SAT 30K+$$ TONEARM: W O R T H T O H A V E I T ?


http://www.swedishat.com/

That is the everywhere touted and very expensive tonearm. Touted by all professional reviewers and obviously " satisfied " owners ( around 70 of them. ).

Here some reviews:

https://www.stereophile.com/content/swedish-analog-technologies-tonearm

http://www.monoandstereo.com/2014/06/sat-swedish-analog-technologies-tonearm.html

http://www.absolutesounds.com/pdf/main/press/AirForce%20III_SAT_HiFi+_0817.pdf

and you can look elsewhere the TAS one and others.

Obviously that the proudly owners started to buy the tonearm because those reviews and trhough audio shows but mainly for the " great " reviews.

It was ranked class A in Stereophile and I know are coming two new models that inludes a 12" tonearm.

Other than the very high price I never was interested on the tonearm design due that is totally out of my budget. Its price cost what a decent whole audio system cost.

Anyway, a few months ago in an other analog forum and through a TT review the SAT appeared in that discussion thread and was here when I decided to analize this regarded tonearm design where I found out that those 30K+ dollars are a true money lost and does not matters of what reviewers and owners think about where there are not clear facts all of them are extremely satisfied with the SAT.



Let me explain a little why I said that through my post to MF:


"""""""

from your Stereophile review the SAT specs are as follows: P2S: 212.2mm, overhang: 22.8mm, offset angle 26.10° with an effective length: 235mm.


Those numbers tell us that you are listening ( with any cartridge. ) way higher distortion levels, that you just do not detected even today, against almost any other tonearm/cartridge combination.


Obviously that the SAT needs a dedicated protractor to make the cartridge/tonearm set up but we have to analize what those specs/numbers has to say:

the SAT maximum traking error is a really high: 3.09° when in a normal ( Jelco or Ortofon. ) 235m Effective Length tonearm Löfgren A alignment ( IEC standard. ) is only: 1.84°

the SAT maximum distortion % level is: 2.67 when in that normal tonearm only 0.633

the SAT average RMS % distortion is: 0.616 when in normal tonearm only :
0.412 ( Löfgren B even lower: 0.37 ).

All those makes that the linnear offset in the SAT be 10mm longer than in a normal tonearm ! !

All those are facts and you or Mr. Gomez can’t do nothing to change it. Pure mathematics reality.

You posted in that review: """ Marc Gomez has chosen null points of 80 and 126mm instead of the more commonly used 66 and 121mm. """

that’s a deep misunderstood on tonearm/cartridge alignment input/output calulations in the overall equations used for that alignment:

NULL POINTS WERE NOT CHOOSED BY MR. GOMEZ BUT ARE PART OF THE OUTPUT DATA ON THOSE ALIGNMENTS CALCULATIONS.

In the same is not true your statement: """ the more commonly used 66 and 121mm. """

that " commonly " just does not exist and only depends of the standard choosed for the calculations.

There are several other things in that SAT design that not only are not orthodox but that has a negative influence in what we are listening it:

he said that the tonearm owner can change the bearing friction levels and this characteristics could tell to you that’s a " good thing " but it’s not but all the way the opposite because makes not a fully 100% steady bearings.

Ask you a question?: why the best top cartridges use cantilevers of boron and not carbon fiber, it does not matters that laminated carbon fiber the SAT has.

Carbon fiber is way resonant no matter what. In the past existed cartridges with CF cantilever and sounds inferior to the boron ones. ....................................................................................................................................................................... the designer was and is proud that the tonearm self resonance happens at around 2.8khz, go figure ! ! !. It happens way inside the human been frequency range instead to stays out of that frequency range. """"



Dear friends and owners of the SAT: way before the mounted cartridge on it hits the very first LP groove and against any other vintage or today tonearm you have way higher distortions that per sé preclude you can listen a real and true top quality level performance and does not matters the audio system you own.


