@mulveling Well I guess you have no excuse not to try the LH-8000. I admit I was surprised too about my preference. It’s one of those things that was subtle but I kept going back to the Ortofon headshell and ultimately that’s where the RSP sounded best and where it ended up staying. I was able to use the Yamamoto HS6 despite the mounting holes because I can adjust overhang with my table’s sliding magnetic armboard.
I find it extremely difficult, with Koetsu, to see the cantilever well enough to adjust lateral angle at the null points. I rely on the cartridge body sides assuming they are parallel to the cantilever. I know this is a compromise. Let us know if the SmarTractor allows you to visualize the cantilever on your Koetsu if you end up grabbing one.
Normally i prefer to use manufacturer recommendations first, then i need some time get used to the sound, then i can make changes (maybe). But i can't hear any single problem with Stevenson for FR-7f, at the moment FR64fx + RF-7f is a great combination. What i realized is thast my new First Watt F2J power amp and First Watt B1 passive preamp makes huge different compared to my tube gear i used before. The resolution is so high, First Watt gear must be neutral, tube gear was colored (i believe). Even my belowed WLM Phonata mm/mc phono stage sounds completely different with new First Watt amps. It was much darker with tube gear, but with high resolution First Watt gear it's just great.
"overhang: 16.5mm, offset angle: 21.95° and P2S: 233.5mm. The distortion
levels goes down again as tracking error. That is Löfgren A/Baerwald
alignment but now with and EL: 250mm.
"
Yes, but we need very very long headshell (I do not know such a
sample) and we can not use Ortofon SPU and FR-7 cartridges.
My choice for FR64S is P2S 230mm. Löfgren A/Baerwald aligment via headshell: overhang: 16.7mm, offset angle: 22.25°,
effective length
246.7mm. If I use Ortofon SPU and FR-7, I am just on Stevenson geometry (by the way with great results).
@karl_desch I actually already have an LH-8000; I’ve had it for several years now! That’s impressive that you preferred its sound to the Yamamatos. I never did sound-quality headshell comparisons on the FR64fx, but I do know that the LH-8000 certainly sounds very good, especially with Ortofon silver leads. I’m actually interested in trying out the LH-9000 (carbon fiber + magnesium). There’s nothing else out there, really, that looks "normal" and is made from higher-end materials (how did you cope with the Titanium Yamamoto’s mounting holes vs. slits?).
I enjoy the debate on alignments. I’m probably gonna splash out for a SMARTractor, and go with a Baerwald alignment (maybe with the longer than 230mm S-P distances, as has been suggested). Fortunately the CA turntable facilitates easy adjustment of S-P distance. And I never play any 7" discs, and I don’t want to cater to inner grooves at the expense of the rest of the record, so no Stevenson for me.
@chakster : I'm not against which alignment is what you choosed. What I'm against it is that you posted " no prlem with Stevenson A alignment ", could be no problem for you but for almost all audiophiles exist a huge problem when in any tonearm the choice is Stevenson A alignment.
Btw, if Technics is what is using then they are ignorant of the real problems in that Stevenson A regards.
Btw, 20grs. on effective mass is not " low mass " tonearm as you said.
Dear @chakster@mulveling : You can try the cartridge/tonearm alignment in that FR with these parameters:
overhang: 16.5mm, offset angle: 21.95° and P2S: 233.5mm. The distortion levels goes down again as tracking error. That is Löfgren A/Baerwald alignment but now with and EL: 250mm.
@lewm you can try too. Of course if the headshell and tonearm permit it, my unit is not mounted so I can’t test if works but if works with no problem with the cartridge alignment then is a true improvement. improvement.
Well, 99.9999% of the audiophiles in the world always listen the normal LPs not 7"inch records.
I don’t care about audiophiles with their reissues, CDs or files. There is a certain kind of record collectors who’re mainly into 45s (7inch singles), because most of the music from the 60s/70s on 45s (7 inch) never released on LPs.
I also like LPs, but i’m not a typical audiophile, i believe. I came from record collectors world and i used to play my records in public for 20 years, also on radiostations. The 45s is my main format when i’m playing here or abroad, they are easy to carry (one song per side).
BTW the old Technics standard is very close to Stevenson, i think they are still using the same 52mm plastic gause for the GAE tonerms? If the arm geometry is the same as the old SL1200mkII series, then we got almost Stevenson on GAE? Or did they change it to Baerwald?
@invictus005 I have all kinds of tonearm (super light, mid, heavy mass) for my academic research.
Actually FR-64fx is not heavy mass, it's even said "low mass dynamic balanced tonearm", unless you're using W-250 counterweight with FR-7f cartridge (or SPU). Same with Lustre GST-801 with its 3 different counterweights, or AudioCraft tonearms etc.
