Not only that (Dan-ed's comments), but adding any sort of bonding agent may interrupt energy transmission.
Think of everything as a material - even a thin bonding layer.
Better to wank down on some bolts to join the two layers together. This, at least is reverseable.
Cheers,
Thom @ Galibier |
I don't think you want to glue the armboard down, if that is what you meant. Part of the design of this style is that you can move the armboard to make cartridge alignment much, much easier. |
Hey Guys......I posted to this thread back in June '05
& put in my order for a Schroder 2 arm back in aug. '05
I JUST recieved it about a week ago (Nov '06)
over a year wait.
I am going to build a cocobolo armboard & use a Teres VTA
adjuster with it since it does not have adjustable VTA like the Schroder Referance has.
The plinth is 2" acrylic. I am not sure if I should glue
the armboard to cut down on resonance or just screw it down
with some brass screws.
Cartridge is a music maker III
this Arm is obviously less expensive & has less adjustments
as the Reference arm, But it is very simple & elegant looking & I expect to be delighted at it's sound when I get
it up & running! |
I stepped in some panoply once. Couldn't get the stuff of with turpentine! Just had to wait until it wore off. |
Hi Jhendrixfan,
I'm not sure who's "panoply of equipment" you're referencing. If it's Dmailer's, his signal path is quite straight-forward and neutral. You can view it here:
http://www.galibierdesign.com/systems_larry_keatts.html
Yes, there are better MC step-ups out there, and Dave Slagle's (Intact Audio) is one of them. One thing at a time ...
Maybe you're referring to someone else's panoply?
Cheers,
Thom @ Galibier |
Considering the panoply of equipment you are using I would be more concerned about the MC step-up to (proposed) cartridge matching. |
Thom: Great!!!
Regards and enjoy the music.
Raul. |
Yup! What y'all said.
Last night I put in the caveat on my spreadsheet for the unsuspecting.
It's interesting - I'm also finding the maximum safe bottom f. res. at about 9 Hz. A bit lower can work with some carts. but 9 seems to be safe number (solid stand, unsuspended deck).
What is obvious to us, is not always obvious to the newbie.
Cheers,
Thom |
Very good points Frank. Btw, I work ( for years ) hard with my system for to have " luck " about.
Regards and enjoy the music.
Raul. |
Hi everyone,
A few additional thoughts on the issue of an "ideal" fres of the arm/cart combo. I second Rauls observation, that even "non-textbook" combinations can give stunning results. It is in the often found case that the table/arm/cart is exited by footfall or other causes, like record excentricity or, quite common, heavy, mass loaded decks, sitting on top of tall racks(doing the Eiffel Tower dance), that the choice of a f.res that is least perceptible to being excited is beneficial.
This doesn't always mean the f.res has to be farthest away from the f.exite. If your f.res is a (2nd,3rd)multiple of f.excite, the alteration of f.res, be it lowering or raising(sometimes by a small amount only), will result in a sound improvement, more so with undamped arms than with damped arms.
This is why I aim at 11Hz. Most suspended tables have a f.suspension no higher than 4,5Hz, so you should be safe at anything higher than f.res=9Hz. Your suspension resonates at a lower frequency? You're safe going lower than 9Hz.
If you have a mass loaded deck, then footfall or the deck on a tall rack forming the bob of a reversed pendulum are your main concerns(the deck moving sideways, not up and down).
On the other hand, going higher than f.res=14hz will have an effect on the low frequency response of your system, in the worst case causing your amp to waist power on the speakers, prematurely saturate the output trannies on your tube amp,, or (a friend experienced it on some BIIIG Infinity Speakers, -3db at 15Hz) severe feedback.
If your table is mounted on/like a rock, or it's suspension is well designed, then you get to enjoy listening to any combination your collection allows you to put together and the actual sonic qualities of the arm or cart will dictate the outcome.
Sounds like Raul is one of those lucky guys!
All the best,
Frank |
|
|
Dear Thom: The mass/compliance chart is a great service to all. It is the best advise to start about and I agree with you to " put some sort of advisory ..".
Well done.
Regards and enjoy the music.
Raul. |
Hi Doug, Raul ...
I wonder if I am doing a disservice by publishing the mass/compliance chart. I think some explanatory notes should be added and I will do so.
