****Dampened it****
Interesting! Not the effect that the double spring has, making the sound much tighter with better detail, but less warmth. Perhaps it's the particular material you used. When you did this, did you notice LESS horizontal movement of the I beam.
Yes, I use the damping trough. In my set-up, while I would agree it does dampen the sound, it also makes the sound staging more stable with better separation. |
BTW, the key to using the damping trough is to allow the paddle to just barely touch the fluid. Otherwise the sound gets too slow.
Ct, can you be more specific as to what you mean by "damping". It's possible this is a semantics issue, whereby your "damping" is my "controlled". What I hear with the lower compliance in the spring is slightly smaller images, but better separated, better integration of the highs with the midrange, overall better detail with a slightly brighter presentation. Although, the highs are, as I said, better integrated and less "splashy". Perhaps this is what you hear as dampened. |
For $15 bucks I am not going to mess around with this - I just ordered a double spring I Beam from Bruce. I warned him to be ready to possibly make a few. :^)
I told Bruce about this thread but he is too busy.
Buying these arms used:
Based on my experience the problem we have here is that when people buy these arms "used" very rarely I think do the arms come in their boxes due to their age and parts go missing. I have bought three of them in total and each time something was missing. I never got 2 I-Beams in three purchases.
Frogman – words describing the music are not my strong point. But I can tell you if it sounds good , better or best to me. So yes “semantics”
You said “Although, the highs are, as I said, better integrated and less "splashy". Perhaps this is what you hear as dampened.” - EXACTLY thank you.
If the sound is less detailed – not as much information I tend use the word “thick” to describe it – which to me is like fog or things not being clear.
Dover said in his post – “I have found any sort of dampening other than the magnet described slugs the sound.”
Looking forward to hearing about this magnet Dover. |
Re I beam compliance
I think what Bruce is saying is he is using the decoupling of the balance weights to reduce the effective horizontal mass which allows the use of heavier arm components with their inherent increased stiffness. This seems to imply the use of the single leaf beam to provide the max decoupling, but the best answer is complicated by the compliance of the cartridge you are using.
If I understand correctly the selection of heavier weights close in or smaller weights further out also depends on cartridge compliance and can be verified by measuring the horizontal resonance frequency with a test record.
Changing the compliance of the beam will have a significant effect on the resonance with the stiffer beam increasing the resonant frequency. I may have that backwards but the idea that it changes with the I beam coupling is correct.
The stiffness of the component parts of the arm are physical factors that cannot be changed by anything attached such as I beam and balance weights. The amount of deflection in the arm components however will change with the change in weight and coupling of the I beam assembly. This deflection is however vanishingly small except perhaps at the I beam spring. |
For what it's worth, I have used this arm for about twenty two years, and have used more cartridges (of all persuasions) than I can remember. While the effect of lower compliance at the I-beam spring has been most noticeable with low compliance/high rigidity MC's, the effect has been consistent with all types of cartridges, including high compliance MM's. I think it's important to remember that issues involving resonance and resonant frequency can be rather mysterious, and since their effects are audible mainly (but not only) as effects on tonal balance, that system synergy/personal preference re tonal balance are an important part of the equation. |
The ears always rule. Didn't mean to suggest otherwise.
If things always worked as physics suggests then this treck would be much easier. |
|
Hi everyone, very interesting topic! I have obtained a used ET2 with Bruce’s upgrade 2.5 bearing, but have yet to set it up.
I am very interested in the discussion on the I-beam compliance. As far as I can tell, the arm on the Walker Proscenium turntable (which is of similar design to the ET2) has a direct couple counterweight. Since the Walker is being regarded as one of the best, I was thinking of modifying the ET2 in such manner.
I wonder what are the pros and cons to the 2 different approaches. |
ketchup
I originally tried the 0.003 wire(0.005 coated) from phoenix, but just could not get a good solder connection and breaking the wire pretty easily while trying to handle the rca plugs.I got tips about sanding the teflon off and that did help improve the soldering process.