For me everything FR related started with FR-5e MM cartridge, then FR-6se MM, then PMC-3 LOMC, and finally FR-7f LOMC praised by my rich buddy Nandric. This old and heavy monster with original LineContact stylus (in perfect condition) is something special. I think FR-7f sounds better on FX tonearm, but maybe my 64FX is in better condition than my ex Lustre 801 which was nice for my MM cartridges like Pioneer PC-1000 mkII or AT-ML series. The FR-64fx tonearm is primary for FR-7f cart in my system.
I want to keep two different arms on each turntable, light mass with MM and high mass with MC to learn more about different concepts.
Dear @chakster : Well, 99.9999% of the audiophiles in the world always listen the normal LPs not 7"inch records.
As I said Stevenson A is based on ignorance. Period.
Btw, don't " listen " to that so stupid people like those germans that have no idea to calculate Löfgren/Baerwald alignment. Not only ignorant but stupid.Period.
You left go a way superior tonearm in favor of your " new kid " FR. Well, I know that you are a seller too. Good. A seller of what? My own cartridges and stuff in upgrading process? As much as you and others.
My Lustre goes to an old friend in the neighbourhood, i'm very positive about FR64fx with FR-7f, can't do anything about it.
Makes no sense to use Stevenson A: higher distortions all over the LP surface in favor of WHAT.
If favor of "7 inch records as one of the reason, they are much smaller than "12 inch, and all musical information located as close to the spingle as the last track on LP surface. Less distortion in this particular area is more important than in the area outide of the '7 inch circle. But Stevenson was more concerned about classical music where crescendos moment (the most complex passages) located towards the inner side of the record. It's here in theory paragraph
If we want Löfgren A alignment in a FR tonearm using the FR effective length 245 spec then the P2S distance must be: 228.137mm , overhang : 16.863mm with an offset angle: 22.421°
@nandric correct, i trust my eyes, you should try feickert First points of loefgren and baerwald are so close to each other, so roughly 228 +/- is pivot to spindle distance if we don't use stevenson method.
@mulveling I have tried three different headshells with my Koetsu RSP and FR-64S (copper). Yamamoto HS-4 (carbon), Yamamoto HS-6 (titanium) and Ortofon LH-8000. Of the three, I like the Ortofon the best in my system. It has the right balance of detail without brightness, midrange beauty and bass extension. I use PASS XP-15/XP-10/XA30.5. I know that the RSP is different than the stone Koetsu (which I would love to hear!) but maybe you should give the Ortofon a try?
Dear @chakster : " I use Stevenson by default with several tonearms, no problem with that. "
I don’t know what you mean with no problem with that/Stevenson.
Always is a real problem to align any tonearm with Stevenson A choice and the problem is that even if you can’t detected or if you are quite satisfied with Stevenson A alignment is the alignment choice with the higher distortion levels that the other standard alignments ( and by a wide margins. ): Löfgren A or B all over the LP surface but the last 3mm of the inner most IEC groove standard distance that normally comes with out recorded grooves. Makes no sense to use Stevenson A: higher distortions all over the LP surface in favor of WHAT.
FR alignment specs comes for Stevenson A alignment and Mr. Ikeda as other Japanese brands that use Stevenson A are plain wrong. They have no idea about, they just did not understand how theose different alignment choices works. High ignorance level in this regards.
But those Germans are not only ignorant but stupid too when said that Löfgren A alignment for 246 effective length the P2S distance is 231.5mm. Totally wrong, it’s not.
If we want Löfgren A alignment in a FR tonearm using the FR effective length 245 spec then the P2S distance must be: 228.137mm , overhang : 16.863mm with an offset angle: 22.421°
But we can make Löfgren A calculations for a little longer effective length, say 247mm. This little change improves/lower the distortion levels.
Of course your Feickert protractor is rigth, no problem with. Dr. F. is not a stupid gentleman as other ignorants.
@mulveling , you can choose the P2S distance is convenient in your TT that permits the cartridge stylus to achieve the Löfgren A alignment. If you choose 247mm for the FR effective length then the Löfgren A/Baerwald gives you a P2S distance of: 230.283mm with 16.717mm on overhang and 22.23° on offset angle.
That is a way way better alignment than the Stevenson A choice or the ignorant " germans ".
You only has to send Yip MINT LP that build the Löfgren A/Baerwald protractor for that P2S distance and the TT spindle diameter measure.
Avoid to use FR/Orsonic/or the like headshells and you can improve that tonearm / cartridge sounds quality levels not only with that kind of alignment but re-wiring the internal tonearm cable and setting up the VTF in static way to avoid the ringing mechanism in that FR balanced design.
