The Arm/Cartridge Matching Myth

Dear friends: We have to be extremely stupid to share information that in this same thread some one explained in a wide way why no one can took it seriously but as I said we are so stupid to.......! ! ! ?


R.

A while ago, I posted a Link to THE KORF BLOG which is a 4-Part technical quasi-scientific report on his testing for TONEARM AND CARTRIDGE MATCHING.
In the first three Parts....Alex Korf was discovering results which contradicted the generally accepted wisdom of Arm/Cartridge Matching.
In his 4TH PART (which makes interesting reading) he concludes:-

1 Carlson's formula of a low frequency resonance does not describe the measured low frequency behaviour of the cartridge/tonearm interaction
2 Modern cartridges (meaning all those built in the last 60 years or so) have too much suspension damping and non-linearity for the resonances to dominate
3 The frequency of the observed motion is determined largely by the frequency of the excitation
4 The cartridge/tonearm system acts as a lowpass filter for vibrations picked up by the stylus
5 Too low an effective mass for a given compliance (or too low a compliance for a given effective mass) results in low frequency attenuation and excessive tonearm motion.
6 Too high an effective mass for a given compliance (or too high a compliance for a given effective mass) results in "ringing"—a small resonant peak—that is largely benign and barely registers in the measurements

As he states:-

The accepted wisdom turned out to be completely wrong.

I have been maintaining for over 10 years, that I've experienced hundreds of combinations with High-Compliance MM Cartridges/High Mass Arms which have sounded spectacularly...
In fact the highest-mass tonearm ever commercially made (FR-66s) I have found to be the BEST sonic match for high-compliance MMs of every make.
It also is a superb match for Low to Very-Low Compliance MC cartridges.....thus it can truly be called a 'Universal Tonearm'.

As my listening experiences have never CONTRADICTED the 'Accepted Wisdom' of Low-Compliance/Low Mass Arm being sub-optimal....I have never actively advocated for this combination.

I have always recommended.....the best match for ANY cartridge is simply the BEST tonearm you can afford.
And unfortunately from my experiences....I don't think Low-Mass Tonearms are the best 🥴

Regards & pardon me, down memory lane. Uberwaltz is to blame:

BW TA & Denon 103---
First foray into "high end" audio was an Infinity BW, al. arm wand. Later models had a CF arm, damping trough optional.

For setup the user’s manual for the BW pictured a Denon 103, as did contemporary adds. Mine sat in a drawer for two years until I was finally able to afford a SP-25 TT. Hosted a Shure M95E for a while.

Son is currently running the rig with an AT 15XE on the BW. Era appropriate Kyocera integrated into rebuilt Large Advents. Sounds pretty good.


Peace,

@lewm  : """  is that we often don’t have correct data for our particular sample of cartridge or tonearm.. """

so then why bother about the myth or the existence of that ideal resonance frequency range, now I got it. Thank's.

R.

@noromance  : a mistake, must say: " that myth exist ...""

You’re extremist, lol
The mass of Black Widow tonearm is less than 5g as far as i know.
I would never do that myself, i’d rather put a cartridge with compliance figure 4 times higher than 8cu. I think this arm designed for very high compliance cartridges (30-50cu)

But it’s good that we have you, so you can tell us more about your experiment to support halcro’s theory.

Extremist?
Lol, I resemble that remark!

But to put into proper context as I stated on the last go round on this matter.
The 103 was already mounted on the Black Widow on the Denon DD table when I bought it from eBay.
Like everyone I doubted the common sense of this and even messaged the seller as to why he did this. His reply was a lol and to try it before I knock it.
Fair enough so I did when it arrived and it was not as bad as everyone would think.
Now would it have been better, nay a lot better on a heavier arm?
Of course it would.
Would I recommend this pairing?
Of course not.

But that is missing the point somewhat.

It was wholly listenable too and if my memory serves me correctly it had a fairly decent presentation and bass, treble etc.

Did it stay on the arm long?
Nope, it was replaced by a vintage ADC XLM cart which is what I had bought just for the Black Widow.

BTW according to an old press release of the Black Widow they recommend carts in the weight range of 4g to 8.5g.
Now the 103r is right at 8.5g so not so much of an unholy alliance as made out to be.

Chakster, OF COURSE, there are extreme values for compliance and effective mass that might knock the Fr out of the generally accepted range of 8 to 12 Hz. My point is that the equation shows there is a lot of room for variation, and my other point is that we often don’t have correct data for our particular sample of cartridge or tonearm. These facts suggest room for experiments.

@syntax : If you got it 15 years ago then your other post makes no common sense at least if you think that the important issue is what is rigth and not what we like.


lewm said : " " The vinylista is free to try anything. "" and that is not the main subject here. Btw, in my case I’m not angry in reality I’m laughing because that big joke makes me laugh.

@noromance with all respect: are you kidding me with You tube? if yes then now I understand your other post because you are saying in an indirect way that that myth does not exist and you like the OP is trying to prove through that big joke name it YT: go figure, LOL ! ! ???

R.

And here we are discussing what is wrong not what we like. Got it?

Yes, of course. Got it minimum 15 years ago.
Did you improve your knowledge in the years, too? You had enough time to develop your Tonearm you wanted to produce since 10 years. Any news for the mass of Audiophiles who are forced to listen to distortion instead of music?

@rauliruegas My jury is out on this one as I don't have the experience to comment on this subject. I've only ever had a few arms. However, I have heard many of his recordings and have no evidence to go by that there was any major issues inherent in their playback. 

@uberwaltz

You’re extremist, lol
The mass of Black Widow tonearm is less than 5g as far as i know.
I would never do that myself, i’d rather put a cartridge with compliance figure 4 times higher than 8cu. I think this arm designed for very high compliance cartridges (30-50cu)

But it’s good that we have you, so you can tell us more about your experiment to support halcro’s theory.

If you assume about 10g for the mass of the cartridge and plug those data into the equation, the tonearm with 30g effective mass yields Fr = 9.06Hz. For the tonearm with 13g effective mass, Fr = ~12Hz. Both of these results fall into the category of "acceptable".

@lewm What if the mass of the arm is less than 5g ?

Personally, i have no reason to use low compliance cartridges on light mass tonearms, but i did it on Technics, i think that an improvement on heavy "12 inch Schick was obvious, at least for me.

But i tried high-ish compliance cartridges (30cu) on 20g tonearm and it was OK, but it wasn’t my favorite combination (or not my favorite cartridge). Normally i am following the golden rules with my cartridges and tonearms.