This all goes back to listening being the final arbiter of "goodness". I need to put some sort of advisory on the spreadsheet to the effect that treating the numbers as being an instant recipe for success is just not possible.
The idea was keep people from starting off with completely wacky combinations like a Shure with an SME 3012R. Now, some have reported success with weird combinations, and I'm not saying that it isn't possible If you were a gambling man however, it wouldn't be the smart place to start, unless (through lists like this) you hear reports of special combinations making magik.
If people get out of this that once you "run the numbers", you are done, they will likely be stopping short of the finish line.
As both of you have wisely observed, the numbers are only the beginning of the story. As you have no doubt have experimented, two different combinations resulting in the same res. freq. can result in one combination sounding at or near its best, with the other one sounding ... er ... suboptimal.
The Benzes seem to be one example of it being dangerous to go too low - below 8 or 9 Hz (as observed - not calculated). OTOH, Denons and Dynavectors for example are quite happy down in that range - at least on unsuspended decks.
Cheers,
Thom |
George,sorry,I don't want to come off as a snob.Your question was a compliment.For that,thanks.You may know some of my BKLYN pals,though.Do you know Sid Marks,or Dave Nemzer? |
Frank,
A friend with much experience with the Denon 103 family believes the 5cu spec is for vertical compliance only. His measurements indicate a lateral compliance of about 10cu, much closer to the mainstream of cartrdiges. Does that tally with your experiments?
On the whole I'm with Raul on this topic. Science has only gone so far, and it's not far enough to provide all the answers. While gross mismatches should probably be avoided - unless you own 15 arms, 30 cartridges and love to experiment! - it is a waste of time trying to predict musical performance from mass and compliance numbers. There are other factors, not published in anyone's specs, that effect how any arm/cartridge combo will sound. |
Is there a case for coming up with a TT's "compliance" figure and taking that into account? That would be acceptable for a suspended TT -- but rather nebulous in other cases I guess...:( OTOH, mass of the TT's moving parts probably play a role too, in the cartridge-tonearm combo's performance.
Is there a mechanical engineer out there who could consider the case? |
Dear friends: I already post in the past: I try to match cartridges/tonearms combinations with out take in count their resonance frecuency and till to now I 'm sucess about.
I'm not saying that the resonance frecuency is not important, it is but there are many issues others than the resonance frecuency that define the quality sound reproduction of " that " combination.
I can tell you many examples, one of them: the Ortofon MC 2000 is 11gr./20cu and I try with severals tonearms and with a very high mass SAEC tonearm was its best sound/match ( resonance frecuency: 4.5Hz ), right now I'm trying the MC 2000 with another high mass tonearm: Dynavector DV-505.
So, we have not to be " crazy " to meet exactly the resonance frecuency for an excellent performance.
When I ask to Jan Allaerts about the compliance of the MC2 Finish Gold for I can match with a tonearm, here is his answer:
+++++ " Hi Raul,,
The compliance from our cartridges is not relevant, if you have a good arm and turntable , you can track 300 µmm, with this cartridge so if you calculate and project this to compliance you get 70 but nobody believe that so, the important thing is the arm can work with cartridges from 10 Gr mass and more,
Second if you build in the cartridge set in full parallel to the record, first after ( with 180 our 200 Gr vinyl ) you listen to voice on a record and put the arm a little higher no lower settings and adjust you have the most air our room around the voice that play, that is the point you leave it normal is this 1 our 2 mm higher ( NO MORE )
Regards
Jan " +++++
I try my MC2 with seven tonearms and the best match is with the SME IV.
My experience tell me that there are some " things " that I can't explain in full scientific way or common sense about the " irrelevant " resonance frecuency issue: the MC 2000 example is not the only one: I test a cartridge/tonearm combination that its resonance frecuency is 10Hz and sounds only good and the same cartridge with other tonearm with 6Hz resonance frecuency sounds excellent. This can tell me that the resonance frecuency can be only that a: resonance frecuency value.
So, Sirspeedy/Flyingred: don't worry too much about. There are other issues that defines the sound reproduction quality: cartridge frecuency response, load impedance, tonearm energy dissipation, tonearm ringing, tonearm vibrational damping, tonearm wiring, tonearm bearing or not bearing, arm board, TT, phono preamp accuracy, etc, etc, ....
Btw, Thom my LP never sound better than with my MAX 282. We have differents experiences with the same cartridge and one of the reasons is that we have differents audio systems and maybe differents music/sound reproduction priorities.
