And, I would say that Ortofon RMG 309 dynamic tonearm is one of perfect tonearms. |
The SAEC UXL3, Victor L1000 and Audio Technica LH-18, all these weight: 18grs. Thanks. I would eventually need an SPU cartridge to work with RMG 309, but I am trying to find a (cheaper) way to use Denon 103r which is 8.5g. With 18g headshell, I would need add another 5.5g weight to make it total 32g. I will see how it goes. |
Atmasphere wrote: Tri Mai of Triplanar has nothing but complements for the Phantom, and there have been quite a few threads here on the 'gon regarding its qualities. IME it is a transformation over the 2.2! I would call the Phantom, the logical evolution of the v2.x series - not so much a transformation, as an improved 2.2 - an arm which weaves a very similar sonic presentationto the 2.x series. In other words, if you liked the 2.2, you will love the Phantom. I will say that if you audition the Phantom and the Tri-Planar, and will most certainly prefer one over the other. I can typically work with a customer and predict to a high degree of certainty which will be the case. Both are fine tonearms, but the designers have a different vision of what an analog presentation should be, and this vision has been consistent through the evolution of both products. Disclaimer - I know Tr-Mai (Tri-Planar) and sell his tonarms. I don't know Bob Graham very well, but have a high degree of respect for him. Note - I don't have much time for forums these days, so any pressing questions are best directed to me via e-mail. Cheers, Thom @ Galibier |
you can buy a new SME V now for around 2600 or 2700. Why settle for less? |
Dear Ihcho: The SAEC UXL3, Victor L1000 and Audio Technica LH-18, all these weight: 18grs.
R. |
The 'deceptive' part is the IS in the sentence form 'x is P'(aka the subject -predicate).But we want a tonearm which satisfy many conditions and this assume a list of properties not just one. Besides 'the best' imply comparison between how many tonearms?: 3, 4, or...
What we get is actually: John thinks, believes, is convinced that,etc. that the tonearm A is better than the other he ever owned. Assuming that most of us owned, say,
3 tonearms this 'best quality' become a very hazy qualification. |
The Perfect tonearm is the Graham Phantom Supreme for so many reasons.... |
Regarding Orsonic AV-101B/S being 16 gr, would that be one of the heaviest headshell? Any heavier one (except Ortofon SPU)? |
"The GCPH should have enough gain for a mid-output MC, I think. And can you say why you think the NAD amp is causing hum in that system? Phono hum is caused by a long list of grounding issues that usually occur upstream from the input of a linestage."
Agree. I have a GCPH and discovered you often need a ground wire between it and the tonearm. Also, do not put the spade around the GCPH ground post, put one arm of the spade THROUGH the hole (or use bare wire through the hole) in the GCPH ground post and tighten the nut by hand.
Y'all be cool,
Robert |
|
Any tonearm can only be considered "best" is it meets your needs; be that compatibility with your preferred cartridge or deck, method of mounting, or price.
For the cartridges and decks I prefer, I would have to say that the new Ortofon TA-110 ($1,599) and TA-210 ($1,899) tonearms are exceptional performers at their respective price points. |
The Opera tonearm sold by Grant Fidelity has gotten nice reviews. Was at the top of my list until I bought an Amadeus (tonearm built in. Go golf ball!). |
If I were to spend $2000 on a tone arm I would buy the Balance Audio Aeris. |
Dear Franz, Unless the bearing of the Clarify CF is radically different from that of the Clarify, I don't know why you would even consider it, given your experience with the latter (and assuming you correctly assessed the cause of the problem). The M-S 505 is an excellent tonearm but overpriced at $1080, IMO. With patience I think you can find one for less. In the under $1000 vintage Japanese tonearm category, consider also the Lustre and Victor tonearms. Sometimes you can find an SAEC 308N for that kind of money as well. The GCPH should have enough gain for a mid-output MC, I think. And can you say why you think the NAD amp is causing hum in that system? Phono hum is caused by a long list of grounding issues that usually occur upstream from the input of a linestage. |
In the under $2000 class, there is only one non linear tonearm that equals the higher priced models and that is the Audiomods IV. It has all the features you are looking for and is built to a very exacting level. I have directly compared it to an SME 309 and 345, Linn Ittok II and Roksan Tabriz and it is superior on every level. I have not compared to a phantom or Triplanar. |
Check out the Terminator T-3 from Trans-Fi. Fits most turntable without worrying about P to S distance. Easy as pie to set-up. VTA on the fly, azimuth is adjustable, no anti-skate to worry about. Many, many cartridges are compatible. Around $1000 US dollars NEW! Great technical support. Downside, not classic S-shaped. I'm digging' mine! |
For this amount of money you can get second hand an 0L conqueror mkII.Read the reviews (10 audio, stereo times).It's a fantastic arm,since i have it ,around 8 months i listen vinyl intensively. |
I recently bought a Clearaudio Innovation Compact with a Clarify tonearm. The Clarify (with its magnetically floating pivot) did not track well: it jumped from the empty grooves at the beginning of records into those with music and at the end of records jumped around too. In any case, I returned the Clarify tonearm and am now in the same position as was Mikeyc8 at the beginning of this thread.
