Lyra and OMA

@mijostyn I didn’t ask about amplifier change I didn’t even see what amplifier I had. Please answer the question if you know the answer to it.

Soundsmith, The Voice cartridge
pro ject RPM Table and EVO Carbon 10 inch arm

into Aric Audio, Special 6sn7 phono pre, Preamp and Amp
into  ZU Soul Supreme.

Bent

@mijostyn 

OK I’ll just give up.  Wha wha….

Say not see

Thank you all for your responses!

Bent

excuse me. The extended range at the low end.
 

I did check with Aric. He recommended of 1:10 winding and did not see any detriment to do what I have planned, from the SUT perspective anyway. 
also: FROM ARIC: Hi Michael, My MM phono stage does not use any capacitors at the input so there’s no worries regarding connection of SUTs.

sumiko/project looks very similar to the Kleos, but I suspect the quality is not nearly the same.

 @jcarr are we speaking to compliance resonance issues for my arm and the Lyra?

KLEOS Dynamic compliance: 12 x 10-6 cm/dyn (@100 Hz?) at 8.8 gm

SUMIKO Songbird low MC is a cartridge often shown with my TT.

12×10-6cm/dyn @ 100Hz  at 8.5 gm  and it’s about $1000 less and cost

Both of these cartridge/arm combinations resonate at ~11 Hz.  (that’s high no doubt)I can do the hard math, but I haven’t yet and doubt it will make any difference to that aspect
Please tell me what I missing. Before I make a mistake. I know just enough to get myself in trouble. I’m chasing this because of the dynamic range of the cartridges’ is vastly different at the low end. I listen to classical music and rock.
Bent

@rauliruegas  

Ah ha! thanks for pointing out the difference between the Japanese standard and the US/euro standard dyne. A lot more compliant than I ever thought. No wonder cart we’re getting such apparent poor results. 
ready to do the real mouth now. 

Bent

@tomic601 

Thanks, I'll check the Korf calculator.  The 8.37Hz was from an actual calculation, not a chart.

Yes, I kew he was the designer, as he stated such.  Very cool that he even responded.

So I'm asking one more time: Why does the low-mass arm create a shortfall in the response? I just don't get it...What are the mechanics that cause that? (same answer as why one cable sounds better than another? Ha)  Is there a definable answer?

Bent

The math says…

The calculation says that the cartridge/arm RF is a very healthy 8.37 Hz. 
So my question is why does the low-mass arm make a difference in the sound?  If the mass were higher, the cartridge/arm compliance would logically be a higher resonant frequency also.  It wouldn’t pass out of the recommendation, but 8.37 Hz nice sweet spot, no?

Paint me disappointed!

Thank you all for you guidance.

ml

I just did a Google search and went to the first thing that looked right. I haven’t studied it yet. I will expand my google search. Thank you.
 

Bent

Thank you all. I've learned a lot!  

HA, shame on me? I took too long to move on the Lyra and someone else bought it!  It was an 'open box'- I can't do a $3,600 cart. right now.

Plus... I was very much on the fence with adding mass to the arm as the solution to the lack of symbiosis described by @jcarr.  A few years ago I had only the F9e, and was buying a new stylus, Peter Green at SS, said I might try to add a blue-tac weight (measured 1@gm) to the arm. It didn't work for me.

The Korf discussion is fantastic:

It clearly shows the Why, which was part of my quest after @jcarr wrote to the subject. 

Thanks:

+10 @jcarr 

+1 @lewm 

+1 @tomic601 

+1 @rauliruegas 

and everybody who helped me save $1,900 on a cart that's not right for my TT!

Bent

Oops!

+1@solypsa 

Bent

I’m still here and I’m still listening. Thanks Jonathan.