@pindac thank you. I will revisit this. I guess I wonder if the tonearm/cartridge compliance might also have something to do with it?
Phasemation cart on Technics
I recently got a Phasemation PP-500 and it’s fantastic. Part of the pulling trigger was something I read where Technics would demo the G with a Phasemation PP-2000. Given these are the same weight I figured it would work.
its sounds great and only 5 hours on it so far but I wonder if I set it up right. I used the jig and had to add the extra Technics weight to the arm as the cart is a little heavier. It’s listed at 8x10-6 whereas the outgoing cartridge is 10x10-6.
I am eyeballing a heavier arm that’s said to be a great match with the PM carts.
as of now it seems like the lower mids are light though bass is punchy.
Wondering what else I can do to help things.
thanks
- ...
- 13 posts total
By the way, you seem to be conflating weight with compliance. At least the numbers you quote look like compliance data. But yes, for a low compliance cartridge, like yours seems to be, you want a tonearm with high ish effective mass ( not “weight”). Effective mass reflects the distribution of the mass of the tonearm, from counterweight to headshell/cartridge. |
Thanks @lewm and you are correct about my mistake. And yes, its dumb of me to be asking questions after a handful of hours but I guess I wonder if its the suspension or the tonearm (which is not a great fit). I'll keep on keeping on. |
As long as the tone arm effective mass and the cartridge compliance are not wildly mismatched, I personally tend not to worry about that issue too much. For one thing, we never can know the actual compliance of a given sample of the cartridge. All we know is what the manufacturer tells us is the compliance of an average sample. For another thing, we often are guessing at the effective mass of the tone arm. If you think your tone arm effective mass is too low, that is easily remedied by using a heavier headshell of which there are many good ones on the market. |
- 13 posts total