The stereo home music/sound reproduction is a very complex process that have many " sides/faces ", that's is what do so interesting and always a challenge.
}
Regards and enjoy the music.
Raul.
Regards and enjoy the music.
Raul. |
Hi all,
The whole res. freq. thing is certainly intriguing. Keep in mind that you can go a bit lower than the 10hz number depending on the turntable you're running.
This 10-12Hz range was arrived at as a means of splitting the difference between 20 Hz and the res. freq. of a typical turntable's suspension (3-5 Hz). With an unsuspended 'table you can go a bit lower.
Having said that, a Benz LP is a poor match for both the MX-282 and an 18 gram Ebony arm wand Schroeder Reference. In both arms it is a bit sluggish sounding. OTOH, it sounds very nice in a Triplanar with its lower effective mass.
Cheers,
Thom |
Sirspeedy:
It was never my intent to obtain your home address. I was simply interested in finding out if there were any audiophile clubs/groups in my neck of the woods. By the way, I spent most of my formative years in Brooklyn
George |
Hi guys,
Recently I had the opportunity to measure f-res of a TemperV in a 14gr. Tigerwood armwand and it came out to be 10,5Hz. Just goes to show you that published specs don't always correlate with actual measurements, just as , for quite some time, most samples of the Denon DL103 seem to have a higher compliance than the published spec(5cu). In reality, the last three samples that went through my hands were closer to 8cu.
Cheerio,
Frank |
Sirspeedy I don't think I'm qualified to advise you. However I went back to the spreadsheet and that cartridge in tigerwood/jacaranda gives a resonant frequency of 8.66 Hz. The ideal range "green zone" is 9 to 11 Hz, however on AJ Van den Hul's site, the 'yellow zone' is 8 to 12 Hz.
On that basis, I reckon either of those are viable.
I was tempted by bocote for my Reference but checking out the pics on Thom's site, I don't like the look of the wood. I also looked at the cartridges that it would allow me to run and, in reality, everything I would want to play with (Koetsus, DL-103 and Dyna XX-2) work better in a 15g armwand. I like the look of jacaranda over tigerwood, so that's what I'm getting.
You have to remember that it's not just the cartridge mass, but also the compliance that counts. Low compliance favors higher mass tonearms.
If you're thinking of buying a Schroeder, if you order now you'll be lucky to take delivery this year. I reckon that's far enough away for you to enjoy a state of the art tennis racket this season and still be able to pay for your arm when it's ready in the new year!
Put your order down, you know it makes sense! :-)
(Disclaimer: No commercial relationship with any of the above - just an impressionable audiophile). |
Flyingred,do you feel then,that the Bacote tube best matches the Tranny?Also,how about the additional 3 gms offered up by the Jacaranda and Tiger Wood?Possibly ,still,a good match for the Tranny,with an eye/ear on the possibility of future,slightly heavier cartridges?What do you think?Thanks!! |
I have a new,latest for me,spin on our beloved little analog subject.I'm currently in wait,for a matched set(3 for my phono stage)of the LOWEST NOISE Siemens(grey getters)small signal tubes,that I have EVER seen.These appear to have been sourced from GOD's private stash.
I already have some "primo" phono tubes in circuit,however I am feeling pretty good about trying out these new babies.I've already tried 7 different types in my phono section,and will be ending my plight this weekend,hopefully.
PLEASE,don't anyone ask what I payed for these,I'm embarassed to say!! |
Dear Thom: I have severals headshells and many of them wuth the azimuth adjustement, but no: I don't have the Sumiko.
If I can, this weekend I would like to try the J Micro tonearm. I let you know about.
Regards and enjoy the music.
Raul. |
Hi Raul,
The "J" shaped 'Seikis have always intrigued me. I have an MA-505 Mk III (straight, removeable arm wand) which is on lone to a friend. Another friend has a MK I version of the arm which is indeed "J" shaped with removable headshell.
It's been on my mind to bring a Sumiko headshell I have lying around in my parts box to experiment with Azimuth adjustment for him.
The Sumiko headshell is quite nicely made - machined from a solid aluminum billet. It has a small hex screw which locks down a collet. When loosened, you can adjust the azimuth.
Considering its price of $40, I'd recommend that anyone with a universal headshell tonearm pick one of these up before Sumiko decides to stop making them (disclaimer - no affiliation or commercial interest ...). I've seen them for sale at the Needle Doctor.