@chakster this last sentence is one of the advantages in the GST 801 over almost all the balanced tonearm designs but the MS. You left go a way superior tonearm in favor of your " new kid " FR. Well, I know that you are a seller too. Good.
... the first recommendation was to change Stevenson in Baerwald geometry. I have no idea why the most Japanese tonearms followed Stevenson. To get Baerwald the spindle-pivot distance need to be increased to 231.5 mm which result in eff. length of 246 mm.
In my case it’s the other way around, to set-up Baerwald (instead of Steventon) we have to move the arm closer to the spindle for a few mm (or to move the cartridge forward in the shell). Pivot to spinde distance on FR-64FX is 230mm, i use Dr.Feickert protractor, so i can chose Baerwald, Loefgren or Stevenson. Ikeda-San use Stevenson for this tonearm by default with correct pivot to spinde distande (230mm). The Stevenson points are closer to the spindle than Baerwald points. So when i put the needle to the Baerwald, without changind pivot to spinde distance, i have my needle a few mm behind the Baerwald points, which means the 230mm is too much (and must the shortened by a few mm).
You said it must be increased from 230 to 231.5 as your German reviewers said, but it must be shortened to about 228 as i can see to set up tonearm by Baerwald with Feickert protractor (which is a great, precision tool).
P.S. I use Stevenson by default with several tonearms, no problem with that.
I own both the FR 64 FX and the FR 64 S. Great arms, both of them. It seems that more and more people are aware of them, and the are becoming ever more expensive. I agree with @mulveling that a stone-body Kuetsu sounds great in an FR 64 FX, silver cable version. I run an almost 40 year old Kondo Audio Note Io ii in my FR 64 S, and on many recordings it is pure magic.
poor man is ok with me ......with my FR 64 fx I used a Grado cartridge that the guy I bought the arm from had mounted and what did I know.....not sure what Grado...black body with the JR logo. Thinking I paid $100 for it and new it would have been $200. Many moons ago. I had a Hafler dh100 pre amp with phono. A Hafler dh 220 amp driving Quad 57s that I bought for $700 from,as it turns out,Roy Harris aka mr tennis . According to my true audiophile cousin-of my- wife from whom I got the Haflers......I was very lucky that everything matched up. Not much more enlightened today but have learned a little .....but what music I heard from it all ......a Pink Triangle turntable I got for $150....all this I'm repeating from earlier in this thread.....the arm was $150 . Luck was with me. so now I spin cds happily on an Eastern Electric cdp, and my Pink and Fidelity Research wait for the time I finally get up and get back to spinning records......one of these days. I am the op,so i thought I should jump in, but I'm keeping a low profile in fear that my lack of knowledge and expertise will be exposed......and much respect to those here with the tech savvy , I'm green with envy but it appears to be my lot in life. I never let it stop me from enjoying the music ..... Hoping the response here will give me analog inspiration once again . Lots of lps I'd love to hear again.
I just snagged the FR64S with original B-60 base. I hope its bearings/etc are in good condition. I’ve had my FR64fx for years on a SOTA, and it certainly doesn’t feel like a "poor man’s" version anything -- just a fabulous arm with Koetsu stones and the Ortofon Cadenza Bronze (it’s lower compliance than the higher-end Ortofons, which I think makes it a perfect match for the FR64fx). That said, I had to scratch that 64S itch because of its reputation with Koetsu. I’ll be pairing this with my Coralstone and Clearaudio Master Innovation.
For those with FR64* experience, what the heck headshells do you guys like? It seems difficult to find a top quality headshell that meets all the requirements (e.g. the Clearaudio one doesn’t seem to have a finger-lift??). I’ve got 3 original FR headshells, and they look cool but seem mediocre at best.
Also, what kind of alignment curves do you guys like? I have a Mint LP for FR64, but it was made for the SOTA and I cracked it trying to fit on the Innovation spindle (I know, I know). Also I’ll have the headache of getting an arm board made for that B60 base, getting the right spindle-pivot distance, etc...ugh!
The conclusion of them both was , in short, that FR-64 FX is a '' poor man FR-64 S ''.
poor me :)) appart from this review we know nothing about comparison between two models, beside the fact that FX is more flexible in term of effective mass and can be lighter when needed (but still can accommodate FR-7f or SPU).
Nelson Pass is one of the greats in modern audio design; I have long had curiosity about his First Watt products, but none of those amplifiers were powerful enough to run my Sound Lab speakers.
