General question on Carbon fiber tonearms versus aluminum


Is it my imagination or is it real?  In a very general sense, do Carbon fiber tonearms sound a bit better than the aluminum tubes?   I am not sure but if I was a betting man, I would put money on the carbon fiber tubes.   Any comments here?

I'd especially like to hear from folks who have had both on their turntables or who have owned both just not at the same time.

Thanks!
spatialking

Showing 4 responses by noromance

it is possible that the live sound from aluminum, if indeed  it is from the arm itself, could be energy from the cartridge that is causing the arm to color the sound in a rather pleasing way.  The dead sound from fiber, if indeed it is from the arm itself, could be the lack of this coloration.
I'll take the live sound any day for it's pleasing nature over the dead sound of possible lack of coloration. 
That subtle lack of noise and distortion in the upper frequencies were considered a lack of "air" and consequently colored the sound in a bad way.  
This isn't the same as acoustic ringing or damping. Dolby effectively filtered frequencies (-3 dB at 600 Hz/ -6 dB at 1.2 kHz/ -8 dB at 2.4 kHz/ -10 dB at 5 kHz) resulting in a removal of ambient information. Back in the 80s, we never used Dolby B or C as both sounded worse than the clear and airy unadulterated sound—albeit with tape noise.
@lewm I compared the CF headshell with my standard magnesium one and, while bass was better on the CF, it lost absolute detail—diminishing the color of brass, for example—and "dried" out the "air."
In particular, that has been true of the very few carbon fiber tonearms I have heard. They have tended to produce a sound that seems overdamped, lacking in dynamics.
@lewm I have both and the CF one is way less dynamic, less detailed, slower, and ultimately less musical than the aluminum ones. But it does have a taller and more expansive soundstage. I found the same thing with a Yamamoto CF headshell.