Cartridge Compliance Conversion

You might have bitten off more than you can chew here.John Elison at Vinyl Asylum is the resident expert on these equations there,so I would advise having a look at what's in the archives in his postings there.But from what I remember these are 2 different measurements taken either at 10Hz or 100Hz and are not transposable.

yea, I'm somewhat surprised that I didn't get an answer from a self-proclaimed expert as well ;)

Anyone else what to take a crack at this one?

I am not sure this is the case. If we add a weight on top of a spring the resonance frequency of the system will change (decrease).
This is funny, I have posted the similar question before in a few forums but I never got a reply from someone who was sure of the answer!! I guess the question is really extreme.
BTW, last night I had a ZYX cartridge for test in my place. Its compliance is 15 and its weight including mounting gear is 6.2 grams. Befor that I had a Denon 301 with very similar compliance & weight, on the same TT. The Denon was making the woofers of my speakers flap quite a lot but the ZYX not at all.
I an not sure the published data for compliance can be trusted to the point that the calculations show us if a specific cartdridge would be a good matsh for an arm.
The final and only safe test is to get the distributor or someone else who owns it, to set it up on your arm and then review it, period. And I think that when we are speaking of cartridges with a price tag over say $600, it makes sense to expect the seller spend a couple of hours for you....

Psam:

The resonance frequency formula is taken from the physics equation that measures the resonance frequency for vertical motion, usually applied to spring systems in college physics textbooks. If we assume that these are similar problem domains, I would guess that the counterweight wouldn't change anything as its effects are outside of the system being considered... just a guess though ;)

Rewires may somehow affect the effective mass of a tonearm, but what about the heavier counterweights? The original counterweight on the Rega RB300 is 95 grams and the Clearudio Turboweight for example is 135 grams... How does this affect the effective arm mass? Is it safe to divide 135 by 95 (equals 1.42) and multiply this with the original effective mass, i.e. 12 grams X 1.42 = 17 grams for the Rega? Or is it better to calculate the extra 40 grams as a percentage of the total mass of the arm?
Is there a proper definition of the term "arm effective mass" somewhere? I am quoting a frequently used definition:

Effective tonearm mass: The total mass of a tonearm's moving parts, and where along the tonearm that mass is distributed. Mass near the pivot point only slightly increases a tonearm's effective mass, but the same amount of mass near the tonearm's cartridge end greatly increases the effective mass.

If this is correct, shouldn't the counterweight added to the arm's mass since it is a moving part?
Regards,
Panayiotis

Robdoorack:

Which version of the DL-103 was tested? I was interested in the DL-130D. Also, is there a way to measure empirically the effictive mass of a tonearm, or must we trust the published specfications? For example, after a tonearm wire upgrade, it seems reasonable to think that the effective mass would change, and it would be nice to verify it. I just got finished reading the VDH treatise and got interested in this formula from a theoretical interest, but I appreciate your candor about whether or not it is all that useful.

-Marc

Empirical testing by Audio Asylum correspondent Garth using a Schröder arm with a verified effective mass showed that the DL-103's compliance is likely 10-12 cu if it were measured by the standard method used by most cartridge manufacturers. There's lots of real world experience demonstrating that the 103 works well in medium mass arms such as Regas that, using the familiar resonance frequency formula, should be gross mismatches.