also the thickness wire i was discussing was the coated diameter. If you are nifty with handling the fine wire, the smaller diameter is the way to go. If the diameter is too large, the wire is too stiff and will impact the freeplay of the tonearm. Sorry about not discussing the smaller diameter earlier. I went back to the spools i actually used, and the 0.005 bare (0.007) was very similar to the 0.003 wire from Phoenix in my ability to handle (ie, hard to handle without breaking or getting a good solder connection). The 0.008 bare (0.011 coated) is what is I am using on my tonearm. The 0.010 bare(0.013 coated) was easier to handle but was a little to stiff for my application. I did not mention earlier the type of air pump I use but my apollo uses the original superquiet pump from maplenoll but my ariadne signature uses a JunAir compressor which i really like. Very quiet and dependable. It also has a good air regulation control system that i like. |
Thekong, congratulations! As should be clear so far, we feel this is a terrific arm. And if you enjoy tinkering...well, you'll be in heaven. I think the ET's reputation for requiring a lot of maintenance is exaggerated and unjustified, as I have found that once you have it set up well it will stay that way; pretty much. As a footnote, I have my TNT on a wall mounted platform bolted directly into the wooden studs in a wall of a 100+ year-old house. I have wondered why the arm needed rebalancing every few months. Then I started to notice a pattern. I realized that the seasonal shifting of the studs/walls due to seasonal temperature changes was causing the arm to need rebalancing.
I would be very interested in learning how you accomplished direct-coupling of the counterweights, so please keep us posted. As posted earlier, I made an I-beam with less compliance than even the double spring stock version in an attempt to get vas close as possible to a dc arrangement. Apbii, does a good job of explaining the theoretical pros/cons of more or less compliance at the I-beam spring. From the standpoint of sonics what I can tell you is (as Ct found out out) that the effects of less compliance are not subtle. As always, you will have weigh your personal tonal balance preferences against what will be a much better organized sound, with more tightly controlled imaging and over-all leaner sound. You may also come across a cartridge that simply requires higher compliance for good tracking; I have not owned one that didn't track at least adequately with the lower compliance I-beam. |
If you want to experiment with really low compliance tightly coupled counterweight you could just wedge something like a tooth pick in the joint to essentially remove the spring from the equation. I think Bruce mentions this somewhere, in any event I didn't invent it, just passing it on. |
Frogman..Good point on the wall mount, I usually check the TT level often for that very reason.
Ketchup.. Thanks for the tip on shim stock.
With regards to the damping trough... if the best results come from the paddle lightly touching the fluid, would there be any sonic difference in trying different weights of fluid or is that going way too far out in left field. Has anyone tried this? |
Hi TheKong
Welcome to the ET2 ET 2.5 Music Lover Fraternity :^) - look forward to hearing about your coupling ideas.
I have an I Beam and 3 separated springs coming to me. I am going to try 2 then 3 springs. I quick look through the manual showed me no mention of multiple springs or trying them. Just the single spring - it it buried somewhere.
Frogman my two current I beams are not the same. They both have one spring but someone has added another what appears to be (folded aluminum type shim) to one of them.
From the Et2 manual - Page – 28 “By changing the weights used and the effective mass of the arm. You can change the low frequency performance of the tonearm.”
This tells me we can play around with it.
In my discussions with Bruce and it states it in the manual he has designed this arm to be neutral down to 5 hz with a medium compliance cartridge. For this is reason it is my opinion that the instructions in the manual reflect and support this.
We all have different gear/rooms listening preferences – you need to experiment here. There is no free lunch / silver bullet in audio. I have learned in the last 18 months comparing turntables that this is a vibration hobby and a black hole. My two ET2 and ET 2.5 were my best tools during this. We need to try things and use your ears and nothing else IMO to decide for yourself. BTW - I do not use the VTA scale on the arm. I use my ears. It can introduce resonances. I removed it.
Has anyone tried a brass or other material counterweight bolt and heard the effects in your room ?
I have been experimenting with the weights closest to the spindle. I have removed enough weight from one of my ET2 arms and positioned it at the end to compare. Frogman and others, have you found the very end to be best or to be just a tad in on the IBeam ?
Early impressions some aspects improved others not so sure. The multiple springs and the IBeam may tell the story for me. It appears from Frogmans experience that we need multiple IBeams for matching up cartridge compliance ?I see this as an advantage in Bruce' design that we can do this. It takes only a few minutes to change an Ibeam out with another one. I have been using this high compliance MM for comparisons. I got involved with Rauls MM thread this past year. It provided me with the means $$ to buy two very good cartridges to do my comparisons. I am familiar with the sound of it so will leave it on for this comparison before I switch back to an MC cartridge. The sound definitely got a tad brighter in my system with less weights out to the end. But other aspects improved. To early to say anything. Any opinions on this ?
I have received emails since the thread started. Some prefer more weight closer to the spindle. The manual supports them being out to the end as Frogman made clear.
