That is the everywhere touted and very expensive tonearm. Touted by all professional reviewers and obviously " satisfied " owners ( around 70 of them. ).
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.
My good friend Mr. Record contends that the 3012R is one of the finest tonearms he has ever heard (he hasn't heard the SAT or Thales though). He also says that the common 3009 is not a very good arm for high end use.
Another high end tonearm which is reasonably priced are the $6200 Triplanar and the $9800 12" version. I previously listed an assortment of other high end competing arms for $5K to $15K
Sorry Lew....but I don't think you've read John Elison's quote correctly. He never said that "the resistance across a connector is zero". He said:-
The maximum possible resistance of a single gold-plated connector is 0.01-ohm whereas the resistance of 4-feet of 33-gauge wire is 1.0436-ohms. The resistance of 1-foot of 33-gauge wire plus 3-feet of heavier 26-gauge interconnect wire and 6 gold plated connectors is 0.2609 + 0.12243 + 6 x 0.01 = 0.44333-ohms.
In regards to his claim that Resistance ALONE is responsible for 'signal loss'....you offer no technical evidence to refute that. You merely offer speculative 'mumbo jumbo'....
In a choice between your electrical qualifications and John's......I'm afraid you don't offer enough substance 🤗
Incidentally....from the subjective point of view....unless you have the same cartridges mounted in an arm with fixed headshell and an arm with detachable headshell all mounted on the same turntable with the same phono cable connected to the same phonostage.....you are not qualified to make a statement regarding 'sound differences'. I have identical Signet TK-7LCa MM cartridges installed on my Copperhead arm (fixed shell) and Fidelity Research FR-66s (detachable shell) on my Raven AC 2 turntable and can testify that if anything....the FR-66s offers more detail, resolution, transparency and 'magic' than the fixed shell of the Copperhead. And the Copperhead is one the best arms I have heard....
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.
Henry, John is a mechanical engineer. I don’t think he has a degree related to electronics. Yes, he knows more about tonearm geometry than I or anyone else on VA or here. Period. If we must get into a pissing contest about who knows more about what, I will only say that as a real life biological scientist, I did also study physics, chemistry, and math, and I have built amplifiers and preamplifiers from scratch, based on my own self-taught skills. In any case, the subject at hand requires only algebra using Ohm's Law and the formula for the reactance of a capacitance.
I guess it's fair to criticize my post for not noting that John did incorporate an estimate for the resistance of "a connector". (I stopped reading his post mid-way through it. Mea culpa for that.) My calculation for the resistance across 4 feet of 33ga wire, based on internet acquired data for resistivity, is 0.824 ohms, a bit less than your quote from John, and this is assuming copper wire. It would be a tiny bit less for silver. One question that arises is, why must we use 33ga, if we are fretting about resistance? One could use a heavier gauge, if that is such a concern. And finally, do you (and John) really think you are hearing the difference between ~1 ohm (for a straight 4-foot shot with 33ga wire, using either his or my slightly lower estimate) and around 0.5 ohms (for his estimate of the sum of various wires plus connectors)? As far as my "mumbo jumbo" is concerned, no specific calculation for the effects of connector inductance and capacitance is possible, because we have to know specifically what products are being used. Anyway, one man's mumbo jumbo is another man's good reason to do something. You haven't even offered mumbo jumbo; you've just declared a position and dared anyone else to knock you off it. In the end, I have no desire to change your mind. You do what you like, and I’ll do what I like. For me, the best connector is no connector, whenever practical. And by the way, you’ve ignored the bit about grid- and gate-stop resistors.
Like everyone else, I too enjoy the convenience and cartridge-matching possibilities afforded by interchangeable headshells, but I approach the problem with an acknowledgement that I am accepting some small compromises, when I choose that method. I do choose it with alacrity for MM/MI cartridges, as noted.
Dear Lewm, On a note of clarification, when you say that you did a comparison of single-loom vs “connectors” was this conducted with e.g. a fully hard-wired version of a 3012 so that it would be closer to like-for-like conditions. Alternatively are you saying it was e.g. 3012 vs Triplanar?
If the latter were the case it would hardly be a fair comparison and you’d be unsure whether to attribute the difference to tone arm design or wiring (or am I misinterpreting your thoughts)? (...or misread the post?) Kind regards,
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.
Technically, Thales solves problems of linear trackers and non-linear trackers off-set angles. I don’t know what problems can occur to diminish it’s sonic attributes. Does anyone know of Thales arm shortcomings?
Moonglum, You wrote: "BTW...your Triplanar has a connector at each end of the phono cable. All you have done is reduced the number of connectors not eliminated them."
