diy tangential tonearms


I hope to have a tangential tracking tonearm one day. The available new ones cost five figures and Revox is not acceptable because of the difficulty in maintaining it and others come with turntables which threaten to be difficult to repair or rebuild. I like the turntable I have and a tangential tonearm could be installed through what appear to be three standard positioned screws which hold the present arcing tonearm in place.
The expensive tangential tonearms have air bearings which minimize any rumble from the arm sliding down its track. Other such tonearms use a servo to try to move the tonearm which can't be precise enough to do any good when the spacing between record groves varies with the amplitude of the music signal. Furthermore, air bearings will introduce the hissing sound of the air and that hissing noise is bound to be louder than any speaker noise the friction of an oil bearing might introduce. Air pumps, the dirt and filter and water condensation problems are not acceptable. From what I can find, my only way to have a tangential tonearm is to make one myself.
Does anybody have any suggestions, for instance, a set of plans I could buy for a tangential tonearm which does not require an air bearing or a servo motor drive? I have built other electronics myself which I like more than what I could buy if I could afford it. I think if I took my time machining the parts it would make a nice finishing touch to my turntable. Your ideas would be of great value to me.
128x128drbarney1
drbarney1
The tracking error is reported to only go up to at most 2 degrees before the servo applies correction, verses 15 to 10 degrees for a pivoted tonearm.
Hmmm, I’m not aware of any pivoted arm that would have tracking error that high, except perhaps one of the "zero offset" arms. The maximum tracking error of a typical properly installed pivoted arm is on the order of plus-or-minus just a few degrees. By way of example, the SME V is spec'd with a maximum tracking error of 0.012 degrees per mm from null.
drbarney1
I am not interested in air bearings because they are too complicated and too given to maintenance requirements and the noise they make diminishes the signal to noise ratio as a whole of the system - such noise would not be tolerated if it cane from the speakers.

^^^^^^

1) Complicated - As this is an audio hobby - complicated is but relative to the individual.

2) Maintenance - As long as the air is dry there is no more maintenance than any pivot arm. Do some research on Timeter Aridyne.

3) Noise - I will assume your statement is based on assumptions or theory; or you have heard past setups which were not set up properly and or just a plain bad design.

The simple test is to ..... with the Air OFF ..... lower the stylus onto a still record. UNMUTE and turn the volume up. Then have a friend turn your pump on as you keep your ear to the speaker cone, panel, horn - whatever you are using.

Cheers - Good luck on your adventure.


I'm the maker of the AirProdigy air-bearing, linear-tracking arm and I note with interest the comments above.

bdp24, you realise of course that Vic's Transfi Terminator was a 'copy' of Poul Ladegaard's pioneering low-pressure air bearing tonearm?!

Of course that's not true - Vic's Terminator wasn't a direct copy - there were all sorts of modifications he made in order to improve on the original design. In particular he inverted the airtrack, which was a useful advance because the airtrack could then be positioned above the record to allow a much shorter 'glider' arm to be used which had the potential for enhancing sound quality.

There are a number of high-pressure air-bearing arms on the market (such as the Cartridgeman arm) which use commercially produced cylindrical airbearings to achieve linear tracking of the cartridge across the record. These arms are expensive, heavy and cumbersome and require long sub-arms to track the cartridge over the record, since the bulky air-bearing section is located beyond the circumference of the record.

I contend that my own version of the low-pressure, air bearing, linear-tracking tonearm is by no means a copy of the Terminator but introduces its own major enhancements. I'm not attempting to advertise my own product here but defend a project I've been developing over a long period.

I had a Terminator for a number of years (I've owned many different tonearms) and was very impressed with the sound quality, which was better than all the pivot arms I'd heard. However there were a couple of aspects I was never really happy with, namely the size and weight. The Terminator's a bulky arm and weighs a lot! It's just not possible to mount it adequately on suspended sub-chassis decks and I particularly wanted to try it on my Thorens TD520. That's when I decided to try and create my own version.

I have introduced what I believe are a number of major improvements to this genre of tonearms. The AirProdigy is unique in being cheap, light and compact and it sounds excellent!

The airtrack is mounted over the platter so the glider-arm (as I call the sub-arm) can be short and light. The low weight of the glider-arm improves tracking and minimises resonances, which degrade sonic performance, by avoiding a long, tubular arm.

I used CAD to craft specific parts for the arm by professional SLS 3D-printing so that I was not limited to the availability of different aluminium profiles. The nylon printed parts have the major benefits both of lightness and low resonance while also being rigid, strong and hard. Parts I designed that I am particularly proud of, and which help with my goal of straightforward setup, include the arm height mechanism and the levelling mechanism.

So although the same in the general principle of operation to the Terminator, I believe my AirProdigy arm has major advantages in terms of applicability to a wide range of turntables, lightness, compactness and low price. And it sounds at least as good!

Thanks for coming to the forum and sharing your thoughts Andy.
I still have yet to decide on trying one but your comments here may well help.
See if you can spot where things go wrong:
With the pivoted tonearm a typical tracking error causes one side of the needle to delay on the order of about 0.25 milliseconds which at the speed of sound of 1000 feet per second (the acoustic speed outdoors on a cold winter day) this is equivalent to one speaker being 3 inches further away than the other But with two ears is this significant, 

Got it? No? Could it maybe be....
tracking error causes one side of the needle to delay on the order of about 0.25 milliseconds 
Delay .25ms compared to.... what? I don't think its the other side. The needle does not delay at all. It keeps right on moving the whole time.