I hopefully can answer some of your questions. I bought a Micro Seiki DQ-30(?) TT because of the MA-707 tonearm that was mounted on it. Subsequently I acquired an MA-505 tonearm and no longer needed the MA-707 (which in the end could not easily be removed from the table anyway). Both the MA-707 and CF-1 had the arm tube markings and came with the additional sliding weight. If the weight is not included the arm is incomplete. To me these arms looked identical and the only difference was that the CF-1 was made out of carbon fiber. Unlike the MA-505, the MA-707/CF-1 does not allow for repeatable/on the fly VTA adjustment.
Micro Seiki MA707 vs CF-1
I see photos of these two tonearms, and they appear to be identical. In both cases the arm tube can be black in color, which I assume means that it is made of carbon fiber, and has markings at regular intervals from pivot to stylus. However, sometimes the armtube has a sliding weight on it, sometimes not. I understand from my reading on the web that the graduations on the arm tube along with the sliding weight are used to adjust tonearm effective mass. So, two questions, really: What are differences between the two arms? If I see an arm tube that is black and has the graduated markings on it but no sliding weight, is it likely that the arm is incomplete? And BTW, does the MA707 or the CF-1 offer any kind of repeatable VTA adjustment, on the fly or otherwise? Thanks.
7 responses Add your response
Thanks, Clio09. That's about what I had come to believe from seeing photos on-line. So I gather that the major if not the only difference between the two is the carbon fiber arm tube on the CF-1. If I see an "MA707" with a black arm tube, I then assume that it's made of metal, just painted black. Correct? As an aside, you say you replaced your 707 with a 505. Do you think that the 505 is a better all around tonearm? I've got a 505 MkIII, which is quite nifty, but the MkIII version no longer has the VTA "on the fly" feature. It IS however set up so that changing the VTA is very easily done. |
You're correct about the composition of the MA-707 arm. Even without the VTA on the fly (which is problematic in that it requires the steadiest of hands to use, and I choose not to use it) the MA-505 is superior. It's an incredible tonearm and if I recall from a previous post yours is in near original condition. It's a no brainer from my perspective as to which arm to go with. |
Thanks, Clio09. If you subtract the 707 from the 505, you have the 202. Until I saw that M-S 99V turntable for sale here a few weeks ago, I did not know that the 202 tonearm existed. My gut instinct was that the 202 could not be as good as the 505 or 707, since, after all, the model number is lower. OTOH, they sold it with one of their finest ever belt-drive turntables. So, what's up with the 202? Don't worry, I am very pleased with the 505 and plan to keep it. I'd just like to learn more about M-S products. Still would like to find that special wrench for the 505 mounting bolt, though. |
I'll have to look into the 202 myself. You may want to ping Raul on the forum. He has a MS 282 I believe which is supposed to be one fantastic arm. He knows quite a bit about the vintage tonearms. I have the wrench for the MA-505 somewhere. I don't recall using it to mount the tonearm though. I think I was able to tighten it fine by hand. |
The answer of @clio09 is wrong: None have a sliding weight on the front armtube (carbon fiber) nor do they have markings! So both, the CF-1 and MA-701 are complete without any front sliding weight because they never had one. It is the MA-707 which has the sliding weight: All three tonearms have the same detacheable headshell and there is a ceramic headshell by Micro which is supposed to be very good. There was a late version of the MA-701 which was cheaper: and here we have the confusion, vinylengine has data on the MA707 tonearm here:
|