Cheers,
Thom |
Sirspeedy, if you go to the "support" page on the Galibier site, half way down the page you will find a section headed "arm and cartridge set-up." There's an Excel spreadsheet you can download to calculate resonant frequencies.
With the Temper's mass of 7.5g and 15 cu compliance, the bocote arm gives a resonant frequency of 9.31 Hz.
Incidentally, I think the Galibier site is one of the best-organized analog resources available - certainly better than any other manufacturer's.
I agree with your comments about flexibility of set-up on the Schroeder and the ability to "voice." Having heard References in three different systems, I've found it interesting that each owner's preferred set-up reflects their taste in music and their "ideal" presentation. |
George,My business is in Middlesex county.Went to a Harry Partch concert at Montclair Univ,and it was a blast.
BTW,and do not take this personally,as you appear to be a good fellow.I'm a bit paranoid about revealing too much on the web.I know of some who have had their homes broken into.Pretty sad state,though my home is monitored by the police,and has a ton of various home security systems.Hey,I'm originally from New York,where almost everyone is paranoid. |
SirSpeedy:
I hail from Montclair in NJ, where in NJ are you located?
George |
George,trust me on this.The cap tightness"thing",on the Graham, is fantasy.The cap is,actually part of the bearing assembly,and must be tightly mounted.Why anyone would not want it that way would be a mystery,to me!!Thanks,and you have a good memory too. |
Dear George: +++++ " Micro Seiki does make a J shaped arm without headshell to which one could add an azimuth adjustable headshell. " +++++
Very good point. Till to today I never try my J shaped arm and I don't have nothing to say against the SC arms. I have to do it.
Regards and enjoy the music.
Raul. |
Sirspeedy,
Recalling that you have a Graham arm my friend mentioned that another tuning feature is how tight you make the cap over the fluid resevoir. I don't have a Graham so this is about all I know.
Good luck,
George |
Thom,the Galibier pages,especially regarding the seemingly fascinating Schroeder Ref. was a fabulous read,to me.I thought the points made about the, "not necessarily an advantage",12.5 vs 9 inch arm length was quite interesting to ponder.
Also,and to me,an arm like a Schroeder,which seems to be infinitely adjustable,is a HUGE advantage(like that Frank?).I really don't get the concern of some hobbyists about it being so adjustable.I,myself,see that as allowing it to be fine tuned to my specific voicing tastes.
I guess there are some people who don't really get the most out of their stuff because they are afraid to familiarize themselves with it,and rely exclusively on the dealer to voice a system.However as time goes on,and we become more experienced it is a GOOD thing to go "Hands On" and learn to extract as much from our stuff as we can.It has helped me to get MUCH more from my own set-up!!I would have a field day with an arm like the Schroeder REF!!One question,there is mention of the variety of cartridges that would mate to a specific wood's mass, in the arm tube.I did not see what mass tube(12 gm Bacote vs 15 gm Jacaranda)would best mate with my 7.5 gm Transfiguration Temper-V.
My only criticism,of the comments,on the Galibier site are of the early review of the Schroeder Ref,where it is stated that this is NOT the reviewer's set-up,and then the reviewer goes on to comment on the "ARM'S" characteristics.The reviewer does mention the comments are in "broad strokes",but how does one really tell the personality of the arm,when it is someone else's set-up.Here,in this particular review,we are told that there had been an arm and cartridge change,recently.Maybe climate conditions changed,or vta,or sra,or almost anything which could have slightly re-voiced the sound,so these comments,although fascinating,are to be taken with a grain of salt.Heck a cable cleaning,alone, could have contributed to a better perception of "Dimensionality".
That being said,I DO DEFINITELY feel this arm MUST be really special!I'm not,in any way,trying to be antagonistic,and loved my 2 hour lunch break,while absorbing all this juicy stuff.It's good to be the boss!!
PS--I DID play tennis,later that day.Got my ass kicked too.TRUTH IS,I DIDN'T EVEN CARE!!! |
Hello Thom,
Thanks for all the information imparted in your post. You make an excellent point about the lack of azimuth adjustment.
Micro Seiki does make a J shaped arm without headshell to which one could add an azimuth adjustable headshell. Of course you now no longer have the rigidity of an integrated non-adjustable arm but it always seems to be about trade-offs. It might be an interesting experiment to do at some point.
