Comparison of sonic qualities of some tonearms

Pindac, are you a neurologist or neuroscientist of some sort?

I suspect a lot of us are "neurodiverse" if that counts!

@tomic601  : " I also am glad products like Safir exist "

Why are you glad when the cartridge overall suspension/cantilever looks a inertia moment of at least 70grs? what is your foundation reasons to be glad.

R.

More of us are neuro-tic.

Not having a lot of different tonearm experiences I did discover that wiring from the headshell to the RCA connectors made a improvement and a carbon fiber arm tube was another improvement worth looking into .

@lewm I am not a medical professional, but have become quite familiar with both Behavioural and Substance addiction. 

Walking in their Company and having left their worse influences far behind. 

The learning opportunities that followed have placed me in the world on environmental influences and stimulus that is generated. 

I stand by my not so usual descriptions, even as layman for this forum as they are.

Funny how captive Dolphins that are not able to be influenced by what captivity offers, are in certain cases capable of ending their lives by no longer surfacing for air. 

Mammals and the Mammalian Brain Crave, and to Crave is to seek out stimulus. 

Audio Equipment is an environmental influence, and the use is a means to create a stimulus. 

@lewm

Thanks for your comment. I couldn't agree more.

Our knowledge is always incomplete. The best one can hope for is to learn over time.

"Our knowledge is always incomplete. The best one can hope for is to learn over time."

 "There is a principle which is a bar against all information, which is proof against all arguments and which can not fail to keep a man in everlasting ignorance-that principle is contempt prior to investigation."

I have found the latter above the route to very valuable change throughout most of my Adult Life.

The @jollytinker statement is the only way to expand on ones knowledge base, stick with the subject and all the necessary variables will start to show, becoming inclusive in subject discussion.

My introducing a variable is as valid and relevant as a reference to a ADEC Type Bearing or Fixed Headshell vs Removable Headshell.

Decisions being made are not only resulting from the tangible or visual, there is much more, and unique to each individual brain chemistry as a result of stimulus, is a massive factor.

Hence, not one person can vouch for another each encounter is totally isolated and unique, hence each report can only be taken lightly, it is the individuals reaction to the experience, that only matters, and if it is one they would like to maintain.

One mans ADEC 9 Bearing - Magnesium Structure is another mans Knife Edge Bearing - SS Structure, or Viv Labs Oil - Carbon Fibre Structure.    

@jollytinker Yes, actually. It was a MSL Platinum signature on a Saphir mounted on a CS Port turntable and the 4 point was on a Kuzma R. Now, this was at a friend’s house and he feels the Saphir sounded better. He's a lot more impressionable than I am.

@mijostyn Actually, "no" would be your correct answer, because you used two different turntables. If you compare different arms on different tables with presumably different cartridges, you haven’t shown anything at all. The point of my post, as you could easily read, was to give a controlled comparison between two tonearm/cartridges, which requires using the same turntable at the least. 

[I decided to edit and re-post my comment as parts of it might have been insulting to people who are not involved in this discussion and that is not my intention. The essential point is that mijostyn has apparently been listening to these arms in the very same room where I heard the SAFIR arm and compared it to the 4 point 11. If that’s the case, I suggest that he go there himself, at his convenience, and do the experiment on the exact same table as I did and with the same tonearms. That way, he can decide whether or not this is a case of his friend's being ‘impressionable’ or of hearing a significant difference attributable to a different tonearm design.]

@jollytinker  I think you are just as impressionable as my friend. Both those turntables were on isolation stands and are extremely similar. It is much more important to be able to quickly switch between setups to AB correctly and it is also important for you to be blinded. It is highly unusual for anyone to have two of exactly the same turntables, although you could mount both arms on either turntable. Any good turntable is not going to "sound" at all. If you have a turntable that changes the sound I suggest you throw it away. It is so bad I would not foist it on anyone else. The cartridge arm combination may sound different and if so that is usually in the bass. A lot of times improper setup causes differences. If I had the equipment at home I would make high resolution digital copies of both setups playing the same record. This makes it very easy to switch back and forth to compare and my wife makes a great switcher. I always blind myself. 