I understand why when I ask Bruce about weights – adding/removing/ positioning he is smart to say – IT DEPENDS ON THE CARTRIDGE and compliance. He then said to have fun and experiment.
BTW this thread is at 1500 views. I can see this through the old web page. I cannot however see or access my virtual system page yet when I try to get in from the new web page. Any one else with this problem? |
Ct0517,
I still can't edit my virtual system. I emailed Audiogon about it on the 9th and they said that they will forward my problem to their programmers. I'm sure they have bigger problems to address right now, but a few more emails from other users stating the problem probably wouldn't hurt. |
OK, I did some experimenting today with my set-up. First I removed quite a bit of damping fluid. I heard more information coming through (air, ambient info, detail) and found that I needed to raise VTA somewhat, but things were sounding somewhat dark. I removed my added weight, slid lead weights outwardly to bring me to 2 grams tracking on my Dyna (manufacturers recommended VTF)set the VTA back to where I thought it should be. The sound has opened up quite a bit and still seems to have the dynamics, fast transient response, and real bass weight (not bloated). Conclusion for now: I used more damping fluid than necessary to evaluate my set-up.
When I set up my cartridge, I use the help of a lighted magnifying glass to try and visually set at 92 degrees. This is where I make my reference point in regards to VTA for any record.
I'm a little frustrated with the recent changes to A'gon myself. |
Slaw, glad the changes yielded good results. You said:
"With regards to the damping trough... if the best results come from the paddle lightly touching the fluid, would there be any sonic difference in trying different weights of fluid or is that going way too far out in left field. Has anyone tried this?"
Yes, I did. And yes it's probably going too far in left field. Eighteen years ago or so, before I had kids and had a lot more time on my hands I actually tried, among other things, vegetable oil and hair conditioner (which dried up and made a mess). Bottom line: same results can be accomplished by controlling how far into the fluid the paddle goes. BTW, you don't need to remove or add fluid. Simply turn the paddle one way or the other with needle-nose pliers to raise or lower it. |
ET2 Damping TroughHi Frogman/Slaw/others – what type of fluid are you using for damping now after all these years ? Have you changed from the ET supplied fluid. Slaw – you said “The sound has opened up quite a bit and still seems to have the dynamics, fast transient response, and real bass weight (not bloated)” Without the trough in place I noticed similar results / just a tad brighter. I have not re installed the damping trough yet. Weights are to the very end. I added one thin ET2 lead weight last night which brought the weight assembly of the 1.1 gram cartridge to number 5 on the scale. The benefits remained with a little more bottom end and it seemed to help with the highs as well in my system. But I need another listening session to be sure. Call me crazy - I believe the mood you are in when you start listening to your system affects what you hear - the body has blockers. This is just a gut feel obviously. Listening sessions over multiple days usually ensures me what I am hearing is in fact what it is to me in my room. FWIW – the same words here describing the sound we are hearing is how I would describe the sound improvement I heard when I replaced the soft VPI rubber belts with thread except it was multiplied. Cheers |
Chris... I still use the ET supplied fluid. Your observation on mood influencing what you hear I think has some validity. When listening to brand new Lps, what I hear the first time doesn't always equal to what I hear the second time. I believe this has something to do with unknown expectations. |
I am using the ET supplied silicone fluid. |
ET air pressure:
I've experimented again. I understand other perspectives' (17 psi) , however, in my system ( and I do believe this is system dependant), very slightly under 19 psi is the desired pressure. |
Not seeing the forest for the trees. Sometimes the obvious is not so obvious.
Both of my ET2 arms are currently mounted on pedestals/pods where the braided wires come down vertically at least 6 inches before they touch the plinth. I had experimented with the newer Cardas wire and it was causing some frustration in me this past year as I moved the arms around many times between pods, pedestals and full plinths. That Cardas wire just seemed to twist and curl, go into loops when braided and was not user friendly.
Well from pictures and suggestions here I unbraided about 8 inches of the wire into separate strands starting where it exits the arm tube. Much better results. With each strand separated it no longer twists and curls into loops -it can be tugged at with little effect on the arm, when it is raised and balanced with the extra blue tac on the couhterweights making it delicate. Just passing this on.
Cheers |
|
How much weight can the ET-2, ET-2.5 designs carry on the I Beam ?
I hope that this will help to clear up ALOT of questions with some of you. It did for me.