P.S. I can remember only one problematic sample of low compliance cartridge that miss track on properly matched tonearm. It was Ortofon SPU cartridge on Schick. I returned the cartridge to the seller, because it wasn't the arm or setting problem. Clearly factory defect.  

I just want to be careful to point out that I am not even necessarily advocating breaking any rules (although I do it myself).  I am pointing out that what may SEEM to be in violation of the Fr rule (range of 8 to 12Hz) may not in fact be a violation, for one's own particular pairing of tonearm and cartridge.

+1 Lewm

I remember Chakster commenting on my usage of a Denon 103 on an Infinity Black Widow and not truly believing my statement that it sounded quite acceptable even though common "myth" would have you believe it is wrong.

Always believed in trying it and see what happens rather than stick to all the "golden rules"

One of the reasons why there can be wide latitude for tonearm effective mass, if the target is a resonant frequency (Fr) of between 8 and 12Hz, is the very nature of the equation used to calculate Fr, which reflects the physical laws that govern Fr:  For example, I took the seemingly extreme examples offered up by Chakster a few posts up from this one, the idea of using a tonearm with 13g effective mass vs one of 30g effective mass, with a very low compliance cartridge like the Denon DL103, which he estimates to have a compliance of 8 at 10Hz.  If you assume about 10g for the mass of the cartridge and plug those data into the equation, the tonearm with 30g effective mass yields Fr = 9.06Hz.  For the tonearm with 13g effective mass, Fr = ~12Hz. Both of these results fall into the category of "acceptable".  Thus, to me it is no wonder that Halcro experiences no profound problems with apparent mismatching of cartridges to tonearms, especially since I think Halcro likes to use the Yamamoto Carbon Fiber headshell (as do I), which weighs only 10g.  If he's using a Yamamoto on his FR64S and FR66S, that would reduce the factory-stated effective mass of both of those tonearms by a considerable fraction, since the OEM FR headshells are very heavy.  If you couple these facts with the additional hypothesis that (1) individual cartridges, even brand new, probably vary in compliance from one sample to another by a fair amount, and (2) "vintage" cartridges probably have lost some springi-ness to their suspension, then nothing is really predictably verboten.  The vinylista is free to try anything.  I don't know why that makes anyone angry.

Dear @noromance  : """  a gentleman, fellow enthusiast, and does not deserve some of these pretty abrasive posts..."""

It could be a gentleman but that's not the main subject it's nothing personal against or in favor of his " person " in the thread and IMHO those " abrasive " post he already wining by a wide margin and I agree with those posts for say the least.

If you agree with his position just say it: that that resonance frequency is a myth. 
Why don't you do that?

R.

Dear @syntax  : If it's true almost all what you said but nothing of that really matters if the tonearm is not well damped.

A tonearm/cartridge resonance frequency out of the ideal frequency range it's a lot more prone to develops resonances/distortions and the like if it's non well damped than a well damped tonearm design.

Now, damped or not all the issues in the cartridge/resonance land exist no matters what and exist a lot of evidence all over the net but in this thread many links with that evidence/facts.

In the other side, all audiophiles like the sound and distortions that are accustom too even if what some of them like to listen is way wrong.

It's important separate subjectivity from objectivity and when we make any kind of audio devices evaluations the first premise to do it is an UNBIASED attitude that's not easy to achieve it.

From some time now ( years ago. ) I had what I consider the best MUSIC/sound experiences of all my audio life that through those experiences I learned what to look for to listen in any audio system evaluations.
That experiences were and are listening live MUSIC seated at near field position where is the only way ( other that if you are an instrument player. ) to learn how MUSIC ( each instrument performs, which is its kind/level o sound level and differences in between. ).
If you do that you will know that MUSIC ( live Music. ) is everything you want but: smooth, warm, , calm and the like. Instead live MUSIC has its natural agresiveness, brithness, explosivity, heavy emotional, great dynamics and very fast transients, time decay is spot on, immediacy that you can touch it and with some instruments listening at live SPL you can't do it for more than a few minutes, example, horns or even piano or a first violin. MUSIC has the POWER that we can't mimic at home but things are that the recording microphones are " seated " at very near field positions of the source. So I always try though my room system to do everything that puts me nearer to the recording to what those mics pic-up.

In the other side the analog is an arcaic alternative and full of imperfections and the advances with TT, tonearms or cartridges gone and goes really really slow and no matters what unfortunatelly can't cope with those imperfections. There is no way to that resonance frequency disappears, if we can't listen its effects that's another matters and not the main subject here.

Btw, for me any cartridge must performs well with any tonearm the problem is that if it's true that cartridge are " universal " are the tonearms the ones that are not for all cartridges and not the other way around.

We have to remnember too that phonolinepreamp are not perfect and that the relation ship between tonearm/cartridge is mechanical full of several issues that affects the quality level of what is in the recording. 
You can't only close your eyes to that resonance frequency tonearm/cartridge just because you like what you are listening even that you can be out of the ideal frequency range. No, what we like and what is rigth is not exactly the same in any room/audio system.

And here we are discussing what is wrong not what we like. Got it?


Regards and enjoy the MUSIC NOT DISTORTIONS,
R.

Henry - going by memory, I seem to recall you had issues with a Graham tonearm ? If the tonearm and cart was set up properly, but was off in your kit. What was this issue, if not the topic of your thread ?

***************************
going back to your OP.

The RECOMMENDED Resonant Frequency of any tonearm/cartridge combination is between 8-12Hz.
But WHY is this the recommended frequency and WHAT does it really mean…?

Below 8 is almost a non-factor these days with any good setup gear and records today. IMO

I have always tried to set up rooms with good bass compression. Room filling bass. Not overpowering but like a live event. Mismatches in setup I find are most easily heard in these types of rooms, because if the bass if off - it’s quite noticeable.
Forget about jumping the groove. I have never experienced this unless a problem with the record itself or tonearm setup. This is akin to racer crashing his car. You don’t want it to get to this level.

No - for me it means if the cantilever starts vibrating due to resonance, or any other phenomena, you will hear the artifact in the music. The bass will be off. Get the bass right the rest takes care of itself. Most vinyl I have heard that was off, required the tonearm to be raised a little (VTA) to fix the bass and this resulted in the highs being cleaner, more resolving  as well.

***************************

Regarding Youtube videos. Just a comment.

Sharing videos is one way for us to share our virtual setups - this is good. If I can ever pick up all the cables, records, and other paraphernalia that lie every where, maybe I will make one.