Listen to @rauliruegas. He is absolutely correct, the Saphir is way too heavy for most cartridges. It impresses the heck out of unsuspecting audiophiles because of the price and cache of a sapphire arm tube. Same deal with the SAT arms, the Mark Levinson effect. Neither tonearm is on my radar. If I were going to spend silly money on an arm it would be for a Reed 5T. 

What @lewm means is, experience is the best teacher with one exception, that would be mistakes. 

@pindac is a gentleman of the old school, the classics. I am a chimney sweep.

Analyzing the design aspects of mechanical objects will usually reveal the best design for functionality on paper depending on execution. It is not how a tonearm sounds, it is how it works. 

It is highly unusual for anyone to have two of exactly the same turntables

I never claimed to be ordinary! 😉

@mijostyn I have read most posts with interest, have I missed something.

Does a Tonearm have Sound as you are suggesting. 

I understand a Tonal  influence might be detectable?  

My own experiences always are dependent on the Cart' for sound.

Engineering, depending on the designs being produced, is a means to a consistent and predictable performance, not necessarily a betterment over other options.

I could happily live with a Kitchen Cabinet Door or Drawer that is not a Soft Close design. 

Correct me if I'm wrong, but do we not agree that tonearms do affect sound quality, and the point of this thread is how best to assess that? After all, if they do not, then it shall make no difference which one we buy or use.

As for how to check for differences, it seems the best chance would come from two tables of the same make and model, with the same cartridges of similar hours usage, feeding into the same electronics and speakers. The only difference would be the tonearm on each table. Listening performed blinded during the playing of the same LP on each table. Results in terms of preference would be valid for that cartridge only. That would be the science-based approach, and it is unlikely anyone would bother to do it.

The unscientific approach is one that, I think, still has some validity: a long term comparison and you see how much you are tempted to play music, and how long a session lasts. Lots of times I have liked a component, only to find myself choosing to do other things rather than listen to music. This is using the entire neurological path from eardrum to cortex as a meter that measures desire to listen to music. And that result, if it is to be trusted at all, can only be trusted by the owner of the brain concerned!

'Affect Sound Quality' , is quite different to 'how it sounds'.

Tonearm will impact on the sound the Cart' is able to produce, and certainly has the possibility to Influence Tone and dare I say Timbre. 

dogberry, 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.  This is why I said from the get-go that good judgements can best be made by a single listener in the context of his or her own home system.  After that, your construction of how to do the "unscientific" experiment works fine.  And, as I have said more than once, I have the wherewithal to do the experiment in my home.  Been doing it in fact for several years.  All I am left with are vague generalities, e.g., Triplanar is very good.  So is Fidelity Research FR64S in my hands, although some do not like it based on principles. Not going to mention the Viv Float.

The difficult part is to get both records to start playing exactly in sync for stereo.....

The really funny part is that I once did exactly that to compare two cartridges mounted on the same arm on the same tables.

I used to run the Vinyl Album and CD Album as Parallel Timed to be useful. Switching Selector and a Tweak to the VC to compare Digital Source to Analogue Source.

This one is no longer necessary but visitors are always keen to hear two sources so this is usually their first introduction prior to selecting a few tracks they know well.

Here is an Analog Planet piece with links to several files comparing different SAT arms, if that helps at all. For deep pockets only. I couldn't get the files to play, but I am on a simple laptop at the moment. I hope it works for anyone interested. If you don't hear any difference, what conclusion would you draw?

SAT comparison

The Links are more than adequate to experience the Sat TA. 

Many buy blind without such prior investigation, maybe just the sales brochure spiel, is the supplied info to seal the deal.

“The links are more than adequate…”

Pindac, dear boy, you can’t be serious. First of all there is no control recording. Second, we aren’t told which is which. And finally, differences are bound to be too subtle to appreciate by this method. If not, something is broken.

@lewm you completely discounted my second paragraph.