The high pressure manifolds are not all the same. The ET 2 and ET 2.5 high pressure manifolds were built based on customer specifications for the pumps they were planning on using. So there are different versions. The higher pressure versions of these will handle more PSI and will also handle more weight. How much weight ?
On January 3rd - I posted this information from Bruce regarding adding more weight.
Chris
Adding weight in this direction causes an asymmetric load on the air bearing so there will be a point where the bearing may bottom at the end of play position.
The other thing to consider is the suspension system of the turntable, you are adding moving mass, this weight moving laterally may cause the suspension to deflect and change the state of level of the tonearm. Increasing the horizontal inertia can cause increased rumble.
As long as you understand these potential problems it does not hurt to experiment and have fun. Thanks
brucet
In Support of this.
Here is an email trail from “today” to help as well. Understand that the ET-2 Design and the existing ET2.0 manual is based on the original design running at 3 – 3.5 psi from years ago
On 1/17/2012 7:35 AM, wrote:
Hi Bruce
The ET-2 is provided with counterweights for 15 grams.
The use of less weight with lighter cartridges as the manual discusses is preferred - and the goal is to keep the weight at the end of the IBeam (higher number).
The manual says we can add more weights up to 20 grams.
Is the 20 gram a threshold number where after that, the weight affects the arm in a negative way?
What did your studies show will happen to the arm with more weight than 20 gms?
Thank u.
Chris
--------------------------------
Chris,
Use the minimum amount of weight far back on the beam meaning beyond scale number 4. The only limitation is air bearing binding at the extremes of travel due to the asymmetric load. If your air bearing will carry the load you can put any amount of weight on it. I hope this helps.
brucet
----------------------------------
Thx Bruce - in your opinion does a higher air pressure 20 psi coming out of the manifold allow for more weight to be placed on the I Beam than say 6 psi.
Does the higher 20 PSI support the air bearing better for more weight than say 6 PSI or does it have nothing to do with it.
Chris
-----------------------------------
Chris,
Yes, higher pressure should allow you to carry more weight. – brucet
REVELATION PART OF IT
I then called Bruce.
I found out that all these ET 2.5’s manifolds are designed based on the pumps that were to be used with them by the customers ordering them. They will not all do 20 psi at the arm. If you bought a new ET 2.5 the manifold has been built for the pump you are using or told Bruce you were going to use.
If you bought it used what was the previous pressure the owner was using? If you don’t know there is an easy answer – bump up the pressure and listen to what happens. When does it hit the brick wall? It sounds like for some here it is 15 psi – 17 psi. For others 20 psi is not an issue and maybe beyond.
My ET 2.5 manifold was designed for 20 + psi. How do I know? I had Bruce do the update from a ET 2.0 last year and told him I was running 20 psi on it and above. It still works at 10 and 15 psi but I can also go to 20 psi + with no issues and I now intend to try 25 -30 PSI with a different hose and see what happens.
I hope this clears up questions.
BTW – If it is not obvious from the Jan 3rd post Bruce does not know how much weight a high pressure spindle designed for 20 psi can carry. He did tell me definitely more than 20 gms. Too many factors involved including the turntable – like if is suspended, and other considerations ….
This is why he says experiment and have fun.
Cheers
I hate these long posts - sorry for any errors. |
Ct0517, good info. What I would like to know is how to inspect a manifold to determine what pressure it's set up for. I would guess that things like the spindle/manifold clearances and capillary size would need to be measured. Did Bruce mention how to determine this? Maybe he could let us know the specs that he built the to for different pressures. |
That last sentence should read, "Maybe he could let us know the specs that he built them to for different pressures." |
Can anyone describe the symptoms / downside of over pressure?
Initially (recent history as I have had this arm since '85) it seemed that the music dulled a bit above 16 psi.
After replacing the spring suspension in my TNT mk 1? with delrin cups and racquet balls I don't think I can hear any difference between 15 - 19 psi. |
Can you visually inspect an ET 2 manifold to determine what PSI its set up for ?
Chris,
The manifolds look the same, there were no exterior markings. You would need a pressure and flow gauge to determine the manifold type. Thanks
brucet
On 1/17/2012 9:49 PM, wrote:
Hi Bruce
A question from an owner that bought an ET2 used.
other than hooking it up to a pump to see what it can handle -
Is it possible to visually inspect a manifold to determine what pressure it's set up for ?