What do you think of the Clearaudio Satisfy Carbon Fiber tonearm and of Clearaudio tonearms in general? I can get the Satisfy CF from the dealer for a reduced price. But there is a MA 505s available on Ebay for $1080, and the Jelco 750LB 12” there goes for $670? How do you think the Satisfy CF compares with these?
I will probably be using MM cartridges since my system does not seem to have enough power to play MC cartridges without enormous hum. I tried it with a Shelter 501 II. I have an old NAD 3155 amp with a new PS Audio GCPH preamp. I get the hum with all settings of the GCPH. I think the NAD amp is the problem. |
Used Dynavector 597 MKII, is a good choise! |
Thanks for that info Nandric.
Does anyone have any thoughts on SME, specifically the 3012R. |
Dear Syntax,You are right:both AV -101 are 16 gr.and AV-1
is 10 gr. My is AV-1 but the lettering is fadeaway.
Sorry Perrew.
Mike,for the FR-64 you need AV-1 (10gr.);for the FR-64fx
you can use both.
Regards, |
as fate would have it, I have an Orsonic Headshell on my Audiocraft AC300 arm. I guess this would mate nicely with a FR arm eh? |
Perrew, There is AV-101 B (+/- 10 gr.) and AV-101S
(16 gr.). I used the 'B' in all of my earlier tonearms Both are identical from weight 101 B=Black color 101 S=Silver color |
Dear Perrew, There is AV-101 B (+/- 10 gr.) and AV-101S
(16 gr.). I used the 'B' in all of my earlier tonearms:
FR-64S;Lustre 801 and Micro MA-505(S).To me:the best headshell there is. But Sumiko AS-12 looks very impressive and I think you should try this one first. I.e. if the money is of eny importance.But to be honest I have no experience with this headshell even if I own 2 of them.
There is no way I can put one other tonearm on my Kuzma
S.R. because the 'base' is drilled for the Triplanar.
Besides: chenging carts and tonearms is like a 'horror'to
me.I.e.I am not a consistent hifi 'nuts'.
Regards,
Regards, |
Dear Nandric, thanks for the tip. It looked like the last Orsonic sold in 2008 but I saw a Orsonic AV101 available, any experience with this one? |
Dear Perrew, 'the Orsonic difficult to get'?
I see Orsonic headshells regular on eBay for $100-18o.
There is the 'B' and the 'S' kind with diff. weight.
But you can try the 'Sumiko AS-12'(eBay.co.uk) for 30
GBP. The same headshell is offered under diff. names for
more (+/-12 gr). Fantastic 'tags',azimuth provision and
magnesium construction. I purchased two of them even if
I have no idea what to do with them;I dont need a headshell.Greedy I assume. I also keep my Orsonic 'B' as
kind of treasure for more then 10 years. But I use the
Triplanar VII and Reed L with 'fast headshells'.
So I am obviously crazy but my advise is ,I hope,sound?