But I have never been a head phone audiophile. I feel like I am the speaker box when I wear headphones. I like to be free, so never acquired great headphone gear to appreciate any Youtube. I own some Grados, and Denon headphones that I acquired. The Denon when our Frat twins were born. 8^0

If I was listening critically through youtube I would want to hear the signal coming out of your preamp after - RIAA. Stick a device tape loop in there, record it and play it back.
Each of us listening with headphones, is using our own personal tone controls at the other end anyway. Aren’t we ?
JMO - Cheers Chris

noromance, that is very nice and I am sure Halcro loves music however people looking to learn read these posts and might get the impression that you can put any cartridge in any arm which all of us with experience know is a bad and sometimes disastrous thing to do. For the absolute best performance out of a turntable it is critical that the tonearm and cartridge be tuned correctly. If you use subwoofers it is super critical.
Many experts here have testified on this point but Halcro refuses to admit that he is dead wrong. What exactly does that make him? 

At the same time so many users that have no idea about tonearm/cartridge resonance are happy with their Denon 103 (5cu @ 100Hz = about 8cu @ 10Hz) on 11-13g tonearms instead of 30g tonearms. They are all over audiogon, lol

It seems like the question about tonearm/cartridge matching is no so important for many audiophiles for some reasons, but this is the basics.

@halcro is a gentleman, fellow enthusiast, and most of all someone who shares his love of music, and does not deserve some of these pretty abrasive posts. That is all.

The general opinion is, that it is fine when the result is between 8-12.
It is overrated and I don’t give much for it. Today you have different materials in the Arms (Steel, Aluminum, Wood, Titan etc. etc.). There are also different Tonearm geometries out there, some have less distortions at the beginning, some more in the inner grooves, most audiophiles think, when they buy an "Arm" then it is done perfect in every way but I think, that’s the mistake of their audiophile life. Did no one ask why some arms are straight and some not? And why? (the straight ones are cheeper to make and need no knowledge...) and what the arch angle is good for? .....or..are the magnets or the coils really matched?
These materials all have different resonances. Next, you have different kind of bearings (from construction and from design). these differences can be huge.Or, is the Arm a rigid design or not, what’s with the energy transfer?
How fast is this one? Does it even exist, or does the Arm save it to a momentum and starts to vibrate on its own and reflects this back into the tracking process...long story short: does it allow fast transient transmission?
Back to life
I have (and had) combinations which have been between 9.7 -10.0- 10.4
Nearly super (from that Theory) but I was amazed that some carts performed MUCH better in Arms where the "calculation" showed different datas.
This calculation is more or less a help but after all I don’t give a dime for it. A good designed tonearm is much more important.
I wrote several times about that when I made my comparisons with my Arms and Datas and the result was always the same, the best quality Arms worked best with a lot of cartridges at superior level.
And other Arms only with a few ones.
Btw. Cartridge Design does not stop with compliance.Their reaction with a tonearm can be totally different, but you will never read something about that. The best cartridge is a sold cartridge and based on that you will also find the general "recommendation" about loading: 100 Ω 47kΩ :-)
Example: Lyra Titan / Olympos / Koetsu Stones are superior from sonics in top Arms only (energy transfer via Headshell into the Arm), when used in Arms with cheap or sensitive bearings (SME3012R) or bad geometry or carbon fibre Armtubes you get an boring, less detailed smeared sound which is not a pleasure to listen to.
But to be honest, there are a lot of Audiophiles who prefer that because it was expensive and has to be good...
But let’s not forget: All has to go through a Phonostage and that one can change the results also. Or, even more audible, internal turntable vibrations (Bearing, Belt, Motor(s), Platter, Suspension ...), in my personal opinion, I think, they degrade the possible maximum from sonics more than anything else.

There is nothing more dangerous than an idiot who thinks he knows something. 
Raul, don't waste your time. Not worth it. 

Here are two Videos of the same cartridge in the same arm on the same turntable with all the same cables, electronics and speakers.
Because of the simple change to the Headshell employed and the corresponding position of Counterweight....the Resonant Frequency of both these Arm/Cartridge combinations is DIFFERENT.

One complies with the recommended 8Hz-12Hz Resonant Frequency whilst the other is OUTSIDE the recommended.

RESONANT FREQUENCY -A

RESONANT FREQUENCY -B

I specially chose a track with high dynamics and very deep bass cuts.
If the cartridge was going to jump out of the track.....it would do it here 😝

I understand the suggestion of experimenting with differing weights and their respective positions in order to ’alter’ the Arm/Cartridge Resonant Frequency. I do have various different Fidelity Research weights to use on all my FR-64S and FR-66S tonearms......and have done so 🤗

Please note one important fact which I think everyone has ignored in my particular case.......

• I have heard EVERY cartridge I have owned (70-80) in a recommended Arm/Cartridge Resonant Frequency range in MY SYSTEM
  

Now let me explain some logistics related to MY situation compared to most others....

• I have 6 tonearms on two different turntables allowing for 6 different cartridges to be heard in rapid succession
• I have another 30-40 cartridges, 10 of which I regularly listen to
• With each change of cartridge (other than the 6 already mounted) I need to firstly adjust VTF followed by VTA followed by Antiskate followed by Resistance and Capacitance (for all MM/MI) followed by listening to my ’Test Tracks’ to ensure maximised performance
• Every cartridge I own has been tested in at least two different headshells and two different arms to find the ’best’ combination in MY SYSTEM

Do I think there is potential for ’tweaking’ and ’futzing’ to MAXIMISE the performance of ALL my combinations....? Of course I accept this 🤗

I simply do not have the desire to add ANOTHER ’variable’ to this constantly performed ritual 🤪

Now ’riddle’ me this Batman........Ignoring all your personal individual experiences.....what would YOU do if...

• You heard better SOUND in your Systems in many cases where the Arm/Cartridge RF was OUTSIDE the recommended range?

Would you...

1. Listen to the combination which sounded the ’best’
2. Listen to the combination which sounded ’worse’ but complied with the recommended Arm/Cartridge RF

In a future Post.....I will attempt to let you hear for yourselves (via my Videos) the results of ’Compliance’ and ’Non-Compliance’ in MY SYSTEM....some of which Dover was involved with.

I predict that within the next 5 years, there will be less and less tolerance for subjective Statements on Audio which are unsupported by science or by the ’audible’ evidence of YouTube Videos.
The days of ’Raul’ are over....🎉🤥😝

Btw, the gentleman in your link use an accelerometer and a ADC/DAC not a real room/system with phonolinepreamp and the like and using real conditions about SPL for the tests.

