Comparison of sonic qualities of some tonearms

@lewm 

While, theoretically, you are correct about comparing tonearms (or anything, for that matter, as no one is even the same moment to moment); realistically, assuming that you have a cartridge that doesn't resonate poorly with the tonearm, keeping the turntable, cartridge , and LP the same, and changing out tonearms to compare differences in sound quality, would be a very good comparison.  That's all we need, but apparently almost no one (except probably dealers) does this to any degree to offer real insightful comparison of various tonearms. 

@lewm

If not many people change out tonearms for use with the same cartridge, then you would be correct, and that may account for the lack of response in this thread: no one, or very few, has this experience with tonearms…but perhaps some do, and will be willing to comment…although audio dealers would probably be the only ones with extensive experience, switching out tonearms for clients on the same turntable with the same cartridge.

@mijostyn 

Thanks for your comment, but wouldn't you agree that your tonearm theory is the same for all components?  Turntables, cartridges, phono stages, pre-amplifiers, amplifiers, and speakers should "not have any sound of it's own. It will limit discrepancies so as to minimize distortion into inaudibility".  However, reality is really different from theory, and everything does impart some coloration to the reproduction of music.  

However, in the interest of staying on topic, let's please try to just share actual experiences of hearing different tonearms, ideally on the same turntable, with the same cartridge. . . . however, that stipulation might make this a very brief, and sparsely commented thread.  

@tablejockey 

Yes, that’s why I figure that there is no thread comparing tonearms, as probably only audio dealers have a valid experience with proper comparison of tonearms.  Comparing cartridges is a breeze compared to comparing tonearms.

@mijostyn You state that between tonearms “The difference in sound quality is so slight as to be made meaningless and subject to psychological overlay.”  
If that were the case, then why would there be so many different types, manufacturers, and grades of tonearms?  It is possible that many listeners are of the same opinion as you, namely that a tonearm makes little difference in sound quality, because very few even discuss tonearms in these threads.  However, in my very limited experience, I would say that a tonearm is capable of making as significant a difference as a pre-amplifier, or phono stage can make.

@rauliruegas

Your statements presume complete knowledge of a subject. I suppose it could be analogous to someone who has driven a Toyota, Lexus, Nissan, Infiniti, Honda, Acura, Ford, Dodge, and Chevrolet commenting how all cars are pretty much the same. Perhaps…or perhaps a Porsche or Ferrari actually do drive better, and are a markedly different experience to drive.

@alan60 @tomic601

can you compare your Viv Labs / Porter tonearms to others that you have played that might be more common? What does it do better, and what does it do worse? What do you attribute its strengths and weaknesses to?  (It’s not that helpful to anyone to simply say it’s the best without specifying why and comparing it to at least one other tonearm)

It seems like much of the conversation has moved towards the technical aspect of tonearms, as opposed to experiential comparison, which I suppose very few have. However, if we discuss the technical components of tonearms, does the supposed sonic success of the Kuzma Safir, with an effective mass of 60g, which is possibly only second to the SAT in sonic performance, demonstrate how little is known about how the tonearm actually works in reality?

@lewm 

How does the Viv compare to the Reed and the Tri-planar?  Have you been able to play those on the same TT with the same cartridge enough to formulate an opinion? 

@rauliruegas

I really enjoy testing and comparing different equipment. It is an expensive hobby, but yields intellectual satisfaction of what sound can sound like. I would be interested in testing and comparing many tonearms; however, the main drawback with my system is that I have to buy a new armboard for each tonearm, and the armboards for the Dohmann are rather expensive ($3,000), which adds a major cost to simply switching out tonearms every month. . .however, reading about the Viv Rigid tonearm, it appears to be freestanding, but it would have to stand on the minus K platform of the Helix to be a fair comparison; however, if someone has one that they want to send me to try out, I'll be glad to try one out and render my opinion. 

@mijostyn

While at recognize that the linear tracking tonearms would theoretically offer a better soundstage, experience can occasionally defy theory…which is why I won’t dismiss others’ experiences, even though it may defy logic and theory, especially when the theory isn’t proven law.

Dear @rauliruegas

To address your points:

I presently have at least 5 MC cartridges. I enjoy each of them, and each has its own strengths and weaknesses, and I do have a favorite, but that’s for another thread.

The SAT and Safir seem to have the best reviews overall, but not many have heard them enough to validly compare to more common tonearms.

I have the Helix One, which I would think would sound very similar to the Helix Two, but those who have A-B’d both say that the Helix One sounds much better. . .how much better, and in what ways? I don’t know. . .but again, that discussion can be reserved for another thread.

I was simply asking about the Viv tonearm because a couple commented about their ownership, so it would be interesting to hear two different perspectives on the tonearm, with respect to timbre of various instruments, sound stage, evenness of sound, etc. . .

I’m content with my system, but I started this thread in the interest of hearing other peoples’ experiences with their different tonearms.

.Thanks. 

@terry9 

Interesting statements about natural fibers and tonearm composition.  Do you have listening experience comparing various natural fibers (by which I assume you mean wood?) with carbon fiber or magnesium or other element on a similar base?  Any take home differences in your comparisons?  

@mijostyn 

Yes, I would agree, that, all else being equal, a LT tonearm should best a pivoted tonearm; however, there are all sorts of other variables in the equation, such as materials, bearings, etc.  
Thanks. 