Raul, any opinions on the sonic differences between the J and SC arms?
Thanks,
George |
Hi Speedy, Raul ...
I know what you mean about off-topic. OTOH, I've come to the opinion that these sorts of things help all of us get to know each other better.
One of the problems we face behind a keyboard is that we sometimes gain too much "courage" and hurt feelings ensue. Some of these off-topic bonding sessions can make the on-topic conversations more meaningful. It can help us triangulate on who the poster is and how to interpret their comments more meaningfully.
To Raul ... I may have come on too strongly, and for this I apologize. I absolutely consider the MX-282 to be one of the great tonearms. Ah ... if I could only make it jump through the azimuth hoop, but that's a whole other story.
People who have met me are shocked that I'm the same guy they see on their computer screen. The frequent comment is that this (sometimes) obnoxious, (mostly) nerdy, New Yorker type is such a Mister Mellow Dude in person. This was one reason I put up the blog page on the website. For better or worse, I figure people knowing more about me can't hurt.
This e-mail and forum stuff can get a bit impersonal at times, and any way we can bridge past this is a good thing.
Back to our regularly scheduled programming ...
Cheers,
Thom |
Thom,I'm kind of sorry for my generic tennis/bass rant.It was nice of you to reply,though not necessary.I do realize that this thread/forum really should be about more specific topics,RE: your product line,as well as the Shroder(which I'm fascinated with).
Best of luck to all involved!! |
Dear Thom: I never heard about Micro Seiki/PIlot pen.
Btw, I really like the LP on the MAX 282 and I agree with you about: " no perfect/build cartridge ".
I don't want to do a " controversial subject " about the " mechanical " sound of the MAX 282 against the Schroeder tonearm. My opinion is that under " some circunstances " that can be true ( I believe you ) but I think too that in different circunstances the " mechanical " sound can will comes from the Schroeder: nothing is absolute, all is relative.
Dmailer, I apologize for intrude on your thread. Sorry for that.
Regards and enjoy the music.
Raul. |
Hi Speedy,
Off topic .. I understand your competitive urge at the tennis club. Since I was never that good, competition was all about measuring personal improvement rather than climbing to the top of the ladder.
I was (and am) terribly hard on myself however ... at least this is what I'm told. These days, it's more about maintaining rather than getting better, and the focus is more on bicycle riding, rock climbing, and back country skiing (picture of me bouldering on Flagstaff Mountain in Boulder on my blog page if you're interested).
Yes, you're preaching to the choir as far as bass is concerned. A culture of MP-3's, THX home theater and boombox audio ... very sad, IMHO.
Cheers,
Thom @ Galibier |
Hi Raul,
Yes, the folks at Micro Seiki were real maniacs.
Did you know that the last year (or two?) of their operation they were owned by the Pilot Pen company?
I don't know more about this story, but can well imagine it involves an audiomaniac member of the board who pushed this purchase, with the Board finally "wising up" to this acquisition ... driving a stake into its heart and killing Micro once and for all
Cheers,
Thom @ Galibier |
Hi George,
Because my armboards allow for adjusting the p-s distance, the choice of protractor (and alignment) determines everything in a straightforward and simple manner.
The short answer is that I used a Baerwaald alignment.
Think of an SME tonearm where the offset angle is frozen because the headshell has mounting holes instead of slots. The SME adjusts p-s distance by moving the arm on a rail to achieve the correct alignment. By moving the arm on its rail, you change the pivot to spindle distance and therefore the overhang (overhang = effective length minus pivot-spindle distance)
Since for a given alignment there is only one combination of offset angle for any one effective length/pivot to spindle distance, the problem is reduced to one adjusting the p-s distance (overhang) to "null out" at the two Baerwaald (or alignment of your choosing) points - dialing in the correct overhang in the process.
People are reading too much into my mechanical sound comment. This is was only an attempt to describe the arm and is relevant *only* in comparison to the Schroeder Reference which is to my experience in a class by itself. The MX-282 is a very fine arm and as a whole, it is not mechanical sounding ... unless you hold it up against a Schroeder.
------
I did some more playing over the weekend, both with the MX-282 as well as a Triplanar. The cartridges in question were a Benz LP and a Denon DL103R. These two arms are far more alike than they are different. If I had a perfect cartridge (which was a compliance match to the MX-282 arm, of course), I'd likely opt for the MX-282 over the Triplanar.