R.

Dear @halcro : In good shape because all my posts were trying to help you and I knows that the posts in the past and latests ones coming from different gentlemans have the " mission " to help you and nothing more than that.

Unfortunatelly you showed and still shows that you need no help and that you are rigth and asking for " science " and your science is You tube: this make sense not for me but for any one but you.

Here the people say: " the woerst bling person is the one that does not wants to see ".

It’s unfortunated for you that you follow with the same attitude from six years now in something extremely easy. It’s not rocket science and certainly it’s not big deal for nay one but you.}

Unfortunastely too each time you post ( like the latest one ) you only go deeper in that black hole with out any possibility for see the " ligth ".

In your last link exist two importants things:

""" So far, we’re only studying the motion that is excited by the artificial test signals. What would happen when we expose our combinations to actual real life records? """

and the other is that that gentleman just does not know the real compliance of the 103 cartridge that certainly is not 5cu as he stated, at least not to use that number for a comparison tests:

He needs read this: " *Denon publishes their dynamic compliance specifications relative to 100Hz . The actual compliance at 10Hz will be higher. "

Additional he choosed an analog rig just " terrible ": the TT is the MS 1500 where the platter ring like a bell, has no suspension and all the TT resonates in heavy way, the tonearm is mounted in the MS arm board and the arm board in the TT is hold in one of the TT foots where any kind of resonance pass through ! !
But things does not stop there: he choosed to use a ceramic headshell that is terrible for say the least, ceramic is the worst material for a headshell due to his very high developed resonances/distortions and you know very well this ceramic headshell issue.



In the other side here more information on your false myth:



"""" """ Why is it so important for a few Posters to continually, repetitively and monotonously gnaw and harp, howl and vent, rail......’ """

exactly in the same time that you try to prove the myth with your " science " name it: You Tube.



""" change their viewpoints.....
Why do they insist on trying to change mine? """



no one try to change your mind, tha’s up to you.




I can see in those videos that you use a record clamp. I’m " terrified "
to ask you an additional the use of a clamp is obvious even for a rookie.

.

This from no Agon forum:


""

Whether the correct term is damping or dampening in mass/spring systems complying with Hooke’s law (remember from school physics F=-kx) to describe reducing the system Q (boinginess) probably depends on where you learned to speak English. When talking about loudspeaker panels, pickup arm fundamental resonance or vehicle suspensions, the different spellings either go unnoticed or infuriate pedants.

More importantly than how the words sound is how the product affects the sound.

There have been attempts to control the movement of pick up arms since the early days of microgroove LPs. In a nutshell, slow arm movements are desirable to ride warps and tolerate spindle eccentricity while permitting the arm to be dragged towards the centre of the record by the stylus following the relentless inward spiral.
Very quick arm movements, excited by surface ripples or vibrational energy caused by the cartridge’s imperfect (inevitably) suspension system, are very undesirable as the cartridge will also convert these non linear, non musical, movements to electrical signals as though they were music; which they are not. We call this "distortion" - it is a bad thing.

The mass of the arm bouncing on the stylus cantilever suspension causes it to resonate as a system, either at around 12Hz or 15Hz depending which of the two dominant theories is preferred by the selector of the arm/cart combo under consideration. More unstable arm/cart systems can flop around down below 10Hz when folk stick their favourite hig compliance cartridge in a arm. This results in almost constant oscillation that leads to pitch instability similar to that of the dreadful compact cassette. It also results in comb filtered boomy, poorly controlled, bass. Equally, ultra low compliance moving coil cartridges mounted on lightweight tone-arms can resonate above 20Hz causing problems well into the audible band above 20Hz. The consequences of either condition include overworking amplifiers and out of gap voicecoils in reflex speakers. Getting arm cartridge matching right is absolutely fundamental to competent vinyl replay.

Even when the arm cartridge resonance is in the right ball park, some degree of resonance control has long been considered desirable especially in the bass region. Ideally applied at the cartridge end, as close as possible to the cantilever pivot, attempts using damping brushes mounted on stylus assemblies were tried in the 70s by cartridge manufacturers. Then the (Townshend/Cranfield) turntable went further with a radial damping fluid trough arranged for immersion of a paddle mounted on the headshell. """

You posted in this thread:

""" and it has made me realise how wrong I am about the importance (or lack thereof) of the Arm/Cartridge Resonance
I’m really kcking my self.......I completely ignored its possible relationship to the Arm/Cartridge Resonance """

Please read what you posted there:

"" I completely ignored its ...relationship to the arm/cartridge resonance. ""

Ignorance, you said it not me ( ignorance by you own words. ). You followed:


This is why I suspect, changing cartridges or headshells or adding mass or damping to the tonearm often ‘solve’ the problem
You are simply shifting your resonant frequency ‘out’ of the feedback harmonics """

This post from you confirm with out doubt what @mijostyn posted in reference that you are " deaf ":

""" The most startling aspect of these experiences...has been the elevation in sound quality when using cartridges in arms that are decidedly a ’bad match’ according to the theoretical Arm/Cartridge Resonant Frequency equation....
With the very high-mass FR-66s tonearms.....virtually ALL the high-compliance MM cartridges I mount on them, transcend their often humble status to become magical devices emitting radiance, tranquility and bliss unheard from them in lesser arms....😘
I’m not talking degrees of betterment here.....I’m talking paradigm shifts of exaltation...👋🎼🎵🎶 """

Several times in the past I posted ( and proved with facts. ) that your system is full of " names " of manufacturers but with a room/system extremely deficiente set-up that impedes that you be aware of almost none kind of distortions and the developed harmonics of those ( every kind ) distortions. Today things on how your room/system " speaks " does not changed, it’s a bad/deficient set-up.

Now, post after post you confirm that even that you are not aware ( for multiple reasons. ) you like all those heavy and full distortions in your room/system, it’s what you like no matters what.

Is totally evident your self position about and that’s why your You tube big joke. Fine with me.

You posted

""" It provoked a ’thought exercise’ which leads me to a ’theory’ as yet unsupported by scientific evidence.
I predict that any cartridge will have the same Frequency Response Plot Graph regardless of the Arm/Cartridge Resonance it ’sees’....."""

and said that your " theory " as yet UNSUPPORTED by scientific evidence.

Who understand you? because you already " won " a prize nobel by your scientific evidence name it: You Tube ! ! ! I think that if Newton or Einstein been with us both will give you a " reverence " as the ultimate studies in the audio world ever made..