I have not opened the links, why would I, 

I might as well warch Panganini videos on the autobahn as well, 

Neither is wanted as part of my life. 

I have not opened the links, why would I,

and

The Links are more than adequate to experience the Sat TA.

...appear to be at odds. Can you help me with that?

@pindac Yup you missed something. I have repeatedly said that a good tonearm should not alter the sound in any way. Now, if you were going from a bad arm to a good one there may be an obvious change in the sound from colored with distortion to neutral with less distortion. All great arms sound the same although depending on effective mass might alter the bass a little depending on the cartridge compliance. There is one challenge left in tonearm design that might move state of the art a little and that is a linear tracker that maintains all the necessary parameters of tonearm performance and moves the arm across the record.  noiselessly and accurately.   All the arms that have tried to do this like the Rabco did not have the right technology available to them. That tech is available now and I am trying to get the right people interested. 

@pindac I would not buy a SAT arm if it cost $5000.00. It is a bad design. The vertical bearing should be down at record level and it is a stable balance arm, not neutral balance. A tonearm shaft taper is nice but it does not have to be that fat. The size of the SME V  is fine. From a technical standpoint the SME V is a better arm. But it is too old and inexpensive to be any good. The press really drives this effect. 

My next arm will be either the Schroder LT or the Reed 5T. Whichever arm I get I will do so without an audition. If there is an issue with either arm I will deal with it.

It was inevitable, but the subject of the thread has now become how a tonearm should be designed and built, rather than how a tonearms sounds.  Unfortunately, we've done this new topic to death in previous threads. I don't expect my pointing this out to sober anyone up.  Carry on.

I may as well throw in my own thoughts on the SATs.  We all had to take them to get into a good college, so I don't see why the younger generation should be exempt. As for the SAT tonearms, they may be the finest sounding tonearms in the world (or not), but the prices are beyond irrational. 

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. . . 😉

Try listening to those files - there is a clear difference between some of them

Based on my own experiments, I think that it is possible that SAT is varying the rigidity / damping trade-off. File 1 is insufficiently damped, File 5 is insufficiently rigid, IMO. I think that 2-4 hit the sweet spot, and your preference depends on your taste. I think that I could listen to #2 all night without fatigue (well damped with good rigidity), maybe #4 (more rigid), but not  3 (least damped but most rigid).

My own wands would sound most like #2 (natural fibre composites) and #3 (sapphire), or so I suspect. Thanks for posting @2channel8 . I wouldn't have thought it possible.

@dogberry I clearly state endlessly that I attempt to make references to my experiences only.

If I do add experiences not directly observed, it will only be about comments I received about an extension of experience I had prior to the one being updated on, with content supplied from individuals whom I have come to trust substantially in audio related topics.

@dogberry 'write' and 'wink' your inaccuracies as you please, I have nothing to prove, my time on here is solely to offer another forum member, a alternative way to consider when looking to learn or make changes.

I am successful at that, I can assure you, even though it is most likely blind to yourself.     

Quantum mechanics is an anti-philosophy.

@terry9 Those files are rigged. I know the Atlas SL real well. I am listening to one as we speak playing Alice in Chains, "Dirt." @lewm is correct, "something is broken." I might also add that Mr Fremer suffers from severe presbycusis according to people who know him well. You might notice that he has a tendency to talk really loudly, a sure sign. 

I have a calibrated instrument that I use to measure and adjust my system. I highly recommend it. 

@drbond I think that description best fits mahgister. @pindac  is into string theory. His speakers are so efficient he wires them with string, Egyption cotton sounds best 

"Something is broken" on which one? Or rigged? Which is it?

Based on my experiments, all five are plausible with the same cartridge. Not to mention changes in set-up. When changing tonearms, it is impossible not to change the alignment of arm board (or head shell) and cartridge. Azimuth can do some of that, so can VTA. So can countless decisions in tonearm design.

What calibrated instrument do you use? What is it's accuracy? What judgements are required?

Typo, sorry. 