There is an important real world caveat however. A cartridge is only perfect by sheer luck. In this day and age, it's difficult to count on them being so. Jonathan Carr (Lyra) recently posted on Audio Asylum that he goes through all sorts of grief with his supplier of cantilevers/tips and can only get them to agree to +/- one degree alignment.
Jonathan would specify half that if he could. This comment alone should emphasize the importance of being able to compensate for the real-world manufacturing difficulties of hand made items like high performance cartridges.
In this very important practical respect, I have to give the nod to the Triplanar over the MX-282. I have growing intolerance for any arm of world-class pretenses that does not permit azimuth adjustment.
Even with the "lowly" Denon DL 103R cartridge, you can hear the effect of "spot on" azimuth.
Now, the DL 103R and its conically tipped brethren are fairly benign when the azimuth is not quite right. You won't hear any real nasties, and will never know that it is out of adjustment. If you have an arm capable of adjusting the azimuth however, only then will you get the magic it is capable of however.
Sorry to get on a rant about this. I'm dreadfully behind in replying on this thread and these above comments had some relevance to earlier posts ... even though their questions you didn't ask.
Cheers,
Thom @ Galibier |
Thom, I would be curious if you used the correct 15mm overhang or the erroneous 12mm one given in the manual for the MAX 282. Might be the reason for the mechanical sound.
Thanks,
George |
Dear George: A big mistake for my part. Mi manual it's the same like yours: 12mm for the 282 and 15mm for the 237, sorry.
+++++ " A truly wonderful arm. " +++++
Yes, it is.
Regards and enjoy the music.
Raul. |
Hello Raul,
My Max 282 manual actually has things backwards: 12mm for the 282 and 15mm for the 237. This I believe has caused some confusion in the past and reason for my post.
Does your manual actually have overhang for the two arms printed correctly?
A truly wonderful arm.
All the best,
George |
Dear George: The Baerwald formula is totally right, overhang= 14.5.
The Micro Seiki manual operation specifications gives: 15 mm ( overhang ) for the 282 and 12mm for the 237 models respective.
Tks George.
Regards and enjoy the music.
Raul. |
From an email sent to me from a leading setup authority:
"According to my Japanese books from 80s the Effective Length of your Excellent Arm is 282 mm (pivot to stylus). The manufacturer's Overhang is specified for 12 mm.
This is not correct. The calculations based on Prof. Baerwald formula give Ovhg = 14.5 mm. So the distance from arm pivot to platter spindle should be 282 - 14.5 = 267.5 mm."
One of the overlooked tuning features of this arm is the tightness of the dial used to hold down the arm. |
Thom,you are absolutely right about getting to the ball quicker,and the shoulder turn,for a hard topspin shot.Watch Federer for the textbook look.As for me,I always considered myself an "A" player(40 yrs of hard competition),but my rackets are 12 years old.There was a time when tennis dollars came first,now it's audio,in the driver's seat.Though I am hitting a damn good ball.Just that there are 2 "biggies"at my local courts(a couple of yrs older than me,too)who can hit the crap out of the ball.On the dead run,no less.I'm close to these guys,but no cigar,and I'd love to wipe the smile off their faces,and will,in time.Just have to follow the methodological approach,that I did with my system,over the years.Take one weakness at a time.It's not as crazy as it may sound.That was my summer goal,until this thread.Now I'm thinking audio,in June.Hmm,I guess I'm going to hear that familiar "Dzzzzt,Dzzzzt"sound passing my head(what transients do you think they might be?)when I hit a crappy approach!!
Enough kidding about tennis.Frank,you have a very valid point about bass,as you clearly know.I see a trend in this hobby(look at the amount of ported speakers,and very few sealed enclosures)towards lots,and lots of really crappy(too strong a word)bass.Let's just say that many designers are happy to give the public what most people like.Lots,and lots of bass.Not accurate bass,mind you,but no true pitch definition,in the lower,or even mid frequencies.This blows my mind!!
I have heard SO MANY pricey set-ups where the average person thinks the bass is great,only to look at the expression on my audio friends's faces(very experienced hobbyists,who preach bass accuracy over quantity),to realize these people would not know a tympany drum from an amplified drumbeat,on a synthesizer.