Regards, |
What other headshell are there that are good, the Orsonic doesnt seem to be easy to find? |
Dear Nandric, I was associated with DAS OHR for a short while 25 years back.
Götz Wilimzig was/is highly subjective in his reviews - Klaus never was and had a much wider knowledge regarding reproduced sound and its interrelations in an audio chain.
The effective moving mass of the FR-64s san headshell is about 14.5 gr.
With an Orsonic the FR-64s is pretty "universal".
It outperforms the FR-64fx buy a good margin providing clearer and more solid bass and - most important - the impression of "true physical weight" in the reproduced sound (something I am missing EVERYWHERE except in FR-7x/FR-64/66s-combos and good reel-to-reel machines with 2-track tapes).
Others may prefer the FR-64fx above the FR-64s in certain set-ups or with certain cartridges - fine, a great opportunity to buy the FR-64s from them.
I have never heard the FR-64fx with any cartridge bettering the stainless steel brother.
You will even get outstanding sonic results with a Shure V15mk4 - 5 or MR mounted on the FR-64s in an Orsonic.
In my point of view the FR-64s would still be today a contender for the very top-end in tonearm design.
I have heard pretty much all - precisely set-up according to the geometry I have laid out in earlier threads I have heard no better (safe for its big brother in 2 areas).
I know that many others have - good for them, fine with me.
Cheers,
D. |
Dear Dertonarm.I am 'disturbed' by the statement of Musicfile: 'wich is superior is strictly subjective'.
I assume you know K.Renner and G.Wilimzig ,the reviewers
by 'Das Ohr'. Are both of them 'subjective reviewers'? BTW you can provide 'objective information' by
quoting from your magazine. According to Renner the effective mass of FR-64 (without the headshell) is 15 gr.
and FR-fx 6 gr. My question is: when using Orsonic AV-1 (10gr.?I used this one) how 'universal' is the FR-64 ?
I had no problem at all then with Ortofon 30 mk2.
Regards |
The first - super detailed and spiced up with many technical aspects and calculations - test of the FR-64s in Germany was in the 1st edition of HIFi-Exlusive issue 9 september 1980.
This was the one most comprehensive and extensive test ever performed on that tonearm.
I have had all FR-60 tonearms during the last 25 years, have re-wired several and still do use mainly the FR-66s.
But my ongoing love-affair with the FR-64s/66s is well known by now and I am certainly no longer objective..... |
Musicfile, yes the FR64fx is definitely on my list. If you ever see one available, please let me know!
Thanks Pat. |
My response is based on the OP requirements
The fx is lighter and more suitable across a wide array of carts -both arms are very good which is superior is strictly subjective |
Hi Musicfile, I still own the German magazine 'Das Ohr'
from April 1984 with the first review in Europe of both
tonearms: FR-64s and FR-64fx. Dertonarm mentioned somwhere
the same magazine and stated (if I am right)that the reviwers ware very competent.According to them the FR-64s
was superior in eny 'parameter'. I am familiar with FR-64s,the best 'tracker' I ever owned but not with FR-64fx.
So I hope you can value this information.
Regards, |
How about the Fidelity Research Arms specifically the FR64fx, and it is a good medium mass tonearm that has outstanding bearings, adjustable VTA, anti-skate, etc.
Great construction and vintage yes |
Nandric, great !
Even if my romantic mood and believe in the ability of man's mind is still underrated.
Frege seems to haunt me forever......
Still - great, even if my picture of the two lions was inappropriate.
I am rather the seasoned Tiger who always hunts alone.
Back from the jungle to the streets.
Cheers,
D. |
huh?? now back to our regular programming. |
Dear Raul and Dertonarm,thanks mainly to you both our
community is best informed on earth regarding tonearms,turntables and carts.
In some sence it is (much) easyer to have just one authority but I prefer two of more. I will elaborate on this later but I will start with Dertonarms methafor about the old- and the young leon in the same territory.
When asked why he so much dislikes M.Gorky the 'old Leon'
Tolstoj used this 'argument':' My dogs also dislike Gorky'.
The same kind of 'argument-weight' I attribute to the
'commercial intentions' arguments used by both 'Dramatis
personae'. Getting rich by producing tonearm?? You must be
kidding.
