In the interest of full disclosure, I own a Souther, which is a liner tracker. I further state that I have owned it for years and am very happy with it and have no plans to replace it. However, I cannot agree that liner trackers are of necessity better.
Pivoted arms are well...fixed and steady. The liner arm sort of snakes its way along, never quite being steady. I once had a Phase Liner Turntable which used a servo controlled liner arm. It tracked the records well enough to avoid disaster, but never really sounded very good.
Also, I would like to point out that the Cantilever of many cartridges are very flexible and allow enough twist and general deformity to moot any discussion of exact angle. In short, general statements are not particularly helpful in such matters. |
Thanks Phil,
My Souther has been a stable, unfussy (after a very fussy set up), reliable tool, perched atop my SOTA Star for a decade. I does require cleaning on occasion (a five minute task) and must be absolutely level. My arm/turntable combination produces so little "grove rush" that on a good quality recording one has to look to see if a record or a CD is playing. Most of us do not live in a cost is no object world. I am grateful to designers like Lou Souther, who make products that give ordinary folks a glimpse of the best for a modest price. |
Thank you, Darkmoebius
"Has anyone ever had a cartridge wear out more quickly or be damaged by this lateral force of a linear arm?"
I have used my Souther for many years. Two years ago I sold my old Audio Technica AT150ML and purchased a new Audio technica 150MLX. The Audiogoner who purchased my old cartridge was very complementary in his feedback post concerning the condition and performance of his purchase.
Now I know this is anecdotal, and I do not keep strict track of my playing time, but still, if wear were a serious problem it seems I would know it by now. |
Atmosphere
"Short arm tubes such as seen in the Souther have two issues. The first is that the arm bearings cannot be in the plane of the LP so tracking pressure will change as warps and bass frequencies are negotiated. The second is that warps will cause wow."
My SOTA has vacuum disc clamping. Severely warped records will not suck down anyway, besides who plays warped records on a decent set up? So how much warp matters anyway? In the same vane, what sort of bass tracking are we talking about?
Wow is at a certain frequency range, or put another way, if I can't hear it, is it there?
regards,
Sam |
Re:Thegage
"I would agree (and the second link below seems to come to the same conclusion) that mechanical linear trackers (whether passive or active) do put excessive side force on the stylus, in a way that would lead to poor performance and quicker wear of the cartridge."
I have read every post so far, and I appreciate (accept) the theory that state of the art pivoted arms are currently better, but where is the evidence that this "poor performance and quicker wear of the cartridge" actually happens. I am beginning to suspect that the argument concerning the "best", is beginning to become the argument that the "other" in any form is unacceptably flawed. I protest. |
Well gee, if only three out of 350 get set up that will reveal the difference !!!!!
I get better odds in Las Vegas. |
Have we then decided that the charge against liner arms ".......(they) put excessive side force on the stylus, in a way that would lead to poor performance and quicker wear of the cartridge" is unsupported, and are now simply discussing the theory of the best tonearm design? |
So, my Souther mounted on a vacuum turntable does not cause excessive wear because I do not play warped records; or it does cause excessive wear, only I don't seem to be able to notice because.....................?
Or, is it more accurate to say that poorly designed liner arms, and arms out of adjustment, cause excessive wear, and liner arms are more likely to stress the cartridge tracking warped records than pivoted arms? |
I freely admit that I know next to nothing about either engineering or physics, however knowing nothing about a subject has never prevented a lawyer, like my humble self, from asking questions, or seeking precision in expression via words.
My inclination is to evidence not theory. I applaud Darkmoebius approach. Let those with evidence come forward. Theory is mere speculation. |
After the collapse of the Soviet Union a Western reporter asked Soviet scientist why Russia had so many theoretical physicists and so few experimental ones.
He replied- pencils are cheap! |
Yes, carefully controlled experiments are the scientific way. If available, they are the best evidence, however evidence has a hierarchy, at least in the legal world.
The highest standard is "beyond reasonable doubt". Granted, that is not the scientific way. However, a lower standard is, "by the preponderance of the evidence presented". We can all draw our own conclusions, but so far I see that even by this very modest standard, the burden of proof has not been met in the matter of "poor performance and quicker wear of the cartridge". I vote for acquittal. |
Mepearson :I already said that the scientific way (controlled experiment) was best in this matter. Only In its absence I suggested that each of us be the judge according to the evidence presented. I do not see how your hatred of the jury trial process (heck, we all hate it) has any relevance to the subject at hand.
All I have by way of evidence is my personal experience with one tonearm. Since my experience is at variance with the theory advanced, namely that my cartridge life will be shortened and my sound distorted ("poor performance and quicker wear of the cartridge"), I simply want some proof. I am open to your suggestions of how to solve this problem.
|
"The problem here is, that the vertical lever is very short too and thus every little tiny height difference on the record is huge for the cantilever and stylus. Huge VTA/SRA changes in a long row"
Thank you, this is very clear. Now assuming a record that looks nominally flat and is clamped or vacuum attached, are there some numbers that can be plugged in to this problem so information concerning choice of cartridges for specific designs can got from manufacturers?
