Problem matching Benz LP S w/ SME V or IV.Vi arm ?


Has anyone encountered any mechanical and/or resonance problems using the 16.4 gram Benz LP S cartridge with the medium to low mass(10/11) SME V or IV.Vi tonearm ? Thanks very much for any light on this issue.
opus88

Showing 8 responses by opus88

Actually, I am gathering information before purchasing to avoid a potential problem. I'm aware the LP is lighter than the S version. In fact,if it was still available(new), I would very seriously consider buying the LP. Though I called Sumiko(the SME distributor)I received no definitive information regarding compatibility with the heavier LP S. Of course, I'm interested in hearing the comments of the dealer/SME specialist you're visiting today. Thanks, Audioquest.
I think you may have inadvertantly erred on the resonance frequency of the original LP. You are correct about the resonance frequency of the LP S being 7.9, however, considering the approximately 6 grams lower weight of the LP version,the resonance frequency should be about 8.9, not 6.9 as you indicate. This makes the LP a better "fit" than the LP S, which shows as marginal in relation to the desireable gray area of the chart. However, that may not be a serious issue, since things don't appear to be really critical. I'm perhaps a bit more concerned about any stability of the tonearm insofar as cuing, tracking and handling with this heavier Benz fitted to the slightly light SME. I might again contact Sumiko to see if they supply a heavier or added counterweight for the SME, but I'll wait first for the report on your experience. Incidentally, I have the IV.Vi. Its effective mass is identical to the V's.
Your chart doesn't show anything for 16 grams cartridge weight, only up to 15. The resonance chart I use can be found at www.resfreq.com/resonancecalculator.html Yes, the effective mass for the SME V or IV.V is 10/11, but when I look at the Musical Surroundings site, no information at all is given for the discontinued Benz LP, but 16 is given for the weight of the LP S. It's actually 16.4 though.

I do not have the optional viscous damping trough/fluid for my IV.Vi arm. My turntable is the discontinued VPI HW-19 MK3 with the lead and cork platter.
"...it will be lots of fun, yeah right." I had to laugh at that. Okay, I'll look forward to hearing your first impressions. Best of luck.
Well, congratulations. Sounds so far like you did make the best decision going for the new S version. From what I gather, the original LP might sound a tad subdued or at least not as lively as the S, which seems to be a bit more open on top. Would you say there's any change or slight shift toward the treble region in terms of overall tonal balance? Is the sound tighter, cleaner and/or more neutral in contrast to the original LP? Thanks for any information/impressions on these things.
You've been most helpful with your well considered comments, and I wish you the best in listening enjoyment...Ciao!
Cport: Please correct the typo below ("waring"). Also, you indicate "Figures of C coming from Japan usually are measured at 100 Hz, so they should be multiplied by 1.5-2." Does this mean, for example, that the compliance quote of 10 that is given for the Dynavector XV-1S is misleading, and that the more accurate figure should be between 15 and 20? or that the quote given of 7 for the Miyajima Kansui should more accurately be in a range from 10.5 to 14? Also, the difference in resonance frequency one gets as a result of multiplying anything between 1.5 and 2 could indicate a pretty significant variation, so what rf figure should the layman accept ?


A Wally Malewicz inspired "three-way" tonearm/cartridge resonance calculator

###########################
Wally has suggested that this "waring" may be bogus -- stand by
###########################

Warning!
Assumes that the quoted cartridge compliance references 10Hz.
[Often (sadly) not published by manufacturers]
Read this following statement, then read here.

"There is one snag about it. The manufacturers of cartridges do not always state a useful value for C(ompliance). (It should be started at 10 Hz). Figures of C coming from Japan usually are measured at 100 Hz, so they should be multiplied by 1.5-2. Figures of C coming from USA often are static values, so they should be halved. Most figures of C coming from Europe are OK (stated at 10 Hz)"
Also, forgot to mention: where it says, "Read this following statement, then read here", when one clicks on "here", a NOT FOUND screen pops up.