What we can listen through the SAT is an inferior quality performance levels with higher distortions. Obviously that all reviewers and owners like those heavy distortions but that does not means they are rigth because and with all respect all of them are wrong.


Some one send the link of what I posted to the SAT designer and latter on ( I do not knew he read my post. ) I ask for him for the information about the effective mass of the SAT. He gave me a " rude " answer and did not disclose that information that in reallity was not important in that moment.



I have to say that at least two professional reviewers bougth the SAT tonearm., both with the Continnum/Cobra TT/tonearm. At least one of them say the SAT outperforms the Cobra one ( maybe both, who knows why bougth it the other reviewer. )

The credentials of the SAT designer are impecable and really impressive ones but no single of those credentials speaks about audio and certainly not on analog audio.

He is a true " roockie " enthusiast ( and I say it with respect.) and obviously that is welcomed in the high-end " arena/area/ring " where all of us are learning at each single day. Any one that’s marketing an audio item has a true merit and this is not under discussion: SAT designer has his own merit for that.

You that are reading this thread permit me to ask: what do you think, overall, about?, at the end audiophiles are the ones that has the last " word " or should be that way.


Regards and enjoy the MUSIC NOT DISTORTIONS,

R.






Ag insider logo xs@2xrauliruegas

Showing 7 responses by downunder

I'll stick with my Thales tonearm that has a maximum distortion anywhere in the record of 0.006 percent. 😁
Btw the SAT tonearm is now discontinued and will be replaced with two new models . One of them is a 12 inch.

 You would be so happy your 30k tonearm is obsolete in only a few years
an audiobuddy in Thailand has two of the original SAT 30k tonearms with AF1 and EMT 927.
He now also has American Sound AS2000 table and finally removed his SAT tonearms from this table and back to the lesser AF1. He now runs 4 x SME 3012-R tonearms for his carts - Opus1, AtlasSL, Vdh Master Sig., Zyx Univ prem.
The AS2000 is quite a bit better than the AF1 or EMT table.

This is what he said regarding the differences between SAT and SME 3012-R.

Sonically it is about small plus/minus comparing to SAT. SAT has the kind of absolute resolution and details that can be view as more analytical in comparison to 3012R.
Whereas 3012R has more organic tone, fuller more completed tone with the kind of resolution and clarity that unless you hear them next to each other in the same system and cart you would not notice it. May be it is the difference in arm wand material and tone arm wire I don’t really know.
You can come to my room, listen to my system with "SME only" and I can wow you with the clarity and resolution you cannot dispute. The difference I am talking is in degree with respect to one another, in relative term here, so don’t go about labelling SAT as cold and analytical.


Hi fleschler. 

He also has a Kronos table and two Acoustical Systems AXion tonearms.  so a total of 4 reference tables.  he was using one of the SAT with Etna SL mono, but more for one of his stereo carts.
  You can but 4 SME 3102R's and still have change left over vs a SAT.
Here we have a report on Tang's wonderful system where you can read yourself on Ked's views between
AF1, EMT 927, AS2000 with SAT, SME 3102R, Acoustical Systems tonearms and most of the best MC carts available.

http://zero-distortion.org/cessaro-gamma-techdas-af1-premium-emt-927-american-sound-sme-3012r-many-carts-much-more/ .
halcro2,195 posts10-11-2018 11:04pmHey Shane,
I haven’t seen any comparisons by you on the SME 3012R compared to your other arms.....particularly your beloved Thales Simplicity...? 👀

Regards
Henry

   that is true Henry.  I have not had it for very long.  I will say I am enjoying it more than the Graham Phantom.
  It excels in the entire midrange and has great transparency in that range - I am yet to be convinced with its bass depth/control and upper frequency "air" ability.

  Overall I am happy with it and for the lowish price, its exceptional, unfortunately impossible to put on either of my DD tables to listen.

  I still prefer the two DD tables for my staple musical diet.  I do not believe its better sounding than the Thales as I have heard that on my TW table a lot.

cheers