I'm glad I am usually looked on as a enigma, it sure beats other Labels one can be attached with.

Maybe it is just plain old speaking what you know, that makes the content seemingly indefinable.

How many can say their interest in music is not really such, but more a nurturing of friendships, well worthy of looking after.

I don't have a alter ego when behind the Keyboard, maybe just a Wax Lyrical use of words on occasion.

I don't see too much within this Analogue Forum that really shows it as being a cutting edge place to be, there are only a few I know, who really have found a way to rise to possibilities through not displaying procrastination, these very few are a pleasure to see a post from.

Much of what is seen from the Old Guard is their 'resting on their laurels', this is not a valuable message to send to anybody very keen to work with the Vinyl LP as a source material, especially if they want to optimise the function of the additional equipment required to create the signal for producing sound.

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)

Now consider that, at the time of the Big Bang, the entire cosmos was in a quantum state. When the Big Bang is observed, say with a radio telescope, it is changed by the observer (Copenhagen). What is the nature of this change? One can only supposes that the universe is changed to make the observation itself more likely; that is, to optimize the universe for the being to see furthest back in time, and to ’see’ in the most detail. That being would be the Maximal Observer.

This explains the mechanism behind the Anthropic Principle.

The question is, to what extent should we fund astronomy? Are we in a universal race to see furthest back in time? Mr. President, we cannot allow a Radio Telescope Gap !!!

@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?

Back in the day, ’Big Bang’ was a derogatory name for the theory that eventually came to dislodge ’Steady State’. Perhaps it’s time for the pendulum to swing back.

I used to commute with a Lady, who's husband is a nominee for the Nobel Peace Prize, as a result of their work in astronomy, where the supplied coordinates were located by all the major Institutions known for observing Space.

Curved light was discovered at a particular coordinate, that is now strongly suspected as being the point the Big Bang occurred.

The Theory has moved forward a few steps and the Hypothesis is certainly one that has extended and created a new era of Math. 

A 9" pivoted tonearm using the Lofgrin A pivot to stylus distance and a 30-degree offset has a tracking error less than 2% and this causes second order harmonic distortion far below that of a SET amplifier, which is inaudible. Good luck mounting a cartridge to the nearest degree. This is why linear tracking tonearms are no advantage over the advantages of pivoted tonearms.

This is why linear tracking tonearms are no advantage

But this is not an agreed fact. Science proceeds by finding reasons for agreed facts; these reasons become models; and models make predictions, which are subject to test.

You seem to be stating a prediction and treating it as an experimental fact.

@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 am not an expert, but in 1989, I purchased an SME IV. Brooks Berdan, an analog equipment expert, removed the wiring, installed the finest Cardas phono cable (and I also mean the absolute hairlike finest thin cable), shot closed end foam into the tube and epoxied the ends at the cartridge wiring exit in front and the wiring within an RCA outlet box. Despite the clumsy VTA adjustment, it has been a dream arm for simplicity in use and dialing in setup other than VTA. I’ve used a DynavectorXX1, Lyra Lydian, Benz Ruby III and now a Dynavector 20X2 L (plays nearly all my 28,500 LPs well or great). I wanted a Tri-Planar but it was too costly at the time. It’s still a great arm if not near SOTA. I paid $1100 and when production ended it was $4300. Great arm.

For an upcoming experience, that in my mind one I am very much looking forward to. T

The Designer / Builder / Owner of the Tonearm to be put under further trials, is looking to set a date for this period to commence, but it is predicted it will most likely be a set of dates, as the intention is to run things on to allow Wires to optimise.

To assist with this period of trials, I have purchased a Batch of Wire to be used as a continuous Wand Wire on a new design Tonearm.

Wires Purchased are from 0.1mm - 0.3mm Diameter, of which some are a Solid and some are Stranded.

Wire Types are Copper and Silver, with the intention to put PC Triple C and PC Triple C /EX Wire in the line up, as this type is what I know as a modern design for a Wire, and the only TA from a commercial entity using it as a Wand Wire is SAEC in their WE-4700 $13000 TA.