I think that that coffin rigth now stays near the center nucleo of earth. Good for you and every one because sooner or latter the coffin will be totally burn in.

Again I know that you think not only that you are rigth all all the other gentlemans including me are wrong and that you do not need help from Agoners.

Well at least try to help by your self because the ignorance that you accepted by your post in this thread gives the opportunity to learn.

Not only you can learn on what we ignore some audio subjects all of us is what we do when we ignore something and that learning always enrich our knowledge levels. No one knows everything about every audio subject, no one. We all have ignorance holes not only you that accept it by your self in that post.

Regards and enjoy the MUSIC NOT DISTORTIONS,

R.

So lets see, by your logic, regarding any mechanical system subject to user perception, ignore the dynamic (moving) parts interaction and get the best platform you can find??
That's equivalent to having a set of tires and shocks/springs you got from your grandpa's garage, and then deciding to put those excellent parts on the best car you can find. 
Do you seriously think the subjective results are likely to be better than maybe acceptable?
You may not have experienced a problem, but I and many others have. Your analysis and conclusions are ignorant and worse silly. 

ct, I'm not in a bad mood at all. I just don't tolerate idiocy. People who know me know that I do not manipulate the truth and don't pull punches.
I prefer Islay scotch. Lagavulin will due:)

Henry
I haven’t participated in this thread except at the end, when I was commenting on another posters findings. So if you could kindly give me some slack.

I have a question for you going back to your OP.

You said.

This Resonant Frequency has ZERO affect on the sound quality of a particular tonearm/cartridge combination and I have proved it hundreds of times with a dozen different arms and over 40 cartridges.

****************************

IMO - Hearing "Resonant Frequency" change, "empirically" in Audiophiledom, requires sticking to the golden rule of making only one change at a time, and keeping, everything else the same.

The Resonant Frequency is the result of combined materials in our audio kit. Anyone disagree ?

The most obvious action we can take - that comes to mind - to prove or dis-prove your Resonant Frequency claim is to just change out the armtube of your tonearm....... into a different material.

Did you attempt this Henry ?

Have you owned and tried / do you own tonearms, with the capability to change out the armtube material ?

**************************
My Empirical Findings

You know of my reference tonearm Henry, but for the others reading benefit here; I use a custom build ET 2.5 and it comes from the factory with optional armtubes to deal with different cartridges /compliance’s, and to keep the Resonant Frequency manageable.

In this link

https://photos.app.goo.gl/pgs7qXyF2f4miwLWA

one can see the MAG wand - Magnesium on top and the Carbon Fiber wand on the bottom. There is also an all aluminum wand.

Mag - stiff compliance (high resonant carts) - MC
Carbon Fiber - middle of the road - works with stiff and higher compliance carts. All around performer.
Aluminum - meant for the higher compliance carts - MM - lower resonance.

Let me say before I forget that IMO - all vintage MM’s have stiffened suspensions which makes their Resonant Frequency - not what it says in their user manual - it would be higher.

Think of the sound you get from a stiff and a less stiff tuning fork.

******************************
Empirical Findings - good enough for me.

My Magnesium wand is intended for a stiff Cart - high resonant -Like an MC.
If I put a high compliance MM cart on the Mag wand, the sound becomes quite strident. Keeping the MM on the Aluminum or CF wand works well.  The fact that there is a "sound" change to me, just by changing out the armtube, proves to me, we are dealing with a Resonant Frequency change.

This has been one of my findings.

Cheers Chris

Thanks again Professor.....but a lot of time has passed since I responded to Kirkus’ Post and I would like to clarify my thoughts since that time.

I also really want to address the points brought up by Dover, Thom and Chris as they are important.....however this will still have to wait as I need to prepare for this evening’s dinner party which will include the attendances of my Luncheon Buddies (and their spouses) 🍽

Conversation will of course be appropriate for the female company....although after even more whisky......it can become quite loud and raunchy 🤪

As I've repeated numerous times......I was moved to begin this Thread, not to disparage the science behind the topic......but because after 40 years in Audio, and the last 12 years testing and listening to hundreds of arm/cartridge combinations.....my ACTUAL experiences could not match what the 'science' was predicting 🤔When I say this.....I don't mean that it was a 50:50 proposition so that the science worked in so FEW cases that I could live it 🤗I mean:-

• I NEVER had a cartridge 'jump' from the groove
• I NEVER had visible woofer pumping
• I NEVER had audible mistracking
• I NEVER had over-bloated bass
• I NEVER had 'missing' bass (unless the cartridge was deficient)

Good science requires 100% applicability and predictability.Bad science should still provide (at the very least) a majority applicability 🎯When the 'science' provides zero correlation to the listening experience of even one shmuck (like me)....it needs to be questioned.
Propitiously......this LINK landed in my Emails last night and deserves a reading (complete with the graphs, and Test results which aren't included in the following quote.

This is the second post in the series on low frequency interaction between the tonearm and the cartridge.
In our previous post, we've formulated The Plan, and done the first bullet point: measured the Ortofon/Jelco combo from 5 Hz to 20 kHz, and put it all on two charts. What the measurements showed was a bit removed from what the calculations suggested.

Today, it's time for the second part of The Plan:✓Make sure our test rig is working fine and is picking up both high and low frequency resonances. We'll measure the low frequency set with it, and superimpose it over the usual 20Hz-20kHz sweep.2Change the cartridge to the one with different compliance, and see what the effect on the low frequency resonance would be.3See what the low frequency content of the usual LPs looks like. We'll use some nearly unplayable LPs from our collection to try and get the effects of warps and excentricity.4Do the analysis of the data and see if there are some recommendations to be made on matching tonearms and cartridges.The Setup
In addition to the Ortofon SL-15E that we've employed in the previous post, we will use our old acquaintance the Denon DL-103. Its compliance is specified at 5⋅10−65⋅10−6 cm/dyne (5 µm/mN). This fits well with the required downforce of 2.5 gram. Unlike many other cartridges, there's no doubt that Denon's suspension is actually quite stiff.And to give an opposite perspective, a Shure M97xE. While it is shown with its brush down, all our measurements were done with the brush up and the downforce correspondingly decreased.

Shure specifies the compliance at 25⋅10−625⋅10−6 cm/dyne, but it's probably much higher. Various moving magnet Audio Technicas are specified as having 40 (!), and Shure definitely has a much softer suspension. The lower required downforce (less than a gram for Shure versus 1.8-2.2 g for ATs) supports this.
The MeasurementsThe accepted formula gives us 12 Hz resonant frequency for the Denon.
So if we take it at face value and plot Denon and Ortofon low frequency resonances together, we should get something like this.