So both of our beloved Dramatis personae illustrate two different,say,human 'propertys':
1.The human weakness;
2.The 'homo faber' story (Bergson,Frisch)
Regarding the human weakness Raul is (much) more sensitive
then Dertonarm. He always underlines the individual preferences. In this context I am on the side of Raul because to me the empathy is one of the most important
human quality. Dertonarm SEEMS to 'hate' human weakness
probable because he is follower of the 'absolute theory
of truth' and hates eny compromise.But in Sweden he was not
looking for,say,the richest- but for the most beautiful
lady. So perhaps he is not as 'hard' as he thinks.
2. The 'homo faber'
Because of the division of labor most of us have lost the
skills to make things. I have no idea how to 'produce' even
a stone-knife. So,I ques, the most of us will regard those
two as 'lucky bastards' because thy can combine their hobby
with their work.
So this 'part' is that envy both at most.
Dertonarm mentioned somwehere this 'unity of theory and practice' in.say,'general terms'.
I am familiar with the,say,Marxian one,because I am from
eastern Europa. Thanks to Poppers 'Conjecures and Refutantions' we can use suitable terms to describe the
'experiment' with the 'scientific socialism'. While social
scientist were producing evidence that Marx was right;mainly by quoting from Marx work,some 'regular' person,without eny academic education refuted the theory.
When asked:'And how are we today Sergej?' His answer was:
'Well it is worst then yesterday but better then tomorrow'.
There are also the so called 'American pragmatist'(from
Dewey till Quine) with the similar programme but I am not
familiar with the possible results there.
But I am with Dertonarm for the 'individual cases'.I.e.:
Raul produced 'the' tonearm by the 'unity of theory and
practice' and
Dertonarm (also)produced 'the' tonearm ,etc.
3. The authority
Aristoteles dominated western culture for 2000 years.
The easy 'part' of this fact was:one needed only to read
Aristoteles and nothing else and one was sure about the
'real truth'.I.e. no dillemas then.
So till Galileo in physics and Frege in logic 'we' had just
one authority.
So I have no problem at all with the 'number' in our forum:
I enjoy reading Raul as well as Dertonarm.
Regards, |
To my experience all headshell leads by Ikeda ( I have them all - S-30 to S-50 ) are of identical length.
It may be however that there are shorter length samples around.
Usually the problem is the other way round and you have problems squeezing the leads in between the pins of headshell bajonett and cartridge leadout pins.
In most cases there is little distance left to be bridged by the headshell leads. |
Dear Mikeyc8:Yes, it makes a good match with the own magnesium lustre headshell.
Btw, If you choose for the Ikeda headshell wires be carefully to choose the right ones for the cartridge you have because the S-50 are a little short and not works with every cartridge out there, maybe is a better and secure choice the S-40 that are a little longer.
Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul. |
so lots of good choices here it seems....
FR 64fx, Lustre GST 801, Micro Seiki 505, Graham 2.2, Triplanar and IT245.
Raul, I noticed you posted in in earlier thread about the Lustre with a XV1s, to clarify did you say it sounded good with the XV1s?
|
Dear Mickeyc8: The Lustre GST-801 that Nandric suggest isa very good and versatile one for what you asking:
VTA on the fly, easy ( magnetic ) anti-skate device, easy VTF setting ( magnetic too. ), classic looking not a straight tonearm, comes with different counterweights to try different cartridges, Azymuth set-up, with easy carridge/tonearm effective mass handling due that you can use different headshells that weight different too.
Iuse this tonearm for many years with very good results with cartridges ranging from 3grs to 30 grs and with cartridge compliance ranging from 4cu to 40cu.
THis Lustre kind of " friendly " device is something that I can say is a versatile tonearm and you can find it second hand for no more than 500-600 and the other 1.5K you can use for a good tonearm cable, LP's and even a new cartridge!!!
Good luck.
Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
F |
Dertonarm, obfuscations aside, the reason the Triplanar is more precise is because when you set it up, it stays set up and does not require fiddling to keep the azimuth correct. This is a problem for the G2.2 when the LP thickness is varied or if there are warps of any size.