Without a doubt, what you say is true. Would you expect me to solder the tonearm wires direct to the cartridge, at one end, and direct to the hot and ground inputs on the phono stage? The issue at hand is whether reducing the number of connectors to the bare minimum, using presumably very thin wires all the way from cartridge pins to phono stage where the same wires are terminated with male RCAs or XLRs, vs using a removable headshell, which entails the introduction of physical connectors at the headshell times 2 (headshell wires connect to the rear of the headshell and headshell makes additional physical contacts with the mating piece on the arm wand), at the base of the tonearm via DIN or RCA or whatever, and then on to the phono stage, using RCA or XLR there.
John Ellison pointed out on VA that by allowing for the extra connectors introduced by the headshell, one can actually reduce the total resistance seen by the phono signal, compared to using 33ga wires all the way from cartridge to phono inputs. He seemed also to believe that the lower the resistance, the better or less distorted would be the SQ. My own experience tells me that eliminating as many connectors as possible always sounds better, notwithstanding the slight penalty for added R. You could say this is my opinion based on my years in this hobby. It is important to note that in terms of pure resistance, we are talking about a difference of less than 0.5 ohms, using John's calculation, which I don't doubt, albeit I found a slightly lower number than he did for the 4 feet of 33ga straight wire option (~0.8 ohms vs ~1.0 ohms). You can read the relevant posts from me and Halcro, above. I also pointed out that there is no imperative about using 33ga wire from one end to the other in the minimal connector scenario. One could get away with 28ga wire, for example, and this would reduce the gap in resistance between the two approaches, if resistance is a bugaboo. (John assumed one foot of 33ga wire [disregarding the two added physical connections in series with the signal in his scenario], followed by 3 feet of 26ga wire. He compared the total R for that to the total R for 4 feet of 33ga wire.)
I have also pointed out that many phono stage gain devices are wired with discrete resistors in series with their inputs, to prevent oscillation. The values of such resistors are typically about 100 ohms or more. This totally swamps the difference in total R between the two wiring options, so I cannot imagine why resistances in that order of magnitude would make much difference. But if I am entitled to my opinion, the other guys are also entitled to theirs.
You seem to be asking me to say how I arrived at my own opinion. I guess this is due to an accumulation of several experiences. One such was in connection with my Triplanar. When I bought it (from a reviewer), it came with the external in-line termination box that offered female RCA outputs. After listening to it for several months or even a year, I then had it re-wired by Herb Papier, the inventor of the Triplanar, with about 4 feet of 33ga Cardas wire going from cartridge to male XLRs that plug directly into my balanced phono stage. The original wire was also Cardas 33ga, so there would be no SQ difference per se attributed to changing the wire. Using a Koetsu Urushi, it was and is my subjective impression that the tonearm sounds better using the direct connection. These days, I own several tonearms, some that use the straight shot wiring and some with removable headshells. I generally find that for LOMC cartridges, I prefer the tonearms with straight connection vs the tonearms with removable headshells. For higher output cartridges, I agree with what I think Halcro said; I hear no difference.
Dear @jeff1225@daveyf : I was banned from several audio forums over the net including WBF and in reality I was banned more because very low music/audio knowledge levels/ignorance levels there that for insult to other gentlemans.
I don’t use the word " idiot " with any one and and word " stupid " almost never not even many years ago when I was as an " hurricane " attitude and always trying to win. A stupid person is a person with very high ignorance levels in some music/sound subjects and that is not abble to learn through the time and that never grows up and likes to stay everywhere/forums showing his stupidity level.
Anyway, the removable headshell design against the fixed one has several issues other that high or lower distortions because of that.
The real issue here is not whom has the reason but which trade offs are better for the MUSIC sound reproduction.
Btw, from some of those forums were I was banned people thoughts were that I was and am a troll when in reality I’m not. Yes sometimes I " sound " like a troll but only because sometimes I need to push for annswers obvious answers that could permit to go more deeper in the main subject under analizis. With out a matured dialogue no one of us ( including me. ) can’t learn almost nothing.
My self target is to improve my self MUSIC/audio knowledge levels that means to lower my ignorance levels in several subjects. How any one of us can groiw up if always are entilted with our believes and just do not " open/opened " our mind to other gentlemans experiences. Just can’t do it.
For several years now I read VA and DYERS forums where there are great experts of almost everything that have very high technical knowledge levels and skild that I can’t ever dream to have it. I never participated down there I only learn in those forums and try to learn or confirm if my believes are wrong or just fine.
As Ellison in VA is a top top gentleman that I think every one knows for his very very high technical levels: Kelly.