Of course, the amplitudes might be different, and the curves would not be so neat and unbroken. But we definitely would see the frequency peaks, and we would see the frequency shift. The resonant peak must shift in frequency.
I've zoomed the charts on the 5-25 Hz area and made the X axis linear.
And what do we have in reality?That doesn't look like shift at all. Maybe the vertical resonance would?
We see the change in amplitude all right, but the frequency shift is missing. This does not look much like resonant behaviour.


Extraordinary findings require extraordinary evidence, right? So let's see if using the Shure would result in the shift in the frequency of the resonant peak. Remember, specified lateral compliance of Shure is the same as Ortofon's, but we expect it to be higher. So our peak should be similar with the blue trace's, or slightly to the left. Right?You can argue that the 6 Hz hump is the peak we're looking for, but this is splitting hairs. The main difference is in the lower overall motion, not in some particular frequency.


For completeness, here's the vertical comparison chart with Shure included.What did we discover today?Looks like the low frequency behaviour of the cartridge/tonearm combination is shaped more by Newton's third law than by the compliance resonance. Modern cartridges (meaning all those built in the last 60 years or so) have too much suspension damping and non-linearity for the resonances to dominate.

I would stop at this today, leaving conclusions proper until the last post in the series. This is heady stuff, and I fully expect some people to become very upset.

Besides, we are not done yet. So far, we're only studying the motion that is excited by the artificial test signals. What would happen when we expose our combinations to actual real life records? That's the topic for the next post.

I'm not claiming 'victory' as a result of this single publication.....but I AM claiming 'vindication' in QUESTIONING the premise contained in this Thread.

I missed the Post Chris.......Perhaps the Parrot was the rare NORWEGIAN BLUE and has "joined the Choir Invisible".....? 

@halcro 

Now I'm off for our regular Thursday 'Lunch With The Boys' where we sit around for three hours devouring bowls of Laksas and an entire bottle of the finest blended Scotch between the three of us 🥃

Halcro (Henry)
Maybe you should send some of that good scotch to Mijostyn. The stuff he is drinking has put him in some bad mood. Good that the mods are here.

Regards, Halcro:

No need to respond ("Dover and the Professor will have to wait...."), it seems you already did, subsequent to Kirkus’ entry, 10-11-2014:

Halcro wrote:
"Many thanks for your thoughtful Post (as usual).....and it has made me realise how wrong I am about the importance (or lack thereof) of the Arm/Cartridge Resonance…..😲❗️
I’m really kicking myself now because I’ve done a great deal of thought and study on the subject of Structure-Borne Feedback as it relates to Audio and yet…..because I fortunately don’t suffer from it myself…..I completely ignored its possible relationship to the Arm/Cartridge Resonance..."

Two days later Fleib wrote:
"Generalizations, half truths, and oversimplification lead to erroneous conclusions even if they work. Rules are made to be broken and it’s results that matter.---
"How is it that Halcro can track almost anything with a resonant frequency below the recommended range, magic? It’s because his set-up isn’t easily excited by acoustic/mechanical impulses and he probably doesn’t play severely warped records."

Atmasphere points out "The adage that rules are made to be broken is in itself a generalization."

Offered was a thread in which the exchange of evidence and experience were deliberated in a thoughtful manner. Falling back on conventional "wisdom" is easily done, those who dare to examine certain of those conventions are not always celebrated. Mea culpa.

In this thread tunnel vision is recently in evidence, for perspective the entire thread needs to be reviewed. The title of this thread is on its own a generalization. It questions audiophile convention and stirs controversy. Although I don’t agree with all comments (ahem) I’ve been driven to actually think and for that I’m somewhat resentful.

Keep up the good work.


Peace,

Simple Halcro, because you are dead wrong. Which indicates that you do not have enough experience to know what you are talking about and are adversely influencing others because you think you do. People like Ralph, Raul and myself feel the need to make sure people who are new to the art understand cartridge/tonearm matching correctly. You on the other hand are trying desperately to make sure they fuck things up. Your ego and you should be ashamed of themselves.

@thom_at_galibier_design 

thom at galibier design
Have you ever played with tonearms which have multiple counterweights that can be used in different combinations? The resonant frequency shift from using different combinations (maintaining the same tracking force) it typically much less than 1 Hz, but the effect is salutary.

When I perform a setup for a customer with an arm having this capability (Kuzma 4Point, Tri-Planar & Moerch being three examples), there’s an optimum combination, for any particular cartridge.

I agree having experienced the same. There’s an optimum combination, for any particular cartridge .....and tonearm.

The tonearm/cart relationship is an intimate one. There are tonearms that benefit from increased vertical inertia. This getting produced with the minimum number of weights - furthest from the bearing.

There is so much that can be explored in refining ones setup, with just one good effective contact cartridge, and one good tonearm that as a former coach used to say......has capabilities.

Too many rabbit holes and too little time.

Thanks for your response Thom which is in line with Dover’s advice.
I will certainly address this suggestion in detail tomorrow.

Right now....Federer and Djokovic start their Semi-Final in the Aust Open.....

Thanks for the kind words Professor....I always take your advice seriously 🤔

I simply refuse to post anything to this thread.

TL;DR

I was however fortunate enough to catch @kirkus’ post.  Thanks for taking the time to post.

---

Have you ever played with tonearms which have multiple counterweights that can be used in different combinations? The resonant frequency shift from using different combinations (maintaining the same tracking force) it typically much less than 1 Hz, but the effect is salutary.

When I perform a setup for a customer with an arm having this capability (Kuzma 4Point, Tri-Planar & Moerch being three examples), there’s an optimum combination, for any particular cartridge.

Once you hear this, you’ll understand that resonant frequency tuning is more than about warped records.

Thom @ Galibier Design

Regards, gentlemen:

Halcro (Henry) is remarkably experienced in audio. I've trusted his impressions and continue to do so. Allow me to elaborate.

In a paper presented to the AES by Shure technician C. A. Anderson:
"resonance exists because the arm and pickup assembly behaves like an effective mass that is coupled to the record groove by means of a stylus assembly with its own mass, compliance, and mechanical resistance". Seems pretty clear, yes?

Let's take it further then:
 Ideally, frequencies BELOW the natural resonance produced by warps, eccentric groves or surface imperfections will not disturb the signal because the tonearm and cartridge move as a unit. Ideally. This occurs when compliance and mass allow the tonearm and cartridge to remain centered above the groove. Precisely what I expect of my tonearm(s).