The design of the Phantom seems to be aimed at addressing this issue in particular.
I owned the G2.2 for years and showed with it at shows- my comments come from direct experience. I liked his setup device a lot BTW. It forced you to go out of your way to set the arm up wrong. You only hope that his calculations were correct, but IME they had to be quite close.
The Triplanar has a provision to set azimuth exactly, and it will not vary nor oscillate as is often seen in the G2.2. In addition, the Triplanar has and had the first VTA tower that allows for precise VTA adjustment on the fly, and done in such a manner that it does not interact with other adjustments on the arm. |
Dear Mikeyc8, Nandric was right in his suggestions of the Lustre/Koshin GST-801 and the MA-505 (s or x).
Adding the recommended headshell and fine tuned with the Ikeda S-50 headshell wires and an AQ Leopard dbs or similar pure silver tonearm cable will give you a very good tonearm/cable combination too - for well below $1500.
The Lustre is the slightly "better" tonearm, but is less versatile.
Both do offer your prefered "S"-shape and the Lustre is very similar in handling, built quality and rigidy to the old Ikeda tonearms of the early 1980ies.
You can't do wrong with either.
If you shopuld decide to go for the classic MA-505, make sure you get either an "S" or an "X" suffix.
Both do feature pure silver inside leads.
Cheers,
D. |
So - ********* it (the Triplanar) can also be set up to more precise geometrical settings than the 2.2...*********
Very interesting.
Both tonearms can be aligned for overhang, vta, azimuth, mounting distance.
Hmmmm - do you want to start telling people that the geometrical calculation of the Triplanar is "better" and therefor more "precise".
I'd love to see that technical explanation displayed here.
But I suggest you get some more back-up before starting that.
Well Atmasphere...... there were so many modifications to the "perfect" Triplanar tonearm (many by Herb Papier - not sure who did the last ones) over its almost 25 years of existance now (talking about an "oldskool tonearm"...) , that not only I lost track about what "offical" or "silent" version is on sale right now.
The Triplanar may run "circles" around the G 2.2 if you set-up both tonearms.
I can't dispute that.
In fact I am sure it is that way if you set-up both.
And it may instantly obvious to you.
I can't dispute that either - and I won't.
In fact I am pretty sure it is that way.
As you will have little to none knowledge about the true roots of "novacula occami" aside from what you can read on Wikipedia or what is on the internet (which is neither all nor the true concept and spiritual idea.......) - because if you had, you wouldn't use it in this context at all.
Your simplified way of concept and view brings up beautiful memories of G.W. Bush view of the world.
You miss him - don't you?
Cheers,
D. |
Well Dertonearm, first there is no Mk8 of the Triplanar...
The Mk6 was out about 4-5 years ago. You might well see one for about $2K. FWIW, I don't sell them :) Your respect notwithstanding, the Mk6 ran/runs circles around the G2.2 and does it in a way that instantly obvious. It can also be set to more precise geometrical settings than the 2.2.
Occam's Razor suggests that your dissing of the Triplanar has to do with something other than tone arm performance. |
Dear Dougdeacon, dear Ralph Karsten, I appreciate you two being open in your realation with the Triplanar distributor.
I had personally 4 versions of the Wheaton/Triplanar.
While I do not agree with your comments that it belongs to the very best toenarms on the market, it is a nice tonearm with several good ideas but a few shortcomings too.
Its shortcoming mays not apparent in all set-ups and with all cartridges.
About precision in tonearm set-up and cartridge alignment..... well, frankly - as I have learned in various threads and discussions in the past 3 months here on Audiogon, my ideas about precise alignment are VERY different from almost everybody else here.
I have constantly been critizsed for being TOO demanding about geometry or alignment issues.
Knowing this only too well I did with good intention and good resaon recommend the Graham alignment tool. I may not be the ultimate, but it is a hell of a lot better then most other "alignment tools" and allows the novice to set-up the Graham with a fairly good geometry in no time and with prooven results.
I know that the Phantom is better - the Phantom II by a good margin as I learned from Syntax.