Can the differences be seen - Are there specs for the different PSI's ?
thank u - Chris
Full Disclaimer – I am not a dealer, distributor, or manufacturer of this ET2 tonearm. I am just a user and a fan. I started this thread looking for an exchange of information between ET2 owners new, experienced and soon to be, with the objective that we can all improve our ET2 setups through these discussions. |
If one were to purchase a new ET 2.5 today, can anyone recommend a new, moderately priced turntable that could be fit with an arm board that is compatible ? |
Since no one has responded I will post my thoughts and see if anyone comments.
I think of it this way:
As the pressure is increased the volume of air used increases and this is dependent on the clearance between the manifold and spindle. At some point that escaping air will become obvious in two ways, one being the noise created and the other will be horizontal force on the arm at the end of travel.
The increase in pressure will also make the tube / manifold interface stiffer and I think this is what causes the increased performance. It seems to me the the stiffer the better as long as other factors such as oscillations, vibration etc. from the escaping air don't rise to a
level that they cause problems.
My arm is a very early version, so certainly not optimized for higher pressure, and I can feel the air escaping at 19 psi but I can't hear it yet. I have not tried to determine if it introduces significant horizontal force. As I stated in my post I could hear some of the life or vibrancy go out of the music when I increased the pressure but since I have tightened up the suspension I no longer notice this change.
It would be interesting to ask Bruce about this. I suspect that as the pressure increases he reduces the clearance between the manifold and tube. There must be a point of diminishing returns and I wonder where he thinks it is.
As I think back on what I did I also made some adjustments to tighten things up on the arm / mounting board around the same time I changed the suspension so that may also be a factor.
I should plumb the pressure regulator so I can sit at the listening position and adjust the pressure so it is easier to evaluate changes.
|
Hi David - please tell us what moderately priced TT means -budget range ? Does it have to be brand new ? As I look at my naked TNT II without tonerarm I can see the one bolt that secures the ET2. The bolt is located about 2 5/8 inches from the nearest part of the platter and one inch above the spindle. Draw a horizontal line one inch above the spindle. a vertical line 2 5/8 inches beside platter. Where they join is the spot approximately just to give you an idea. It can be mounted anywhere "around" the platter as you only need a straight line to make it work. It is a universal mount design only the one threaded bolt needs to be drilled unless you plan on running wires and the air tube through a plinth as well. You can get info by going to the Eminent Technology website. Go to Support, Manuals ET2 Manual Part 2 - See Pages 62-63 or The manual can also be downloaded from Vinyl Engine ET-2 ManualLet us know if any questions. Cheers Chris |
Apbiii, I have never experienced what could be described as a decrease in performance by increasing the pressure; although I am sure there comes a point, as I think you found out with your regular manifold, at which the arm does not work optimally due to the higher pressure. The reason I like 17 psi and no higher is that because of the way my system is tuned, 17 psi is the most complementary. Higher pressure produces a sound that is too lean and overly controlled. I have no doubt that in a different system, with my cartridge, the arm would sound better at the higher pressure.
I am intrigued by your observation that with the rubber ball suspension
(lower compliance) you don't hear as much of the dulling of the sound with psi above 15. If your non-high pressure manifold is given higher psi, it's possible that the resulting instability due to the "turbulence" in the larger gap between the manifold wall and the bearing tube is made worse by the higher compliance of the tt's suspension.
A couple of other comments/ observations that come to mind about the arm:
-The capillaries do get clogged over time. Years ago I experienced a gradual dulling of the sound with eventual poor tracking. The problem was clogged capillaries. It is tedious but not difficult to clean them. DO NOT do what I have seen suggested in a couple of forums. Do not try to clean them by forcing alcohol through "the system". I tried it and made matters worse. The manifold must be removed and all the capillaries unscrewed off the manifold and cleaned individually with alcohol. The difference in sound from doing this was significant.
-Do not over tighten the two bolts that secure the manifold housing to the pillar. In some arms (mine) the holes for the bolts are tapped too long and will actually go into the inside of the manifold housing and dislodge the piece of tape that is in place to seal and make airtight the housing. The result is escaping air and decrease in pressure. |
When are you guys coming over? :-)
Siriusly -hehe- when I had Bruce, no -- not that Bruce -- from Stereo Unlimited in San Diego set-up my deck, ET2 with VPI HW-19 Mk.IV, it sounded wonderful...
I'll get back to that sound, someday!
Thanks all for the great exchange of information :-)
Vbr,
Sam
|
Hi Sam - Welcome to the thread. The one where tonearm owners need life support for their straight lines; all in the name of no tracking distortion and natural sounds. Heh, heh
Two Bruce’s in HI FI eh ?