My situation is totally different, his F2J current source power amp was designed only for full range drivers and with my 101db Zu Audio Druid i have so much power that i use only10-20% of the volume control on First Watt B1 passive preamp. F2J has only 5 watt at 8 ohm, but my speakers are 16 ohm, so i think i have only 3-4 watts power with them. It’s nice to realize that with my speakers i can live with 3 watts or even lower. Class A circuits (no feedback), he made only 100 units.
@sampsa55
Good to hear you’re enjoying it. Have you tried other cartridges? How do you like it compared to other tonearms?
I think it’s a great combination, what i’ve noticed is the Stevenson alignment of FR-7f on FR-64fx tonearm when i set up pivot to spindle distance with Feickert protracktor on my LUX 444. I’m gonna play with it for a few weeks, then i’m gonna swap my FR-7f with Ortofon SPU Royal G mkII with Replicant 100, they are almost identical in settings of the arm. But i can not use any lighter carts on my FR-64fx, because i have one one counterweight (w-250) designed for superheavy cartridges (30-32g). I think i prefer this FR tonearm compared to Lustre GST-801 which was also very good.
Last night i decided to remove Luxman SUT and ZYX Headamp from the chain and connected FR-7f directly to my JLTi phono stage. I enjoyed the quality and with this combo i can turn the volume up a bit on my passive pre, i think my ex low power tube push-pull amp was not right for this combo. So with First Watt gear i can use very low output cartridges without thinking of the volume pot (when it was too high on tube amp).
I realized 1000k ohm loading was more pleasant for FR-7f than 100 Ohm or 47k Ohm. But i need more time to play with it.
Chakster, You have to acquire something uses tubes for gain. Then you have to say here how much better it sounds than your SS stuff, just to piss off Raul. Seriously, Nelson Pass is one of the greats in modern audio design; I have long had curiosity about his First Watt products, but none of those amplifiers were powerful enough to run my Sound Lab speakers. However, about 3 years ago, I made some major changes to the speakers that have dramatically increased their efficiency.
I’m playin with my Fidelity-Research FR-64FX for a few days. I like this tonearm, it’s my first Fidelity-Research tonearm and with W-250 counterweight it works just fine with my FR-7f cartridge. The arm is easy to set up, the VTA is not "on the fly", but still easy to adjust, the tracking force is easy to adjust too. I like the black color of this combo (arm and cartridge). There is no disadvantages of FR-64FX compared to my ex Lustre GTS-801.
I use FR-64fx on Luxman PD-444 with FR-7f cartridge and Luxman AD8000 + 8030 Toroidal Silver SUT for low impedance cartridges (2-3 Ohm). Zu Audio Mission Phono MKII cable with WBT nextgen RCAs and my new Stereovox HDSE cables between the SUT and my JLTi phono stage.
Also my new First Watt F2J current source power amp for crossover-less speakers (and my First Watt B1 passive buffer peamp) giving me tremendous resolution i have never heard before in my system!
I think i will have to sell (to a friend) my WLM Minueta tube push-pull class A to justify my expenses on First Watt gear. But i will be missing silky bass of my belowed tube integrated with NOS vintage Telefunken valves.
At the moment i have no tubes in my system, Raul must be happy, lol
@nandric it's too complicated to make parts for tonearm, but i have additional original counterweight and ringweight for Lustre GST-801 owners if anyone need it. I'm moving on, 64FX is my new tonearm with W250 heavy counterweight (but i'm looking for light original counterweight too).
@chakster I'm staying out of this at this point because I'm in way over my head. That being said,I'm enjoying the exchanges and trying to absorb what I can. Glad to see the interest interest in the 64FX.
Your Lustre 801 has only the (thin) armwand made from steel.
Right, Lustre GST-801 Vibration-proofing of stainless steel arm-pipe. The rest composed of brass parts with huge stabilizer. I enjoyed this arm pretty much with various MM cartridges (Pioneer PC1000 mkII was great along with At-ML180), it’s the heavyest tonearm i have ever owned, low compliance MC carts (FR-7f and SPU Royal G MKII) were both fantastic.
@offnon57 I think this GST-801 is alternative to FR-64S with silver wire. Lustre GST-801 comes with silver wire too. The Lustre GST-801 is the first dynamic balance tone arm with contactless stylus force application system.
This Lustre's unique variable magnetic flux type stylus force application system is a magnetic contactless system of compact and simple construction using a rare earth magnet. Features high Precision radial bearings. VTA on the fly, Magnetic flux type anti-skating mechanism.
I’m waiting for my FR-64FX to try.
Meanwile the Lustre arm migrated to another home in my neighbourhood. It will be mounted on Technics SP-20 for a friend. This is my last picture of the Lustre 801.
