Linear tracking vs. Pivoted tracking tone arms.


After searching all 735 existing analog "threads" I only found one short discussion regarding Linear tracking arms vs. tangential tracking arms. I have been a vinyl collector for over 32 years, and beleive that pure analog is still the "gold standard". In 1984 I purchased a Sony PS-X555ES linear tracking, biotracer, turntable. It is a fully automatic table with direct drive. This table has served me well, with no mechanical or set up issues. It is still in my system today. There are no adjustments other than balancing the tonearm to a netural position, then dialing in your tracking force. Two years ago I installed a Denon DL 160 moving coil cartridge, and am very pleased with its quality. I am considering retirement for the Sony and replacement with a Michell Gyro SE with Rega pivoted arm. Linear tracking arms are not availiable. This is a belt drive, full manual table. I understand that the master LP lacquer is cut on a lathe with the linear method. Should vinyl be replayed in the same manner for optimal sound? I would really like to hear from some hard core audiophile vinyl types on this one. By the way, my system consists of the followinig: Conrad-Johnson PV10B all tube pre-amp with tube phono stage. This is split into a C-J Primer 11 tube amp and C-J MF2250 FET amp, bi-amped into a pair of KEF Reference series 3-2 speakers. The Premier 11 feeds the mids and highs and the MF2250 feeds the bass section. All cables and interconnects are Monster Cables finest. Thanks in advance for any advice.
lbo

Showing 4 responses by dover

I had Vacuum Sota/ET2 for a few years before my Final Audio.
No problems on levelling and maintaining level across the record.
No mistracking whatsoever, particularly compared with pivoted arms on demanding tracks.
I did have a couple of records that were noisy on one side and suspected the vacuum system, but have no real proof.
Had no speed issues either but had knocked out half the Papst motorboard and replaced with on board regulation and external regulated power supply.
The ET2 was stripped of all dampening material, custom arm/bearing tube bracket, air supply consisted on dual pumps ( one running out of phase ) and surge tank and added electromagnetic dampening for horizontal movement. Also tweaked the compliance of the decoupled counterweight in the horizontal mode for each cartridge.
Lewm et al, theET2 definitely goes out of level in my experience on Oracles ( the worst ), Linn's etc.
SOTA at least has the advantage that it is hung from the springs and is inherently more stable like the SME decks. Given the mass and the additional mass loading via lead shot in the corners I think it is the exception to this scenario. Remember the moving mass of the ET is quite low ( 25g ).
Davide - I dont see your point with 2 vs 3 body physics. "Radial" arms have split vertical and horizontal bearings and remain 3 body in your hypothesis unless you are using a unipivot.
Ketchup - I dont just slap arms on decks, I ran an Oracle/Zeta/Koetsu Black for a couple of years prior to the SOTA ET2. In my experience you can optimise high frequency extension on an Oracle by setting the height such that the suspension is quite lossy ( highish ). At this point the movement of the ET2 arm unbalances the deck.
In other words to run an ET2 you would have to stiffen the suspension which is suboptimal for high frequency extension. Yes I had the under chassis counterbalance weight.