Look at the inital price frame - the question was for $2k or under..........
You want to sell Mikeyc8 a Triplanar VII or VIII for under $2k ...?
No ?
But he can get a almost mint Graham 2.2 ceramic for about $1500 to $1600 and will be amazed by the results.
Later he can maybe upgrade one day to a Triplanar or Phantom - we'll see.
But he will get good results (I will try a G 2.2 with the Grado - even if this strange osccilation is "widely known", I want to see it and then I will find out why.) and will be hard pressed finding anything the par in terms of versality and ease of set-up.
And no - I am not associated with Robert Graham.
This is just one of the VERY few audio components on the market that gets my respect.
Cheers,
D. |
You must give a listen to an RS Labs RS A1 tonearm. It has a rotating headshell and is one of the (if not best) arms I have ever heard. I think new is $2,900 (maybe $3900-can't remember) but used should be in your budget-if you can find one. Only downside is no armlift but the sound (and incredible ease of set up as no geometyrical cartridge setup is required due to pivot) is soo worth it. Pure bliss. Soundstage, depth, detail, articulation of instruments in thier own space, musicality, prat-I could keep going. |
Dertonarm, the G2.2 and the Grado cartridges are well-known for something that is sometimes called the 'Grado dance', although it is certainly not the fault of the cartridge! It is merely that the effective mass of the system is incorrect for the compliance of that cartridge. I have seen the combination oscillate mechanically from groove modulation (and not anything else) to the point that it would skip out of the groove. The combination of the two is also unable to track complex passages.
Tri Mai of Triplanar has nothing but complements for the Phantom, and there have been quite a few threads here on the 'gon regarding its qualities. IME it is a transformation over the 2.2!
Its no secret that I show with Triplanar at shows. I am grateful because the Triplanar has consistently been one of the top tonearms ever made; the best I have heard in comparison to master tapes. One would be quite lucky to be able to pick up a used Triplanar Mk7 or Phantom for only $2K! I hope you do not fault me for making friends with people in the industry... |
Hi Mikeyc8: Ikeda's tonearms, like the FR's and IT's mostly veer in the direction of high mass, and should work far better with low-compliance cartridges than high-compliance. I'd say that the IT-245 is at least comparable the 64fx, and probably somewhat better. But you do lose the convenience of universal-type headshells. In a universal headshell tonearm, the IT-345 is a more sophisticated design than the 64fx and sounds better, but I don't think you will have much luck finding a second-hand one for sale (which is why I didn't mention it earlier).
>The Micro 505 is also interesting, as it has VTA on the fly I believe.
Note that the 505 was made in straight-tube as well as S-tube variants. I've owned the 505, and I'd say that it has a midrange-oriented, forgiving personality that is quite likeable. But in terms of frequency extension, dynamic range and resolution, it isn't as capable as the 64fx or IT-245. FWIW, FR made an on-the-fly VTA adjustment piece for the 64 and 66 family, which was called the "Arm Elevation Base".
Good luck with your search! |
Hi Lew:
>What model of Triplanar have you used that has such a headshell?
For sure mine is not the latest version. My memory is that I started using it around 2000~2001, and had it paired with the Allearts around 2002.
>I have owned mine for more than 15 years, and, altho it is not sitting in front of me at the moment, I could swear that the under-surface of the headshell is a flat plane with no "sides" to it. Moreover, to my knowledge there has been no change to the headshell design in the entire long history of the product.
I'd have to search for where my Triplanar is right now to check the construction details. You may be right that the headshell has no sides. But there was something in my particular Triplanar's headshell structure that impaired its compatibility with the Allearts - that was one of the very, very few times where I was forced to design and machine a part specifically to allow a cartridge to work properly in a tonearm.
>Anyway, the Allaerts cartridges are unusually wide-bodied.
Agreed. But the question is not only how wide, also where the width is located. On some tonearms, towards the rear of the headshell, the connection between the headshell top and rear is reinforced with triangular or curved pieces. A cartridge that is wide-bodied in this area could cause problems, while the same width farther forward may not cause any difficulties.
cheers! |