@rauliruegas 

Yes, the standard pivoted tonearm has a 1-1.5 degree tracking error.  The linear tracking tonearm that I have mounted (Reed 5A) has a 3-4 minute tracking error (which is 1/15-1/20 of a degree);  I don't know if it is this lower tracking error is responsible for the difference that I hear, but it seems reasonable that it could account for the improved soundstage that I hear when playing the LT tonearm.  

@thr1961

Thanks for sharing your experience with your tonearms.

@whart

The purpose of this thread isn’t necessarily to improve my system. Given my limited experience, I found it rather odd that no one really commented on tonearms, as I’ve found that they can make a sizeable difference in music reproduction. I really just wanted to hear about others’ experiences with their tonearms, but it seems like very few have taken the time to investigate and experience on their own.

@rauliruegas

So far, very few Audiogon members have expressed an ability to compare tonearms, which leads me to my conclusion: very few on this forum have actually compared tonearms, which rationally only leaves dealers, who, of course, are biased to one degree or another; but some biased information is better than no information at all.

@terry9

No need to apologize. Your first impression was more correct: different tonearms use different materials, andtheir sonic impact would be interesting to discern.  Of course everyone knows that you neeed to set up the tonearms properly with respect to VTA, etc.

@mijostyn

I have tried only two different tonearms (Schroder CB, and Reed 5A) on the Helix, and the differences are dramatic, so I would imagine that for just about all tonearms…I’ll try a third in the near future…

@pindac 

LOL!  Most thoughtful comment out of left field…for the win!

@rauliruegas

Just as I thought you had become a better person, you prove me wrong by your assinine comments. Oh well, some people never change…  You have never offered anything constructive, and my best policy was to always ignore your comments, as they are always irrelevant to the matter.  So I will return to my past approach, which is to ignore any and all messages by you, which I suppose most on this forum would also benefit by learning from my experience, which I am willing to share.

@jollytinker @sokogear 

Thanks for sharing your experience with your various tonearms.  I, too, have found that tonearms can make a marked difference in the sound quality when playing vinyl records.  It would be interesting to continue hearing from others who have experience with various tonearms. 

A "scientific" approach is only possible if you have a calibrated instrument that does the listening itself.  Which of course is not going to fly.  In the end, we are stuck with subjective impressions.

@lewm 

Yes, I think this sums it up nicely, which is why I was interested in hearing other peoples' experiences with various tonearms, as theory can only take us so far.  As I listen to more tonearms, I will add to this thread in a more meaningful manner, but I'll probably try one new tonearm every year or two, so my input will be rather minimal.  

@dogberry 

I think @pindac is our resident quantum philosopher to whom all things are possible at all times, but only if not directly observed. . . 😉

Since it seems that some on this forum are already on LSD, this quote might help us venture towards the cutting edge of musical and tonearm theory more thoroughly, if that’s even possible:

Forks in the quantum road

At its essence, the ontic vs. epistemic debate hides the ghost of objectivity in science. Onticists deeply dislike the notion that observers could have anything to do with determining the nature of reality. Is an experimenter really determining whether an electron is here or there? One ontic school known as the Many Worlds interpretation would say instead that all possible outcomes are realized when a measurement is performed. It’s just that they are realized in parallel worlds, and we only have direct access to one of them — namely, the one we exist in. In Borgean style, the idea here is that the act of measurement forks reality into a multiplicity of worlds, each realizing a possible experimental outcome. We do not need to speak of the collapse of the wave function since all outcomes are realized at once. 

Unfortunately, these many worlds are not accessible to observers in different worlds. There have been proposals to test the Many Worlds experimentally, but the obstacles are huge, for example requiring the quantum superposition of macroscopic objects in the laboratory. It is also not clear how to assign different probabilities to the different worlds related to the outcomes of the experiment.

The agent and the nature of reality 

On the epistemic side, interpretations are just as varied. The Copenhagen interpretation leads the pack. It states that the wave function is not a thing in this world, but rather a mere tool to describe what is essential, the outcomes of experimental measurements. Views tend to diverge on the meaning of the observer, about the role the mind exerts on the act of measuring and thus on defining the physical properties of the object being observed, and on the dividing line between classical and quantum. 
 

From:  bigthink.com. (Cannot post link without being blocked)

@terry9

If you really want to expand your mind further to the cutting edge, consider the possibility that the Big Bang never happened! There’s a rather interesting book by that name: “The Big Bang Never Happened”. I think it’s been decades since I read it, but I might be reading it now…perhaps I never stopped?

@drbarney1 

Thanks for pointing that out.  Yes, but is it possible that the audible experience that others have with linear tonearms is due to some other factor?  Maybe the lack of anti-skate plays a role?  Regardless, theory and reality can sometimes be different, which is why I was hoping that some would comment on their experience with various tonearms.  

I just was able to directly compare two different tonearms again, and, again, I am impressed by the difference a tonearm can make!  This time I was able to compare a Schroder CB and a Kuzma 4 point on the same turntable with the same cartridge, and the sonic results are as if I had changed out a major component, such as a pre-amplifier, or amplifier.  (As a reminder, I started this thread by noticing such a similar dramatic change in sound quality when comparing a Schroder CB tonearm with a Reed 5A tonearm.)  

The Schroder CB is an excellent tonearm, but at at half the price of the tonearms that I replaced it with, it perhaps isn't an even comparison:  apparent differences in detail, clarity, and sound stage are most marked.  

In my estimation, the tonearm may have more of an impact on sound quality than the cartridge used.