It’s not the only sample of gentlemans that when they " talk " every one ( as me. ) just close mouth and open ears/mind. Kelly posted in the past in Agon and one of the latest great knowledge level gentleman was Wyn Palmer that maybe you can remember him was in May/June in this forum and he came here for the very first time and have a dialogue with other two well regarded Agon gentlemans that just can’t proved to him their theories and he proved why them were not rigth, this Wyn not only posted his very high technical knowledge but he has on hand a real time electronic/electrical modeling and posted about to prove why he said what he said. He worked for several years as an engineer in nothing less than designing devices for Analog Devices.
That’s kind of gentlemans ’m talking about that can help every one to grow up, to understand why we are wrong in several of our entilted believes and why we are rigth in other ones.
To each his own. I would have modified, at least new wires. My SME (III to be exact) has uninterrupted silver wire from cartridge pins direct to preamp´s RCAs. This tweak takes a stock SME to another league.
I have two 3012Rs on the same Luxman PD444. One arm is stock; the other includes Analogue Tube Audio modifications(bronze bearing, silver wire, RCAs.) The mods refine the treble and improve bass control, but are subtle improvements. These arms are easily competitive with a Kuzma 4PT that occupies the third position on this modified PD444.
^ Didn´t I tell you : ) Dave the Messenger can enlighten us on the subject.
On the other hand, that guy with his four similar arms on the same deck is able to compare different cartridges side by side, quite literally. Actually he has built a superb tool for cartridge evaluation. Unfortunately he cannot compare the highest compilation cartridges on the same precision level as low compilation cartridges as the SME 3012R´s wand is way too heavy for this examination.
Dear @daveyf @lewm: That we have to have some matured attitude for not insult directly as Jeff and you.
The other issue is to insist that each one of us has to improve our knowledge audio/MUSIC ( including me. ) because by so very low-inferior/ignorance levels in some subjects discussions can goes out totally of a mature " hot " discussion. I was banned from some forums for poor ignorance levels of some gentlemans down there, including some of its founders.
The other aspect is to share with you one of my roads that I took to improve my knowledge levels and was certainly reading to other true experts in several and different MUSIC/sound main subjects. A newcomer/roockie can grow up faster reading and testing that if he did not but the ones with more experience can improve too.
My SME IV has cartridge pins connected to Cardas wiring which is connected to a Cardas RCA junction box, eliminating at least the DIN connector and providing for a more flexible choice of phono cables. DIN connectors are tough to solder. I've upgraded phono cables four times in 20 years to very low capacitance, highly shielded cables.
I understand that you are translating into English and then posting. Unfortunately, you are perhaps either misunderstanding, or simply missing some of the insults that are being thrown out there towards myself and other members. As an example, the word ’troll’ is an insult. There are always posters who immediately begin insulting others IF their opinions of the gear that they favor comes into question! We have seen that on this forum and on other forums as well. While i agree with you that the most prudent thing to do is to " turn the other cheek" , that is something that I and many others are unwilling to do IF the moderators do NOT step in! Luckily, on this forum, the moderation is good and as such, i rarely have to respond to the ’ad hominem’ attacker. But, occasionally, there is a post that slips through...like all forums.
As to expanding our knowledge base, that goes without saying. All of us can always aspire to that... Also, remember this....your music may in fact be someone else’s distortion...and those that you might consider to be an expert, others may consider to be a neophyte.Please think about that before reposting your reply.
Dear @daveyf : " remember this....your music may in fact be someone else’s distortion..."""
yes, that happens with every one of us but always exist " but ". What happens if through the years you were building your room/system with a main traget: to put at minimum every where the room/system every kind of distortions at minimum where some of those distortions even disappeared and others are way down the room/system noise floor?
First than all to achieve all those you must be trained/self educated to identify all those kind of distortions and need to learn at least two things: from where are developed and what to do to fix it when you can fix it or put at minimum. All those is a day by day job and your room/system will improves as you learn the better and when you are " there " then you can be sure that your system/room has lower distortions than the majority of the other gentlemans room/systems. To be sure about you have to have a very good evaluation room/system proccess.
So, in your statement my " music " in reality in true are distortions for other people and their music are only higher distortion because their main target is not to put at minimum the room/system distortions but other targets as can be ( example ) : what they like it.
""" and those that you might consider to be an expert, others may consider to be a neophyte. """
well, at technical levels those gentlemans I named that you can find out in VA as Kelly or Ellison are truly experts in their technical areas. As lewm pointed out Ellison is very good in tonearm/cartridge alignment and if you have good knowledge levels on that kind of subject you can’t name him a neophyte.
