have no idea what type of tonearm was tracking their cartridge before it was sent back for a rebuild, politics and money are pervasive in everything. Even if it was true, I don't know that cartridge manufacturers would tell you that using a linear tracking arm will shorten the life of your cartridge. Not only do they have to worry about lost sales to potential linear tracking arm customers, they would also most likely incur the wrath of linear tracking tonearm manufacturers. My experience with most manufacturers of a wide range of audio components has found most of them to be fairly straightforward, if not strongly opinionated, about what does and does not work best with their components. In the case of Grado, I was up front that I already own their "The Statement" cart(w/ low hours) and both a quality linear and pivoted arm, my only concern was with doing premature or unnecessary damage to it. The was clear there was no sale to be made, regardless of his view. I don't know about others, but whenever I talk to a manufacturer/dealer/repair person, I always make a point of telling them exactly what their product will be connected to. It would be foolish not to, just in case their is some relationship between it and a current, or future, problem. So far, I found almost all to give warning where a potential issue could arise, some have even recommended against buying their product because of incompatibility or problems. I have certainly been told when a cart IS NOT a good match for a tonearm and to look elsewhere. But, to minimize your valid concern in the future, I suggest others who may contact manufacturers/retippers on their continent do so with those whose products they already own and make clear that it isn't a potential sale inquiry, but rather one of maintenance/longevity. |
|
We need Jonathan Carr to chime on in this discussion. He designs cartridges for Lyra and used to post on some audio forms a few years ago. But, i can't remember which website.
I be he'd have a lot of insight to share on cartridge design, tolerances, forces, and tonearm factors.
Does anyone remember which audio website he posts on? I think his moniker used to be "J Carr" or something to that effect. For some reasons, I think he now only drops in on one of the DIY Audio boards. |
03-14-10: Dertonarm
But by now I finally realize that I am only spoiling the party here. Not at all, I think most of us(even linear-arm owners) see your contribution as refreshing, insightful, and highly educational. Nor do I think anyone disagrees with your mechanical and physical description of the forces at work within the two discussed tonearm designs. I think some disagreement may stem from your patent rejection of the subjective listening experiences of others while offering up your own as law. Compare these responses of yours: 03-10-10: Dertonarm
Individual - yet subjective empirical... - audiophile impressions versus mechanical laws.....
03-11-10: Dertonarm
You are referring to days long gone by while using a phrase abused today. However - long term subjective observations are always subjective.
Logic - isn't it ? With this statement: 03-14-10: Dertonarm
Most linear trackers du built up a big, fat but soft and not really low bass which might sound fascinating with certain set-ups, but not if your woofers go really down and not if the set-up is able to provide air, freshness and color, speed and minute detail in the lower registers. As of yet, we've had no convincing(non-subjective) proof that properly set up, modern, linear-tracking tonearms actually: a) cause premature or excessive cartridge wear/damage, b) cause increased distortion due to excessive lateral force to the cantilever/motor assembly. I have no doubt you PERCEIVE a pivot's greater "speed, inner details, maximum dynamics and tight, hard punch...air, freshness and color, speed and minute detail in the lower registers" versus linear tonearms "big, fat but soft and not really low bass" in your(or all) systems, but as you so succinctly said above long term subjective observations are always subjective.
Logic - isn't it ? Now, if you have frequency response and waterfall decay charts or the response by the two(or more) different tonearm setups in your room with the same cartridge, that's an entirely different ball of wax, altogether. Regardless, I hope you will continue to participate in this thread, as your responses are the type that help elevate such discussions above the subjective "tit for tat" so often found on forums. I have sent an email to Jonathan Carr(of Lyra design fame) inviting him to offer his insight into cartridge design criterion and tolerances. Perhaps his insight can help illuminate other aspects of this discussion we've yet to delve into and clear up some others. I would love to hear from some other cart designers, too. |
03-14-10: C1ferrari
Somewhat off topic, but I'm rather curious...have you listened to analogue reel-to-reel masters (or close to them)? The sound is/has the potential to be exquisite and the experience - revelatory! There are a few threads here in Audiogon's Analog forum dedicated to Reel To Reel playback" 1. Why Not Bring Back Analog, Reel to Reel Tape 2. Tape Project Tapes And, Albert Porter who has participated in this thread has a discussion of his Ampex 351 ProjectDo a search of the Analog forum for "reel to reel", there are a lot threads. |
03-15-10: Dertonarm
Hi Darkmoebius...
My sonic descriptions (I knew that would be coming back against me.... ;-)....) were done to "illustrate" the sonic results of the bearing rigidity and the mechanical problems in linear trackers. Aaaaah, gotcha, now I understand where you were coming from. |
03-16-10: Samujohn
Agreed. I also venture that tubes are prized by many because they like their gentle, well known, distortions. Just wait until Atmasphere gets a load of that line! |
03-17-10: Syntax
No audio product has ever succeeded because it was better, only because it was cheaper, smaller, or easier to use. Wilson Audio would beg to differ. Add to that Soundlab, Magneplanar, Krell, Pass Labs, Magico, Gryphon, etc. etc. |
03-17-10: Dertonarm
Darkmoebius, sorry to say in this context, that Syntax is right. While I do have respect for the brands you listed, the only "field" where the "better" succeeded for several millenia was ( and today it is beginning to change even here....) military/warfare.
In all other aspects related with demand and supply it was always the cheaper - or more easy to access or operate. I should have qualified my comment within the framework of high-end audio, where we've gone from 15wpc triode integrated console amplifiers and speakers to 4-box actively filtered preamplifiers and 6-8 ft full range speakers in the last 60 yrs. |
03-18-10: Dertonarm
Darkmoebius - and high-end went back all the way to the 1920/30ies and today you have 18W SE-Amplifiers (Lamm, WAVAC etc.) and super expensive full-range drivers and speakers which usually do outperform a Linkwitz-filtered 4 way speaker with a cross-over so complex that what the amplifier actually sees, is not a coil or a "load" but a black hole.....
Same with tonearms (hurray - we are back !!) - there are 30 and 40 year old designs which still can teach most "modern" designs a few things and do. Yes, being a SET and high(ish) efficiency owner, I agree. But a lot of the high-end seems follow an inverse law to what Syntax said above 03-17-10: Syntax
No audio product has ever succeeded because it was better, only because it was cheaper, smaller, or easier to use. I'm not sure, but I don't think there were the financial equivalent(adjusted for inflation) of $300k Goldmund Reference Turntables, $250k Transrotor Argos TT, $700k Wisdom Audio Infinite Grand speakers, $500k Moon Audio Titan speakers, $375k Goldmund Telos amplifer, $255k Wavac SH-833 amplifier or anything like this website sellsSeems to me that the highest end has gotten more expensive, larger, and not much easier to use. Some of the components at the link above don't seem too easy to setup or use. In general, though, Syntax's quote applies to just about everything technological - TV's, computers, commodity audio, cameras, etc. |
03-18-10: Dertonarm
Dear Darkmoebius, in teh early 1930ies you could order from H.H.Scott a "Quaranta". If you did so - and included all possible features including your own recording device with cutting lathe... - it would have cost you US$5000+ in the early 1930ies. Yowsa, that's a few mill in today's dollars! There were always options to spend real big money on audio. You could get AEG/Telefunken/Siemens or ERPI WE Mirrorphonic to built and set-up a cinema-like audio set-up in your private home. Bet that cost a few nickels, back in the day. |