@nandric Nandric, surprisingly I have never dismantled a FR64s. Dampening does not need to be provided by a lossy material such as rubber or grease. For example, if 2 different metals are joined together you can achieve bimetallic dampening. Example - Copper mat on aluminium platter dampens the aluminium. Technically you could argue the FR64 arm tube is damped by both the headshell joint and the joint between the tube and bearing pillar itself.
The arm itself in toto is damped by the termination/armboard material. Personally with 2 FR64S in my stable I have heard the "upper mid brightness" on occasion but this also depends on cartridge choice and arm termination/turntable as to whether it is an issue. The Naim Aro arm tube is "undamped" but has no upper mid brightness with any of the many cartridges I have used.
No tonearm is without colourations, when one describes the sound of a tonearm one is really describing the sound of the sum of the parts - turntable, tonearm, cartridge, cable and phono stage. This seems to be the point that continues to elude the Mexican.
Despite owning many tonearms that provide dampening, I have achieved maximum transparency by not employing dampening, but through cartridge compatibility and accurate set up. When I owned a high end shop in the 80's my experience was that 90% of turntables were not set up optimally and that in many instances dampening was used as a bandaid for what was ostensibly poor set up or system colourations.
He was or he is your friend ? I went to Lithuania to meet with Reed people to buy my tonearm, it was a demo version, headshell is different from later versions, but you're right - it is not designed to swap cartridges quickly, but i'm trying to use it as reference with carefully selected cartridge. I do swap carts on some other tonearms to compare the sound to Reed. The last cartridge that was absolutely fantastic on Reed is the original (old) Garrott P77. I sold my teak wood plinth for SP-10mkII and now my Technics is in the dark corner on Audio-Technica pneumatic suspension insulators AT-616 (the big ones), but without tonearm.
I'm gonna mount my Reed 3P on Luxman PD-444 turntable soon.
Nandric, That is something I mentioned to Raul and which he chose to ignore during one of his anti-FR64S rants. If you leave the FR64S in a cool environment, the pivot has a tendency to stiffen. If you then sit it at a reasonable room temperature and exercise the pivot, the stiffness goes away. This is probably the action of the lubricant ("grease") that you say you saw. Thus I also concluded that the bearing is dampened at least to some degree by this greasy packing material. Anyway, the arm sounds good regardless. I think resonant energy is also efficiently dissipated within the massy base of the FR64S, especially if you use the B60 accessory and a heavy metal arm board (which I do).
The aesthetics is very important for me, i can’t ignore it, the SME 309 and SME V are the ugliest tonearms in my opinion, every turntable with this arms looks awful. Well, i’m talking about the design, but not the quality of those arm, i’m sure they are high quality tonearms, but i love vintage tonearms not only because they are good, but also because i appretiate design of those classic gear. For the same reason i hate most of the modern turntables and most of the modern tonearms. I can’t deal with expensive stuff if i don’t like the design (color, shape etc). It is not important for everyone, but for me it is very important. Even the old SME are not my kind of tonearms, but they are closer to what i like aesthetically (except the one SME made for high compliance carts).
Yes, my interest in FR64fx is mainly for Fidelity-Research cartridges such as FR-7f and PMC-3 (and also the best SPU Royal with Replican 100 stylus which i am selling).
For "normal" cartridges i’m happy with my Reed 3p "12 Cocobolo - this tonearm is hard to beat, but it’s not good idea to swap the cartridges every week.
The Technics EPA-100mk2 is another one from my arsenal, but damn, it’s impossible to mount it on Luxman PD-444, the vta on the fly mechanism makes this arm too high in the lowest possible position. So i will have to use it on SP-10mkII or on Victor TT-101 later on. Maybe i need tonearm pod.
@dover Since the torque created by the mass of the cartridge that you're trying to balance is force x distance, a larger counterweight closer to the pivot can have the same torque but lower moment of inertia. Ok. Thanks.
@sampsa55 For a point mass the moment of inertia I = mass x Radius ( distance from pivot ) squared. The further you push a weight out the moment of inertia increases disproportionately ( by the distance squared ).
@nandric Sorry! I meant @chakster. He acquired an FR64fx to use with his FR7 & SPU.
And regarding the mechanics, since you are adjusting both the distance and the mass so that they balance exactly the same thing on the other side, it's not obvious to me why anything important would really be different. If you're moving the same mass to be closer, then you are clearly having an effect, but then you would also need to adjust the mass on the cartridge side to remain in balance. But I'd be happy to be educated on this.
You must have a verified phone number and physical address in order to post in the Audiogon Forums. Please return to Audiogon.com and complete this step. If you have any questions please contact Support.