Sam - Don’t you have a leaky original pump ?
There is probably an ET2 owner near you - otherwise it is 0 degrees Celsius here – about 32F – what if I get a work assignment there for a week ?
I’m sure Slaw can provide many tips for that VPI HW19 MKIV.
APBiii good information - I will respond with my 2 cents worth. I have been doing some experimenting.
Frogman - can I ask what you think of this Empire 4000 DIII on the ET2 ? Don’t you also have one? Did u use it long enough to form an opinion? How does it compare to the many cartridges you have had on this tonearm?
Cheers |
Hi Chris,
The pressure gauge indicates the Wolfe-modified WISA pump operates satisfactorily; the system experiences a drastic pressure drop at the surge tank...there appears to be occlusion, there.
I'd like to keep the arm; however, at some point, I'll look for a non-suspended table :-)
It's in the forties, now...brrr.
-Sam |
Chris, I love the Empire. I think it is a terrific cartridge, and have used it long enough to form an opinion. From a technical point of view, I had no performance issues with it in the ET. Tracking was very good, even if not quite as solid as cartridges like my Monster AG2000 (ZYX), and VDH Grasshopper. IN MY SETUP the double spring I beam is a must in order to firm up what can be a bit of excessive fullness. These are some comments I posted a while back in Raul's MM/MC thread. I hope you find them useful:
*****I just received, and installed a NOS Empire 4000D III Gold. I am
VERY impressed. I have been somewhat lukewarm about the whole issue of the claimed superiority of MM's relative to MC's; and still, overall, in the MC camp. I own ATML170, Azden PVL 50, Andante, and while I recognize what they do well (very well, particularly in the case of the AT and Azden), I have still been unconvinced. The Empire could change all that.
I am interested in hearing from you guys about your findings re break-in, VTA, VTF, viscous damping, etc., in order to optimize it's performance.
Thanks.****
****Thanks guys. I have the Empire in a Eminent Technology 2 air bearing tonearm with the high-pressure manifold and pump; on a VPI TNT6 with "the works". So far, initial impressions are: Terrific clarity, with good inner detail. Tonally, a good middle ground between the white/bleached sound of the Andante, and the more romantic/golden flavor flavor of the Azden.
Open soundstage with good placement. Sound is definitely weighted towards the midrange, and so far seems a little bloated. That is why I ask
about break-in, and damping; a hunch tells me that things will even-out (tighten) a bit after a few more hours. But, in general, so far I like it better than the vaunted ATML170, which in my set-up seems a little slow/slightly boring in comparison. I am going to try fluid damping over the next couple of days and report back.****
****Dear Raul, thank you for your thoughts. I find the Empire to be anything but boring. It is, in fact, very alive sounding. That quality (or it's absence) is the most important performance consideration for me. If the component does not allow the music to move as it should, it doesn't
matter how great it's frequency extension, soundstaging, or tonal refinement is. That is what I meant by "boring" in reference to the ATML170. It is clearly an excellent cartridge in most respects, but in comparison to the Empire (and my MC's), it sounds just a little bit slow; rhythmically laid back. The Empire, in the exact same system sounds very alive, and lets the music move as it should. The AT has superior detailing of the soundstage, with more stable placement, but also sounds a little
closed-in in the highs; not enough natural color. I know "color" is considered a great sin by many audiophiles, but music has a tremendous amount of color, and some components seem to "bleach" the color out of
instruments' timbre. Everything then sounds very much the same, with a gray(ish) color; mistakenly referred to as "neutral". I am sure you are correct, and that 100K loading would improve that.****
****That is still my main issue with MM's in general. Until I heard the Empire 4000D III, every MM that I had tried, including the ATML170OCC, has sounded too relaxed to me. Not bad by any means, but compared to a good MC, without that essential quality of excitement in the rhythm of the music; like a coiled spring ready to unwind at any moment. I am still getting to know the Empire, and I am still not ready to say that in the dynamics (micro/macro) department it is the equal of my VDH MC's.**** |
C1 if you are really interested in visitors let me know, I would love to hear your Dalis.
Frogman the change in sound with changing pressure was fairly subtle prior to the suspension change and since the change is essentially nonexistent.
I don't think the manifold is clogged as the pressure is in the correct range with the original pump. I have had the manifold out and cleaned it but it was some time ago.
