Gimbal vs unipivot tonearms

Ginmal arms or arms with two axis bearings if done correctly are superior.
They are also more expensive to manufacture. Unipivot arms are easy and inexpensive to make They are a little more difficult to handle as they wobble when you pick them up. They are more difficult to keep in adjustment and are more finicky to set up. They tend to have more bloated less detailed bass. The two exceptions to this are the Graham arm which is stabilized by opposing magnets and the Basis arms which are really not unipivots they are bipivot arms. There is a secondary bearing that fixes the torsional axis.
Tonearm wobbling and torsional instability are very bad issues in a tonearm as they can adversely affect the cartridges performance. 
I will never own another unipivot arm.  There are so many excellent arms available with wonderful bearing designs at reasonable prices. But, you can always make a unipivot cheaper if that is what you are after.

@chakster , The Reed 3P is not a unipivot arm and certainly does not act like one. It is very creative but IMHO the 2G is the Reed arm to go for.
I was considering it but in the end I went for the Schroder CB. 

sokogear, there is no accounting for taste. There have been some pretty fancy and expensive unipivot arms. To my knowledge only the Graham as remained a true unipivot and managed to control the torsional stability problem. It is very expensive and there are many who think it is the best arm out there. The one I have played with dates back before  magnetic stabilization and it suffered all of the typical unipivot problems. Basis added a second bearing. 
@cleeds, sorry about my mis-typing of gimbal. Proper well designed 2 axis arms are better and that is a fact. Why do you think the manufacturers of two very fine arms went through so much trouble to stabilize the third axis? Ask Mark Dohmann or Frank Schroder that question and they will give you the very same answer.
 IMHO the VPI tonearm is garbage which is not to say it can't sound ok under the right circumstances. Originally it even had no anti skating device. My guess is the designer could not figure out how to add one so he made up this story about how it sounded better without it. I am not kidding either. 
Peter Ledermann is entitled, like the rest of us to make an occasional mistake. Because he finally associated with  the right tonearm designer I will forgive him that mistake, not that he really cares. But I did buy one of his more expensive cartridges. Can't wait to hear it. 

Antigrunge, experience is the best teacher and yes, sometimes things really are that simple... except for the simple minded. 

Clearthink, you are a riot. It is physics and science that I rely on. You on the other hand seem to prefer mythology. You have to put the computer games down for a while and visit reality. 

Elliott, the SME 3009 is in no way shape or form a unipivot arm. It has ball races for the horizontal axis and a knife edge bearing for the vertical axis. 

@chakster  The 3P is a fine tonearm and Its azimuth on the fly feature is very creative, I just prefer the 2G. My reasoning is the 2G's vertical bearing is down at record level and it is a neutral balance arm. So from a technical standpoint it is a better design. Is it going to sound better? Not if your records are flat or close to flat. Is the Azimuth on the fly feature worth sacrificing optimum bearing geometry? I guess that is a personal choice. 

@rauliruegas , you can't possibly agree with me! That will make you a marked man for sure. Everyone will think you are an arrogant SO who thinks he knows everything. You sure you want to do this?

No really, thanx for the support. Geniuses think alike:-)

Darn, I thought I was the only one who thought the VPI arm was trash.
fsonicsmith, you are stating opinion as fact. You can't do that because it freaks out a lot of insecure people. Don't do it again;-)

@rauliruegas , that is an insane video! What a great set up. He jury rigged the whole thing.
 It was not a unipivot arm but it was very interesting to see the torsional deflection when he skipped grooves.

You would think that 3D printing would be less expensive as there is very little labor involved. I think the other physical properties of the material they are using would be most important such a density, stiffness, resonance properties, etc. Anything can be damaged by heat if you crank up the temp enough. At any rate using a gimbal set up is a step in the right direction even if it is a plain Jane design. Tri-Planar, Schroder , Reed and Kuzma have all come up with beautiful and novel bearing topography. 

@lewm , that is pretty bad. Hopefully, they replaced all of them. It is all right to make a mistake. It is what you do about it that counts. 

sokogear, I agree, Rega arms are a great value. Origin Live arms are better but a lot more expensive when you get up to the good ones in their line. At the bottom I do not think they are any better than the Regas.