What might our experienced listener hear ***in his system***? :  
Resonances can be considered as being constructive or destructive. When a recorded signal matches the natural resonance of our tonearm/cartridge, it's commonly accepted that the recorded signal can be enhanced by 6 to 20 dBl. Excessive excursion of the cantilever is the source, current is proportionate to stimulus and  response is the sum of mechanical and electrical properties. View either the cantilever or tonearm  as a rod, tube or beam, either will none-the-less tend to resonate at certain frequencies. At resonant frequencies the stylus tends to "scrub" in the groove. In the instance of a gross compliance/mass mismatch the entire tonearm can be seem moving laterally, sometimes leaving the groove entirely. Wow, flutter and warbling might be observed. In the instance of destructive resonances a diminution or exaggeration of signal at specific frequencies might be anticipated. Under certain system related conditions constructive resonance may (or may not) be heard as beneficial. In fewer words, "if it sounds good, it is good".

How this relates to an accurate transcripion of the media is another matter and a discussion I'll not be drawn into. None-the-less and regardless how "good" it sounds (Henry my friend), any argument that spring/mass relationships are not a consideration might be re-examined.

Looking forward to your comments &


Peace,

Before I address the interesting comments and Links posted by Dover and The Professor (Timeltel)......I need to ask a serious question that has been bothering me 🤔

Why is it so important for a few Posters to continually, repetitively and monotonously gnaw and harp, howl and vent, rail and condemn against a personal honest viewpoint that is contradictory to theirs?
I get it when they make crystal clear their viewpoints the first time they do it?
I'm not trying to convince THEM to change their viewpoints.....
Why do they insist on trying to change mine? 🧐
They will probably claim they are doing it to 'protect all you newbies out there from destroying your audio lives' by actually CONSIDERING my viewpoint.
Atmasphere even wants to have my opinions 'struck out'.....'banned' 🤯
If my Thread were a book.....he would have it burned in a public square and on this 75th anniversary of the liberation of Auschwitz Concentration Camp.....it is wise to reflect on where this ideology leads.....

No....their outrage is not altruistic.
It is all about ego and 'power'....
They NEED you to believe that THEY know more than you....

If I read someone's opinion on a Forum that claims that valve amplifiers are inherently better than solid-state....do I really need to harangue that Thread to attempt to prove him wrong?
I say 'fine'.....as long as you're happy.
If that same Poster produces charts and technical reports to 'prove' his case.....do I then think to myself "I'm never going to listen to another solid-state amplifier again"?
There seems to me, to be something inherently 'twisted' about people like this 🙃

I even provide over a hundred YOUTUBE VIDEOS of my System playing dozens of varying, revealing and demanding tracks (not the bland 'close-miked' female and one guitar Audiophile-Approved track favoured by Hi-Fi Shows) so that you can listen for yourself to see if you can hear the problems the industry is warning you about.
Do these three individuals take the opportunity to reveal their 'superiority' by actually pointing out the problems they can HEAR on my videos?
It's much easier to 'poo-poo' the videos than reveal their hearing deficiencies or admitting their fallibility.
Do they take the opportunity to post their OWN videos to show what a 'REAL' system (like theirs') sounds like?
Don't hold your breath because that would be the ultimate revelation of the 'Emperor's Clothes'.

Now I'm off for our regular Thursday 'Lunch With The Boys' where we sit around for three hours devouring bowls of Laksas and an entire bottle of the finest blended Scotch between the three of us 🥃

Dover and the Professor will have to wait....😉

Oh...and @mijostyn.....I think I've discovered the Parrot the Pirates are trying to sell me.

Raul :)

@atmasphere  please stop that report because the post must be here for people can learn about. 

Several posts including yours are very good lessons for any agoner, so we need stay the thread for all the newcomers.

R.

Dear @halcro : There is no " best friends " only honest discussions trying to learn every time.

Btw, my " disastrous room/systems set up " sounds just sublime nothing that you can even imagine or dream and certainly nothing that you can achieve today and never in your audio life. Period.

Now and coming back with the Myth main tread subject:

halcro, six years ago when you posted this thread and after post it your foots were inside a coffin with no return no matter what.

In those times several gentlemans proved with facts that your thread statement was totally false. You only post and never gave any true evidence that proved the existence of your Myth that only exist in your brain.

@timeltel in those times was one of those gentlemans and he as always was spot on as today is with his post. Welcome timeltel people miss you in this forums.

Through his post @dover puts an additional nail to your coffin.

Rigth now you are bury so deep in the earth that it’s imposible to stop your free fall down there.

With your latests posts you are not only adding more nails to the coffin but you are accelerating that free fall.

Please do it a favor and stop your free fall because each time you post about don’t put another nail because in the coffin there is no more surface for an additional nail but you just go deeper and deeper.

Hear my cartridges is the big joke you imagine as are all those you tube videos: and you think  and want that through a joke you can prove you are rigth: go figure ! !  

R.

Halcro is off on his own planet somewhere where the laws of physics are strangely different. I suggest we all ignore him from now on. On this planet he makes no sense.

Agreed! This entire topic is ridiculous. I've reported this thread as trolling. This is the last post I will make to it; I suggest others do the same.

@larryi same on modern Hi-Fi News TEST LP, but without instruments, just tone. 

All you need to actually hear the effect of the low frequency resonance is to play one of those old Shure test records that are used to find the resonant frequency of your tonearm/cartridge combination.  The subsonic frequency is recorded along with an instrument; I believe it is a flute.  When the arm/cartridge start to shake at the resonant frequency the flute sound becomes sour and at the peak of the shaking you can hear a distinct "wobble" to the tone of the instrument.  This is the case even without mis-tracking.

Guys, you all have it down pat. Halcro is off on his own planet somewhere where the laws of physics are strangely different. I suggest we all ignore him from now on. On this planet he makes no sense.

@halcro 

Here is an extract from the Shure white papers...

what happens at the resonance frequency? One important characteristic of resonance is that motions are magnified considerably, in this case, typically from 2 to 10 times. 

