Removable headshells 101

Timeltel has raised the subject of the rubber 'O' rings normally supplied between the headshell and the locking-collar of the tonearm.
Fidelity Research abhors them and Yamamoto headshells also are supplied without.
I have largely eschewed them with all my removable headshells but would be interested in the benefits that those who use them, claim to hear?

I'm surprised at Raul's response.
Whilst I can appreciate that what he has experienced may indeed be true.......to then throw up his arms and state that he has no understanding of the reasons for the performance changes of various headshells is contradictory to what he is always stating about the need for us to 'understand' the reasons behind good tonearms and poor tonearms, good turntables and poor turntables?
Raul carefully lists all the factors that play a part in tonearm design and turntable design yet here, with the (relatively) simple parameters of the 'headshell'.......it's all too difficult?
Try it and see?.....maybe it's 'magic'?

Well I don't believe it's 'magic'.
I think there are certain basic physical and structural principles that govern a removable headshell design and the 'magic' may be related to cartridge/tonearm synergy?
That 'magic' is complex enough......let's not create myths and illusions at every twist and turn of the analogue chain.
To the uninitiated, it would appear that analogue is just too complex to bother with?......and that is just not the case.

Firstly I'd like to destroy the myth that removable headshells are in some ways inferior to 'fixed' headshells?
In 'theory', this must be correct as any possible movement or weakness in the rigidity chain between cartridge and arm-board is potential for information loss.
But we all know that in audio, the chasm between 'theory' and 'practice' can sometimes be vast?
The best sounds I have ever heard reproduced in my system have been with tonearms which have removable DIN phono connections and removable headshells.
I have 3 other arms with fixed headshells (or in the case of the Copperhead....no headshell at all) and unbroken phono cables form cartridge clips to phono input.
So how is this possible?

I'm not sure that the weight of the headshell is, of itself, a consideration apart from its affect on the effective mass of the tonearm, but all the theory again about high-compliance cartridges in low-mass tonearms and low-compliance cartridges in high-mass tonearms I have found in my experience to be unreliable?
Why don't we comment about the mass and construction of the fixed headshells in tonearms?

For me, a removable headshell must have a structural logic and connection to its aluminium or magnesium socket tube.
If the connection to this tube is weak, it will allow torsion or twisting to occur and if there is an off-set between the headshell proper and this socket tube, then a bending moment is created which may allow movement.
The best removable headshells generally are those that are integral with the cartridge.
The Technics EPC100Mk3 and the Fidelity Research FR-7 group of headshell/cartridges are prime examples of these and it's easy to see that the axis of connection to the socket-tube is directly in line with the axis of the headshell.
This structural logic is utilised by Micro Seiki in their H-303X headshell for the MA-505 tonearm HEADSHELLS
Of course there are other points to consider and hopefully this thread will illuminate those?
But I refuse to concede that headshell design is a 'black' art :-)

Geoch,
All good questions.
I too had those questions when I was first deciding which headshells to buy and found there were no readily available sources which could answer?
Hopefully we may uncover some of these answers in this thread? :-)

Greetings Professor (Timeltel),
Good to see you here.
I readily accept your experiences with headshells of differing materials.....and this is something we should all share.
But it should not be a mystery? We know that differing materials perform differently in audio, and in fact carbon fibre has been demonstrated (I believe), to be less than ideal for sound. Lloyd Walker changed his tonearm material to carbon fibre and then realising his mistake, quickly changed it to metal again. There are also one or two manufacturers of carbon fibre arms which have not taken the world by storm?
Material selection is a believable and understandable concept in headshell design and should not be confused with 'voodoo' science?:-)
and yes........headshell leads are of great interest to all of us. Please proceed. :-)

Dear Ramon,
Thank you for your thoughts.
I too am happy with the choices I have made thanks to the inspiration of many folk here on this site.
Cheers
Henry

Ecir38,
I have used other headshells in the MA-505s arm with great success.
At the moment the Yamamoto HS-1As is sounding particularly fine with the FR-5 MM cartridge mounted therein.
The only problems I can see with the Micro tonearm is for heavy cartridges and headshells whereby the counterweight ends up precariously close to the end of the arm-tube?
I've just purchased some additional weights from Holland to avoid this problem.