@rodman99999 , I think you are right. If you have a unipivot it is best to stick to highly compliant cartridges. I also think you would be amazed at the improvement in your bass if you got yourself a new arm. If you are after better sound it always helps if you can identify problems with easy fixes:-)

Nothing like a big organ in a big space. The Royal Albert Hall comes to mind. When the 32 footers light up it is like the hand of god shaking you. Your vision blurs! Many of the largest organs in the world are here in the states. There is one in Rode Island and another in Philiderphia. West Point has a big one. 
I have not played an organ piece in a while and I have some great recordings. Unfortunately I still do not have a turntable and none of my organ records are digital files, all vinyl. 
You have to trust me on this one rodman99999, your bass can be even better!

@lewm , It is due to be in production mid July. They have their entire crew back now so it should speed up. I have the arm and all the cartridge mounting plates (various weights). The Smartractor is on standby. 

@rodman99999 , Son of a Gun, another Tact user. I used an LP 1 for 4 years on RH Labs subwoofers, a landmark product. The Tact is so superior in regards to bass management you can't compare them, not fair. What makes you believe the Tact does not go below 20 Hz? My 2.2X goes down to but not including Zero. Get one of these https://www.parts-express.com/Dayton-Audio-OmniMic-V2-Acoustic-Measurement-System-390-792 You will be amazed. You can then create individual target curves for each channel so they match perfectly. The Tact does not allow you to see the system's frequency response after correction. You will not believe how your image will snap into place.
I have used every type of tonearm known to man except the Schroder LT which I am dying to try. The best tonearm you can buy at this time other than the LT is an intermediate mass, two axis, 9 inch arm. The advantages outweigh the greater tracking error. My experience and test results measuring distortion by oscilloscope bear this out.  Theoretically a lighter arm with a high compliance cartridge should have lower distortion but the problem becomes making the arm stiff enough to dampen all resonance in the audio band. None of the ultra light arms have been stiff enough not to mention that it seems the day of very highly compliant cartridges is over. vinylzone is a typical example.
@daveyf , air bearing arms are not worth talking about especially with the Schroder LT available. They are a defective design right from the start. The only way to make a straight line tracker is with an animated carriage like the original Goldmund turntable. But that is a crazy expensive and complicated thing to do and maintain. None of these tables survived. I think the B+O was the most successful but, it sold to a different audience. Audiophiles have to be able to tinker. This is one of the reasons turntables survive. Digital is no fun! Tinkering with the B+O was impossible. 

@rodman99999 , Thanx for the info. I really like the Tact 2.2x. I love the dynamic loudness function  but, time and tech moves on and I am debating going for a Trinnov Amethyst. If I decide not I will look into upgrading the power supply. I had analog input boards but the right channel went south so I got a Benchmark ADC 1 with which I am very happy. Using outboard DACs gets complicated when needing four channels. Fortunately, the Tact DACs are excellent with a signal to noise ratio of 125 dB. By all means get yourself a bigger room:-)

@lewm , I can't think of any air bearing arms back then. I was not impressed with the Goldmond. I thought it a big waste of money. It was on the right path but the tech to pull it off was not available back then Rabco or not. It is now but at stupid expense given the demand. There is a German company making a belt driven carriage drive straight line tracker whose error is vanishingly low and the actual arm is a rather standard 2 axis affair. Horizontal and vertical effective masses are close unlike an air bearing arm. I'm sure it performs well but it is over $100K. The Schroder LT is a far better solution using the energy supplied by friction to power the arm. You should download the patent. It is the only way you can really understand what he designed. Reed did the same thing with the 5T but used a very low speed motor to power it costing twice as much as the LT.
The CB is a great design but the LT is brilliant. 

Air bearing arms and Clearaudio's design are defective from the start. They oscillate horizontally at low frequencies. Maybe you could dampen this out somehow but I have not seen anyone do this effectively. The suspended stylus has to move this mass along one way or the other, frictionless bearing and all. Swirling air currents around a cartridge are not a good idea either. 

GO MAX!!!