D.U.C.C Wire is a modern Wire as well, this might be introduced at the latter stages of trials, when another Branded Wand Wire is trialed.   

The intention is to select a Wire that the listening group unanimously agrees on select a Wire the designer builder would like to run with.

The next intention is to become quite familiar with how each is able to impact on the sound being produced across a selection of systems.

When this is done the intention is to bring the AN Kondo Silver Wire in as a further  comparison, to see if anything manifests to change the opinions of the previous choices made by the attendees at the demo's.

The AN Wire will sell on very quickly if not up to the task, or will be retained and could be a wire that is possibly offered (?), as a Upgrade Wire Option when the TA's become a sale item.

All trials are to be carried out initially on a same support structure, same system, using the same TT > Plinth > Tonearm > Cart.

Additional Phonostages will be utilised either as a SUT - Head Amp > MM Input or as a Dedicated MC Input.

This same trial type will also be done on the same system to compare Tonearms of other Brands as the Plinth is produced in Panzerholz and is purpose designed for this experience, enabling it to receive additional arms between 9" and 12".

Same Brand Cart's are available with a very similar usage life to be mounted on the Tonearms. 

My own SME IV will be one of the TA's used for the comparisons, as will my TA, that superseded the use of my IV and my owned Audiomods Series Five.  

I’ve been using the (legendary, so I’ve been told) Sumiko MMT since 1985.

Just two weeks ago, I got lucky and found a NOS minty Jelco SA-750EB.

Jelco made the MMT and this is essentially the same arm, but better, with newer improved bearings, it’s about an inch longer so it will improve on the HTA, etc.

The point being that I have a turntable/cartridge/tonearm combo that’s worked for almost 4 decades, so why fool around with a totally different tonearm design, comparable or not?

theaudioatticvinylsundays.com

@unreceivedogma I as an individual am very pleased to hear your commitment to a Vinyl Source of 40 Years.

I myself have used and do use TT's of this age and older, as well as a Tonearm from this era as well, even though fully redesigned as a functioning model.

I have been able to witness the state of mechanical interfaces from devices used for replaying vinyl from this prior to this period, this period and newer, where the build up of contamination and loss of a functioning lubrication is nothing but detrimental to the function of the moving part, even could be described as catastrophically impeding the function.

Thorough Cleaning, Servicing and even Repair is a must. 

I will find it very very difficult to accept a optimum performance is on offer from a very old mechanical interface that has not had TLC administered from a competent person.

These partially functioning devices will replay music, but only as a version of what their youthful formers selves could create.      

@pindac
All of my components get serviced every 5 to 15 years, depending.

The tonearm has been serviced and functions as it is designed to.

People who manufacture tables and arms say that with proper maintenance, old components can last a lifetime.

The owner of VPI talked me out of spending $5,000 and out of upgrading to a classic from an HW: he said that the HW MK IV is as good as the classic and the bearing is designed to last forever. Not to be too on-the-nose about it, but that was $5K he could have made from me; instead, he told me to spend it on the wife. So, he clearly disagrees with you: since he has been building tables for almost 50 years, why should I trust you more than him?

I recently had two guests over from Israel (I studiously avoided politics for an evening): one is a repeat visitor but who hadn’t been over since Jon rebuilt the amps, and the other was his dad who had just flown in. His dad is a year younger than me.

For two hours, I played some of their favorite music, as well as some surprises. For two hours, on almost every song after song, I would drop the needle in the groove and watch them clasp their hands over their heads and faces in astonishment and disbelief: they could not believe what they were hearing. At the end, the dad gets up, gives me this enormous bear hug that only Mediterranean types are capable of, thanks me again and again and says "When I die and go to heaven, I am going to ask God to send me here".

Btw, my speakers are a mere year younger than him: they are 68 years old.

Do you REALLY think I would not give attention to maintenance?

Oy vey iz mir. 🙄 🙄 🙄 🙄 🙄 🙄 🙄 🙄 🙄 🙄