I read or ask to experts when my ignorance levels are really low in some music/audio subjects but an expert will be always an expert till one day some other one can prove with facts and with out single doubt that he is totally wrong.
In some technical subjects @dgarretson is a true expert and in those subjects no one can tell he is neophyte.
Months ago in the Agon technical forum I made some questions to a gentleman that down there and the audio subject he is an expert unfortunatelly he did not help me and I still think he is an expert.
Well, two days ago I was in touch with Mike Kelly ( other Kelly not the VA one. ) designer and owner of speakers Aerial Acoustic company, this was the second time I asked something in the last 20+ years. Things are that he is the designer of my ADS L2030 speakers and was ADS designer chief before he started his today own company. I asked something I want to do with my speakers and he was kind enough to gave me a truly great advises about. Now I'm in " trouble " because I'm looking money to follow his advise. I always like to ask experts and in this case no one else than the " source " him self. For others can be a neophyte in those speakers?, certainly not.
In general always exist other experts with different knowledge levels ( higher and lower. ) than your own experts but not for that an expert can be degraded at " neophyte ".
Raul, Your response to my question about the point of your long post of 10/12 at 4:55 PM again leaves me at least a bit puzzled and upset. My question was genuine. I was not taking sides with "daveyf". Little did I know that daveyf would subsequently post a "+1", to indicate his agreement with me, and I think he was implying sarcasm, which I did not intend. In other words, I meant absolutely no insult to you at any time. I was honestly wondering what you wanted to say on 10/12 at 4:55 PM. Moreover, I try to make it a point never to insult anyone here. Argue, yes. Insult, no. So, if you think davey is insulting you, that's between you and him. I am not involved in insults. I consider your opinions very seriously, because I know you spend a lot of time doing the work needed to have a worthwhile opinion, whether I agree or not with the substance.
@lewm please don’t try and put words into my mouth. What I posted was an agreement with your inquiry to Raul. I failed to understand the point of his post. I’m not trying to insult Raul either, I was questioning his post and the meaning behind it. Seemingly, as were you...which is why I posted the +1. My subsequent post to Raul about one man’s ‘expert’ is another man’s neophyte...is a common point in numerous areas of expertise. IME, it definitely applies in this hobby as well. Personally, I feel that there are a number of highly dubious characters in this industry at the present time....not a good thing, imo. Again, don’t get me wrong, there are also a number of great people who have tremendous knowledge...unfortunately the dubious characters are getting more press these days.
Dear @downunder : """ Here we have a report on Tang’s wonderful system ... ""
Wonderful for who? maybe to you. What I see and read there is a very whealthy gentleman with very log MUSIC/sound knowledge levels that’s the worst combination: to many money to waste along to high ignorance levels.
The one person that made the four days review maybe is good to handle tonearm/cartridge set up but I don’t know or did not showed his skills down there:
in that " shoot-out " were used two way different phono stages and worst than that both with those " terrible " tube designs along its sut’s ( I don’t know which is worts the Ayon or the EMT, I think this last. ), different tonearms with different tonearm internal wiring, with no specific test process/specific whole methodology to match each cartridge to each tonearm and in the removable headshell tonearm designs the gentleman did not talks the use of different kind of headshells to match in better way those cartridges with, how that gentleman knew that the differences he reported were more by tiny phonolinepreamp SPL used by its attenuators/volume ( he did not says if even the SPL with each cartridge and phono stages when making the comparisons ), he used normal recordings ( I own at least the 90% of them. ) that in reality can’t tell us differences in between those top cartridge performers: how can he knew for sure that the differences he shared/reviewed are really better and not only different when he has not a true methodology where he can identify the better or worst from the different? ? ? ? ? ?
The review is full of faults and can says almost nothing real nothing where we can trust on it.
The owner obviously is truly satisfied and proudly with what he can shows to his friends even owns that " terrible " non-accurate EMT 927. Why " terrible " non-accurate?
Next is something that I posted many years ago in an EMT thread in this forum where many gentlemans said was the " holly grail " TT when certainly it’s not:
""" These are the true facts ( not " illusions. ) measurements/specs in the 1957 designed 927:
speed unnaccuracy: +,- 0.15%, the swing tell us that the speed unaccuracy in reality is: 0.30% ( the worst I ever seen in any TT. ).
wow an flutter: +,- 0.05% with a swing of: 0.1% ( again the worst I ever seen in any TT. ).
signal to noise ratio: 58db ( again............. ).
as I posted: the 927 was designed for radio stations.....The other " touted EMT vintage designs are not relly better but only non-accurate units:
the 938, 948 and 930 models had a signal to noise ratio: 70db and wow and flutter: 0.075%
where the 950 shows a less poorer ( but still a poor and along the others the worst specs I seen in my life for a TT that several people things are top ones when certainly are not. ) spec on w&f: 0.05%.