Dear Raul,
Thank you for your responses and trust.
I also take with a large grain of salt the recommendations of most reviewers (except for perhaps Art Dudley & Arthur Salvatore) because their job effectively, is to promote new audio products.
Thus they mostly test and listen to, the latest (and greatest?) and probably don't have the time or opportunity to hear the great vintage analogue products which we, through forums such as these are able to?
You thus will never hear a current reviewer test a new audio cartridge against some of those vintage MM designs we have found to be so special?
You won't hear them test the new 'super' tonearms against the FR series or the Micro Seikis or the Audiocrafts or the SAECs etc for the same reasons.
The results of this myopia are constant articles and reviews which give the impression that the state of high-end audio is relentlessly moving forward?
This I have found in the last year or so, to be rather far from the truth.

On the issue of headshells though, I tend to agree with Dertonarm that if a well-designed headshell does not work well with a particular cartridge, there is more likely to be a fault or quirk with that particular cartridge body or design?
Of course it is easier to just say......poor match.....incompatibility......lack of synergy etc but I'd really like to know what are the reasons for these excuses?
And there must be definable reasons? The fact that we don't have the knowledge or patience to discover these is simply an admission of the depth of our lack of knowledge when it comes to audio? :-)
Cheers
Henry

Dear Dertonarm,
Thank you for your recommendations.
Interestingly, Audio Technica headshells I have experienced, frustrate me enormously.
Firstly, their fixed mounting holes in lieu of slots, makes aligning the geometry of the cartridge a hit and miss affair. I find you can be a millimetre or 2 away from achieving the correct stylus position and the only way to correct this is to unscrew the small side screw holding the headshell to the socket tube and slide it back or forth. This side screw is in fact then, the prime point of transferring the structural rigidity of the headshell to the socket tube.
As such it is totally inadequate.
Additionally, these fixed mounting holes do not allow one to adjust the overhang angle of the cartridge so that the stylus is tangential at the 2 null points.
If one is interested in accuracy and rigidity, I find the AT headshells ones to be avoided :-)
Cheers
Henry

My father used to say that there were three types of people in the world:-
Those who contributed
Those who benefited from that contribution
Those who did neither......the oxygen bandits
Somewhere in Holland a little Dutch man is hyperventilating

For cheap headshells ($25-$28) I quite like the Denon PCL5 and PCL7 models available from Foxtan (Hong Kong) on EBay or Email me for contact details.
For reasonable price/ great performance headshells ($90) I go with the Micro Seiki 303-X available from Goldenageaudio (Melbourne) on EBay or Email me for contact details.
For high price synergy on FR series tonearms I like the FR-3 headshell available from both the above sources and I must admit I'm impressed with the Yamamoto African wood headshell available directly from Japan (beware of Chinese copies ex Hong Kong).
There are also cheap Chinese made copies of the Orsonic headshells ex Hong Kong from a prominent dealer to beware of?

Hi David,
I would hesitate before jumping in on an Orsonic headshell.
Sure.....they look sexy but on complex demanding material, it was distorting a treat.
I swear I could actually see the shell convulsing whilst it struggled against the cartridge's demands.
And that wasn't even with low-compliance cantilevers!!
If you haven't tried some of the wood headshells out there, you may be in for an experience? :^)
Cheers
Henry

Greetings Professor,
Glad that you find the Yamamoto Ebony satisfactory :^)
Do you think the hard-wired headshell leads limit your performance options?
If I did not know you better......I would say that I detect a slight cynicism in your comments on Orsonic?
Surely you do not mean to imply that there may be some Chinese copies being sold ex Hong Kong :^)
Cheers
Henry

Pryso,
The forces transferred into the headshell can be large on a microscopic level 'if' they allowed to be magnified by poor structural design and/or rigidity.
If you examine the design o the Orsonic headshell you will see that the bulk of the aluminium structure is elevated above the pin socket which connects to the headshell.
This creates a 'lever arm' for a bending moment and the larger the lever arm.....the greater the bending moment proportional to the square of the lever arm.
The connection of this headshell to the socket itself on the Orsonic (or the copies)......is weak and poorly designed.
If you fix your Orsonic onto the tonearm......try holding the tonearm steady and whilst gripping the headshell at its extreme end......try twisting it back and forward.
This should illuminate the problem :^(