If I get bored perhaps I should do it again just to be sure. |
Hi Frogman – With all the cartridges you must have heard over the years on the ET2, thanx for confirming what am hearing with this Empire 4000 DIII cartridge . Thanks also for retrieving all those comments from that MM thread. Fantastic info.
For the the $350 -400 that I paid for each of these Empires they deliver alot of performance. I bought one on whim from following the MM thread. Having then heard it I figured what the hell this could work for what I had planned so I bought another. So two ET tonearms and 2 Empires helping me with my playing around with these TT's.
3 leaf springs and IBeam are still in mail and have not arrived yet. Will be keeping the Empire on and trying with a double spring as you suggest as soon as they come in. Looking forward to that. Then will be switching back to my favourite MC - in this case it happens to be a Benz Micro MC 3 which is SS Ruby Retip.
I have an old XV1 being rebuilt by Axel in Germany per the MM thread. Am anxious to get it back but very patient as he is hopefully bringing it back from the dead.
Currently listening with lead weights positioned as far back as possible on the I- Beam.
Cheers Chris |
Ct, please keep us posted re the use of the double spring. BTW, I have been tempted, but resisted so far, to super glue the stylus assembly/carrier to the cartridge body. I did it to my ATML170OCC for a nice improvement in refinement. Those removable stylus carriers even though they appear to fit tightly in the body of the cart will benefit from the extra rigidity.
Apbii, my comment about clogged capillaries was a general comment. It doesn't sound like yours are clogged. But I realized that I misspoke (miswrote?) in my comment about the over tightening of the bolts. I was
referring to the two bolts (four total) on either side of the VTA block. I never asked Bruce about this in the handful of conversations I have had with him over the years, but I suspect that in the case of my arm it was a machining error that caused those holes to be tapped so long to pierce the manifold housing. Perhaps not, and all arms are that way so careful with over tightening.
David, re suitable tables: I first mounted my ET on a VPI HW19 Mk 2, upgraded to a MK 3, then a Mk 4, and currently my TNT Mk 6 (actually,
it's a bit of a hybrid. Mk 6 with a Mk 5 platter). That series of tables make terrific platforms for the ET. There is ample space for the arm, and the spring suspension can be replaced with less compliant sorbothane or cones which is ideal for the ET. When the ET first came on the market it was the general consensus that a non-sprung table was best; although I always found it interesting that the ET website and manual shows it mounted on a SOTA which is sprung. Another popular combination was the ET on the Oracle; and man, that combination LOOKS cool. Personally, I would look for a HW19 MK2,3, or 4(best) if you want a
moderately priced table. Not sure what you consider moderately priced, but an older TNT is even better. I am currently lusting after a Technics SP10 MK2, which I suspect would be a fantastic combo with the ET on the right plinth. |
Hi Dover – Can you tell us more about this tuning of the ET2 leaf spring by torque ? on the compliance thread. Looks interesting. Frogman have u or others tried this ? Linear Tracking Arms Compliance Thread
01-16-12: Dover
Atmasphere, when I used an ET2 many years ago these issues were ameliorated by
Using as light a counterweight as possible mounted on a horizontal leaf spring. By tuning the leaf spring through loosening the clamp you could reduce the initial horizontal effective mass when eccentric records generate side force.
The other trick I used was to place a small magnet under the horizontal bearing tube ( not touching it ). This effectively provides horizontal dampening far superior to using a fluid trough. It was so effective that the volume of the preamplifier had to be reduced - very surprising.
Dover (Threads | Answers | This Thread)
Dover how did u attach the magnet to the ET2? I'd email u for a pic but can't yet. Cheers |
Hi Ct0517, I'm very rusty since its about 15 years since I used the ET2, but from memory I had an I beam with a thin metal strip at the bearing tube end. I packed soft strip ( might have used thin lead or teflon ) either side of the thin metal bit that goes into the bracket on the end of the bearing tube and then played around with the tightness of the clamp - I was able to vary the lossiness of the I beam from rigid to virtually floating. Then I settled the point that gave the most natural bass soundwise with air around it.
Re the magnetic dampening, I used a small cupboard door magnet and simply placed it on the turntable plinth with a packer to get the magnet as close to the bearing tube ( the moving one ) without touching it. This magnetic dampening is used by Dynavector on their tonearms where a curved horizontal metal near the counterweight moves through 2 magnets above and below it as the tonearm transverses the record. |
Ct: As far as the high pressure manifols beiing "custom built", not, at least in my case. I had my (.5) upgrade done at least 15 years ago and Bruce did't ask me what pump/pressure I was using. I'm currently running 18psi,
Ketcup: I can run over 20 psi right now and not affect anything but the hose/connectors. IE: No issues regharding over 20psi into the ET 2.5 manifold.