All of them speed innaccuracy is : 0.1% when an average Denon model ( Not the top, from those times. ) has: 0.002% """
downunder, I respect your opinion but to many facts that said that the words " wonedrful systems " has no facts for its foundation. Maybe you have those facts, who knows.
Dear Lewm, Apologies for the late reply and for what I consider to be an over-blunt request on my part. The reason I asked my question was that some folk have actually tried tie-wrapping an external tonearm wire to the original tonearm in a bid to simulate the effect of a single loom. I didn’t dismiss the possibility that you may have tried this yourself. ;)
Anyhow, I doubt that such an experiment would be fair since they would have had to strip out the original tonearm cable to eliminate additional “mechanical” influence on the bearing and cartridge so it would be no more than an interesting exercise.
As for Mr Ellison. He is one of the most helpful guys you will find on any forum. We are unworthy of the data he provides... ;) Have a good day :)
Moonglum, I am not sure whether I am being chastised or not, so I won’t respond to your comment that has to do with John Ellison and the fact that I happen to disagree with his conclusion, which is after all an opinion.
I’m not sure what you mean by “tie-wrap “. I have thought about running a single wire from the cartridge to phono stage that would travel outside the tonearm wand to the pivot point and then from there to the phono stage without ever running through our inside the tonearm itself. This could be a way of achieving a single connection between cartridge and phono stage without drastically re-wiring a tonearm that has interchangeable headshells. You could say that might be the best of both worlds, if you love headshells.
daveyf, Sorry. I did think your +1 was tinged with sarcasm. At the time, you and Raul were engaged in a back and forth that I wanted no part of. Anyway, my bad.
I'm kind of surprised, not to say "shocked; shocked I tell you", that apparently most of this group seem to agree with John Ellison, that minimizing resistance is more important than minimizing the number of connectors, especially in a phono circuit. The latter goal is a gospel to me. Is this just because JE is such an authority? Or is it because most of us use tonearms with interchangeable headshells and don't want to be shaken in our beliefs and practices? I searched for headshells that have soldered leads built-in so as to eliminate at least one set of connectors in the headshell pathway; I found only one product, made by Yamaha. I bought one in Tokyo.
Lewm you are on the money. Guys who think digital sounds the same as analog, well, that speaks volumes.
Maybe the guys on this forum might read the late Allen Wright's cable cookbook. Lots to say about connectors. I do not use RCA jacks any more. Well that's a topic for another time.
I'm kind of surprised, not to say "shocked; shocked I tell you", that apparently most of this group seem to agree with John Ellison, that minimizing resistance is more important than minimizing the number of connectors, especially in a phono circuit. ....John Ellison and the fact that I happen to disagree with his conclusion, which is after all an opinion.
John Ellison is not stating his "opinion".....he is stating the electrical 'facts' as he knows it and offers calculated figures to support these 'facts'. If you disagree with these 'facts' as proffered by John.....you must have the electrical theory to prove him wrong...? C'mon.....it can't be hard to tell us what else (other than Resistance) is responsible for 'Signal Loss"....?
capacitance and an inductance that would be expected to affect the signal in (admittedly) tiny ways.
"Would be expected to affect....." This is just not a scientific nor convincing answer (as your science background should tell you).
I am sure that the small difference I hear is measurable, but I have no idea how to measure it. It does not seem to be so simple as an effect on frequency response.
And you really expect this answer to counter John's.....? That's what I meant about substance...... I don't have the facts to argue on John's side....but you don't appear to have the facts to debunk his proposition,,,and neither does (it appears) any other electrical engineers on these Forums? Does a soldered connection result in 'signal loss' in your opinion? Does a cartridge clip result in 'signal loss' in your opinion? Unless you are able to state what is responsible for 'signal loss' with figures and formulas....you are simply not on the same plane as John Elison on this subject. Sorry.....
Hi Lew, I can understand how when we are fresh from some slightly “abrasive” forum dialogue it can influence our perception of other comments in a negative way. No chastisement intended. My remark about JE was unconnected (pardon the pun) with current issues and only a general observation. Call it forum diplomacy if you will.
So my post was mainly intended to be kind and act as an apology for my earlier lack of subtlety. We’re not getting any younger and we’ve lost enough good men from the forum already. Forums can be stressful (which I think we all know from experience).
You must have a verified phone number and physical address in order to post in the Audiogon Forums. Please return to Audiogon.com and complete this step. If you have any questions please contact Support.