In simply looking at my Souther track, it appears to snake along so that it's tracking error is constantly changing. The shorter the arm the worse this is. Do air bearing arms do any better? |
My understanding is that some stylus shapes are more VTA tolerant than others. This information should be available from the manufacturers, so one can see what range of VTA tolerance is needed by each arm. In any case, the records vary so much in thickness and in cutting angle that precision in that area is almost useless, unless one has a quick VTA adjustment and a notation on every record jacket. I really miss that feature which I had with my old MMT arm. Unhappily, despite that feature, it never really sounded all that good.
|
Tzed: Welcome to the monkey house. Perhaps we can team up and ask Phil for tips on setting up our Southers. |
"There are only audio components which do degrade the recorded sound during reproduction.
All do - the better less, the very best very little."
Well put. I thought the same for a half century until I came to realize that certain additives and equalizations (tubes and digital processing, to cite examples) had the capability of enhancing playback intelligibility.
This topic, however, deserves its own thread. |
Agreed. I also venture that tubes are prized by many because they like their gentle, well known, distortions. I often wish I had some tube amp compression in my tiny car, so I could enjoy classical music while commuting. |
"If you want the 2nd order distortions of the better triodes"
Shades of Bob Carver! Please, please, start a thread. We have much better tools and understanding now than twenty years ago. |
Thank you for the information Dertonarm. I use the infamous Tact equipment, as well as tubes, computers, etc. Software allows for quick changes in various parameters. My fantasy is to be able to audition specific types and brands of say capacitors, tubes and/or other components in simulated circuits prior to, or in lieu of, purchase. Like going to Mars, this may take a while, but the Ipod proves that radical changes in audio can happen overnight when a vision (everybody wants a portable juke box) meets a technology. |
My tonearm fantasy:
Use a holograph image of a phonograph record and play with software.
My prediction; much sooner that most think, because it will not come through our puny hobby, but through the efforts of archivists funded jointly by government and industry. (Thanks to my daughter, recently in graduate school in said field) |
Agree and disagree. WW2 surplus gave us hobby audio. The technology (say reel to reel tapes, radar, transistors, lasers, flight simulators) was developed by governments and major corporations. Audiophiles merely adapted the technology to our own uses. |
Dertonarm raises the basic question: What are we trying to accomplish with all this gear and hardware? I am 65, but when I was 17, I worked in a small, sort of "feeder" studio, some miles from Nashville. We normally used 15ips stereo tape
and recorded both music and radio ads. Our monitors were Altec A7's. I have never had a home system as convincing as our master tapes. A times we received 30ips mono ads for Coca Cola which were dubs from Atlanta. Jesus! The dynamics would make you jump! Would that I could do that at home today.
Home reproduction of prerecorded media is an entirely different situation. Digital is great, but CD's are pitiful. (I plan to throw all mine way soon.) I have little interest in listening to a studio mix on my headphones, except to analyze something. I have a modest size room and budget. I have performed some of the music that I listen to. In reproduction in my home, like most of us, I want to simulate some of the excitement of the original performance. Quad speakers,for example, or LS3/5's have a million obvious shortcomings, but manage to do more to convey the "spirt" of the performance that many full range speakers. I will try to formulate; I try to simulate, not replicate. Deliberate distortion is not bad, it is just a tool like any other. Generally I prefer subtractive distortion to additive, but not always. I enjoy my system, but others with bigger rooms and budgets do better. It's a big hobby. It's about the enjoyment of music -and friends. |
We oldsters were so lucky to have dynakit, KLH and so on to give us a taste of what the rich had with McIntosh,Bozak,Marantz........
We also got lucky with stereo as a standard, with tons of recordings already available (on tape) in the format prior to the development of stereo records. Stereo on a five or seven channel home theater setup sounds confused and less than inspiring. I watch DVD concerts on occasion, but generally finish with the CD copy in my audio room. We need to convert a Steve Jobs to quality audio recording. Perhaps we could send Dave Wilson.
But then again, I am preaching to the choir. |
1960's favorite system. AR turntable w/ Sure $100, Dyna SCA 35 $100, AR4X speakers $100
That $300 today would need a zero added. Today's $3000 system would have much higher resolution.
High end, say K-horns, Mac 275, Marantz 7C, Thorens 124, Grado arm, would cost what, $2500, or in todays terms, $25,000.
The rest of the system would be good value for money today, but who would swap their current turntable for a TD 124? So you turntable/arm/cart guys have made the most progress. |
Once I accepted the argument that what was desired in reproduction was a straight wire with gain. Such a system would let one hear what the "recording engineer" intended.
I have many years experience performing, especially liturgical music. I also play the acoustic guitar. When I worked in a recording studio, the engineer would invite the conductor and/or soloist to listen to the various takes and express their preference. This was always an exercise in diplomacy, because the engineer always ignored their input. He listened with headphones or with his ears fairly close to the huge A7 monitors- far to close for them to properly integrate. If asked, he would say he was trying to get the sound to "match" his previous recordings that had "cut well" when sent off to the engineers who practiced that black art.
The last thing I want is to hear is a violin or a voice on an A7 up close! Yet many of these fifty year old recordings are thought to be among the best ever recorded and are reissued on every new format.
There are various conclusions one can draw from this information, but I opine that we all listen around the defects in our playback equipment like the engineer listened around his. We adjust our systems until they "sound right". |
Raul: So what would you like to see us/them do? The playback hardware is better than the recordings/media available to the consumer (at least 99% of the time).
Software on both the recording and playback ends are the bottleneck. Atmosphere is a fine fellow, but but he (and us) are minnows in the ocean. |