Apbii: Any "soft" form of (suspension) in the VPI line of TT will result in a softening of transients and ,you guessed it, MUSIC.
OK guys, This is obvious, any rubber, compliant, suspension, WILL result in a overly warm, muddy, less "What we are all looking for" SOUND!!!!! |
Gotta love these mods that don't cost anything to try. WTH - honey what happened to all the magnets that used to be on the kitchen cupboards ?
Thx Dover - sounds like the our single, double metal strip IBeams are another way to accomplish this ?
Frogman - I am going to super glue the shaft of the older empire I have and connect to the body. I agree it could be alot more rigid. Will let u know how it works out.
Slaw - I should have got it in an email from Bruce.
|
Slaw, while I agree overall with your comments re type of suspension in the VPI line, I would qualify them with these observations IN MY SYSTEM:
The "overly warm" description is definitely system dependent. What might be overly warm in your system might be perfect in another. This also highlights semantics issues. I experimented with all types of suspensions in my sequence of VPI's (HW19mk2, 3 &4, TNT with spring and currently rubber ball suspension. I found spring suspensions (particularly with the HW19 series) to produce a more diffuse sound, not necessarily warmer. In fact, I found the sound to be less even linearly, with some highlighting of the lower highs, producing overall a sense of a brighter, not warmer, sound. This also gave the sound a livelier character; although I believe that was the result of the tonal highlighting, and less so a result of any issue of dynamics. Upturned metal cones (least compliant) in the HW19 produced a very tight, brighter and detailed sound, but too lean in my system. Sorbothane pucks with upturned short tiptoes was best. With my TNT, which began as a TNT6 plinth with original spring corner towers, the sound was again livelier but edgier and diffuse/bloated compared to the current rubber suspension. |
Frogman I do remember having an issue with air loss from the manifold due to a cap screw leaking. I don't remember which one it was, I resolved it by using Teflon plumbers tape on the cap screw.
Conversations with Bruce T implied that some have had problems with stripping the threads in the manifold where the adjustment block attaches.
I also think that if these screws are too loose it allows the arm to flex quite a bit which would seem to be very counterproductive. |
Frogman: You're right, I should say "In my system". |
Dover, When you mentioned removing the heat shrink from the arm tube, which arm tube were you talking about? My aluminum tube does not have any on it, but I also have what I think is the heavy magnesium tube (it's definitely not the aluminum or carbon fiber tube, and I'm not sure if they ever made a lightweight magnesium tube). When I got it, it had heat shrink on it, but I did not know if it was factory installed or not. It was a little damaged, so I took it completely off. What benefit did you see by removing the heat shrink? What did the metal beneath the heat shrink look like? Mine is a dull, gray color with a pretty rough surface finish, close to what 100 or 80 grit sandpaper would give. Here's a photo and a diagram of the magnesium arm wand. http://www.eminent-tech.com/25%20magnesium%20arm%20wand.htmlhttp://www.eminent-tech.com/magarmtube.htmlAlso, how did you remove the teflon "filler" in the headshell? I assume your talking about the white material inside the arm tube where it's squished together where the cartridge mounts. What did you do, buy a sheet of carbon fiber and cut and file it until it fit in the slot? What benefit did you see from doing this? Thanks a lot. |
Ketchup, I used the ET2 before the magnesium arm wand came out. The arm was smooth and gumetal grey under the shrinkwrap. !st I removed the heatshrink, more agile sound, then I removed the foam inside the arm tube - lighter sound but much more transparent.
For the cartridge mount I carefully prised open the end of the arm, enough to get long nosed pliers onto the soft insert and pulled it out. Then I got a thin piece of carbin fibre, cut to size, then inserted it into arm with araldite and clamped the headshell until dry.
I never compared this to the magnesium arm.
Cheers |
I have a very early ET2, so early in fact it came with an ET1 manual. Why would I mention this? Because there is a very interesting technique Bruce describes using a second tone arm and cartridge to measure arm resonance. Have any of you folks heard of this, especially those who have removed the damping materials? |
Slaw, apologies. In did not mean to come across as heavy handed. My comment was simply a statement of what I heard IN MY SYSTEM; not a suggestion that you should do the same.
Regards. |
Apbii, please describe that technique. Thanks. |