In both situations, the output from resonance frequency signals in the groove will be increased from 6 to 20 dB. These numbers are just the dB equivalent of the magnification numbers previously mentioned. By itself, this may not be all bad, since this resonance peak determines the low-frequency response "limit" of the pickup and system, and a bit of boost here may not be unpleasant. This was certainly true fifteen years ago, when arm resonance frequencies of 30 to 50 Hz were common. However, with modern pickups and arms, these resonance frequencies are usually subsonic (below 20 Hz), so that reproduction by the loudspeakers may cause distortion. Additionally, preamp overload is most likely to occur at boosted low frequencies since the preamp clipping level is lowest here. Consequently, the arm resonance has lost whatever usefulness it once had and must now be regarded as a liability.

The most pernicious effect of the resonance is shown in Figures 1 and 2 by the "scrubbing" notion developed by the stylus in the groove. This causes program material to warble in pitch, just as if the turntable speed were fluctuating. In fact, the groove speed is changing (relative to the tip), because a fraction of the velocity of arm vibration is added to the groove velocity. (See Appendix I.) The effect is that about 1/3 of the arm vibration velocity is alternately added to and subtracted from the groove speed. For example, at arm resonance, total amplitudes of 1/32" are easily observed by eye. If the frequency is 8 Hz (typical for high compliance pickups and average arms), the resonance velocity will be about 2 cm/sec (see Appendix II). This velocity will produce a "scrubbing" velocity of 0.6 cm/sec along the groove axis. The groove speed at a 4.5 inch radius is about 40 cm/sec; so the frequency modulation will be about 0.6/40 = 1.5% and easily audible.

Another less obvious consequence of the arm resonance is that the stylus force is "used up" when the arm is vibrating. In the previous example, if the compliance of the pickup is assumed to be 20 x 10-6 cm/dyne, 2.0 grams of stylus force will be required to accommodate the arm vibration alone. This is larger than the usual stylus force, so mistracking is quite certain at the extremes of the vibration.

AJ Van den Hul

Recently I bought a very good looking rather long tone arm made in Japan around the ’70s. Suddenly the bass response is very different. What happened ?

It sounds like you bought a 12 inch Fidelity Research arm with probably even silver wiring inside. These arms were made for the, in those days, very famous cartridges of the same company, like the FR-1 and later FR-7.
These cartridges had a stiff suspension and worked with a tracking force of around 2.0 gram or even more. The compliance (flexibility) of the suspension was not very high. But with some extra coupled weight around (your heavy arm) the basic resonance frequency of cartridge and arm would be around 10 Hz.

Your actual cartridge has a much higher compliance and already tracks well at 1.35 - 1.50 gramf. So the heavy arm combined with the softer spring (the suspension’s steel wire and rubber together) resonates at a much lower frequency and at a higher amplitude - like 5 Hz. The sonic result is that a lot of extra energy of your power amplifier is used to move your woofer at around 5 Hz and the real bass is gone.
Lesson: Never match what is not made for each other. New arm designs are made for today’s cartridges with a dynamic compliance of 10 - 15 μm/mN. The other way around is also a fact of live: For instance your SME Series V will not work so well with the Fidelity Research FR-1 because the compliance of this cartridge is too low here. So the resonance frequency of the cartridge/arm combination (see Appendix 2) is too high and your bass reproduction is too strong. The whole acts as

a low frequency resonator at around 25 - 30 Hz, so the output at these frequencies is also higher. But even worse is the fact that the tracking ability of your cartridge is gone. This because any resonating cartridge/arm combination already causes a healthy number of microns in excursion at the stylus. So what’s left is for your music. And in worst case that is not much.

So, sudden tracking problems are partly caused by uncontrolled low frequency resonances. A way to solve this problem is a reduction of the headshell mass. And also some fluid damping can help, but ONLY when you play flat records. Otherwise the cure causes your cartridge to age faster than you age yourself.

Halcro, you have an FR64S as do I. I can easily demonstrate that changing the effective mass by changing the counterweight ( I have multiple counterweights for my FR64S ), there is an audible difference with both low and med/high compliance cartridges. Similarly on the latest Shroeder CB multiple head shell plates are provided to dial in optimum effective mass.

This is not to say mismatched arms/cartridges wont work, and or may not be audible in some systems, but there are some latent benefits from matching effective mass and compliance including shortening the life of the cantilver suspension as suggested by Van Den Hul.

For those with a fetish for vintage cartridges, unless the cartridge has been completely rebuilt, you have no idea what the actual compliance is given that the rubber suspension will have deteriorated. A cynic would suggest that the reason why the much vaunted FR7 series cartridges never wear out is that they were  built with a dual layer rubber suspension, that is, when the softer first layer is f**d then the much firmer second layer kicks in and at least keeps the cartridge somewhat functional, albeit now out of spec.

Regards, all:

Tone arm resonance can not be eliminated. It is then best positioned  where it will least likely be excited by vibrations within the mechanical system. Cantilevers and tonearms resonate at specific frequencies, damping or dumping these resonances into the system's mass are both means of addressing this phenomena but do not eliminate it in entirety. 

Apologies Henry; Parrots are in short supply but there is this:  https://www.gcaudio.com/tips-tricks/tonearm-cartridge-compatability/

"At resonance (more on this, see Kogen et al, below), the arm/cartridge combination produces a dramatic rise in output. An increase of 3 to 6dB or more is common. This tremendous boost can cause severe problems if it occurs in the region of recorded music (above 20Hz), or in the area where record warps and rumble are problematic (below 5Hz). A cartridge/arm whose resonance occurs in the region above 20Hz can be influenced by music on the record. At this frequency a significant jump in output (resulting in a "bloated" or "tubby" sound) will be experienced. In extreme cases, the stylus may actually jump out of the groove. Similarly, a cartridge/arm combination that exhibits a resonance below the desired range will exaggerate the effects of record warps, or rumble produced by the turntable."

Galen Carol cites Ortofon as a source.

==================================

Kogen et al. : Trackability 1973
"Audio" magazine, Aug. 1973. pg. 16, (excerpt, pg.19):

"The two major factors that affect the resonance frequency exhibied are determined primarily by the interaction are the mass of the tonearm and the dynamic compliance of the stylus and the efective compliance of the stylus. Increasing the mass of the tonearm-phono cartridge combination lowers the resonance frequency and tend to raise the amplitude near the resonance frequency, the motion of the stylus relative to the tonearm wil be many times that of the exciting signal. This will then significantly reduce the ability of the pickup to accurately track the grove modulation." 

"American Radio History" site. Plenty of adds for (now) vintage equipment on the way to pg.19 for those who have "been there, done that" and sufficient graphs to meet the requirements of the most demanding. 

https://www.americanradiohistory.com/Archive-Audio/70s/Audio-1973-08.pdf

Peace,