When we are stopped at a red light,and the car next to us has his boom box turned up,do you think that guy is concerned with accuracy in bass,or overblown dreck?We all know the answer to that one.It's sad,but a fact,and many mfgrs are all to happy to design products,while maybe not as exagerated as my example,but not accurate either.
Myself,I need accuracy,as Frank describes.Makes more sense to me,and sounds better too.To the average dude,who knows what they like.I like my tympanies to "sound" no larger than a 38 inch skin,and I could care less about anything under 35 hz,although it's nice to have it,but most LP's don't have alot below that.Oh yeah,I happen to have a good sub,and would bet a Shroder Ref could do the low thing,just to my liking,wood or whatever!! |
Dear Thom: It is sad that Micro Seiki is out of business. The MAX 282 is only a product that speaks about this quality oriented company.
Btw, the MAX 282 use torsion bars instead the common spring for the VTF.
Tks for your answers. Always is pleasing that people like you really are on " target ", with audio items like the Micro tonearm.
Regards and enjoy the music.
Raul. |
Dear Frank: +++++ " Low frequency reproduction is quite strongly linked to the quality of the rendition of upper harmonics. This is why adding a "supertweeter" often improves the perceived bass quality of a speaker. " +++++
You are absolutely right: this happen when I add my Tannoy ST.
+++++ " Over the years many audiophiles have gotten used to an exaggeration of upper harmonics, resonant arms(platters, too), bad amplifiers(often solid state, sorry) and cartridges with high frequency resonance peaks as low as 12kHz(!) being some of the contributors. " +++++
THis is one of the " audio cancer " type.
+++++ " So, should I design my arms to match well with severly flawed components? Certainly not.
It is not this "HiFi sound" I'm trying to adhere to, but rather produce a component with as little a sonic fingerprint as possible. " +++++
I applaud you for this.
+++++ " But I do saturate the armwands with a variety of oils, some remaining liquid, others solidifying over a period of three to six weeks, until they all exhibit the same internal damping properties. " +++++
THis kind of care about speaks for your dedication on the research/design/build/test process: great!!!!!
I will have to look the opportunity to try your tonearm on my audio system: I deserve that!!!!!
Tks for your time and delightful explanation about. I think that all of us really appreciate that.
Regards and enjoy the music.
Raul. |
Hi Speedy,
I'll absolutely have to get together with you and Doug when I make my way back East (this Summer?). I'm a native New Yorker. Some say I wear it all to obviously - others are surprised to hear it ... whatever.
I'm just drooling to show Doug how a Galibier sounds against his Teres (Doug ... no doubt you can teach me a thing or two about Triplanar setups - I've not lived with any for long enough to really get to know them).
Speaking of Doug and ZYX cartridges, you all may not be aware that Audio-Note UK is blasting out the Trans-476 MC step-ups at 170 GBP each.
These are a much nicer match for the lower DCR's Lyras, ZYXs, etc. than the very nice S&B's which I also own.
Peter Qvortrup tells me that the 476's will be around for a while. He has miles of silver wire, and apparently enough core material. Of course, he'd love to sell you his new generation trannies at $2K (USD) for the pair.
I should be receiving my 476's within the next couple of weeks, and will report back.
-----
Ah yes, the days of Borg, Connors, McEnroe (I still can't find myself liking that incredibly talented brat), Nastase (another maniac), Villas. I can only now bring myself to watching tennis when Federer is playing - the first fellow since Stephan Edberg (and maybe Geruliits) whom I can bear to watch.
I understand the need for more gear - trust me ... I'm an incurable gear head. With a handle like Sirspeedy however, get to the ball a bit sooner, turn your shoulder, and let that topspin rip down the line. A new racket can't replace technique. I know ... given equal technique, superior gear wins out. It's one of the problems I have with watching professional cycling. I think they should raise the weight minimum on the bikes to say, 19 Lbs (about 8.6 Kilos).
I haven't played tennis for quite some time, but it's one of the few games I've ever been passionate about - along with fly-fishing, climbing, skiing and riding.
Cheers,
Thom |
Dear Raul,
Your question regarding the choice of arm(wand) material is valid and I'll see if I can address the issue to your satisfaction.
Low frequency reproduction is quite strongly linked to the quality of the rendition of upper harmonics. This is why adding a "supertweeter" often improves the perceived bass quality of a speaker. A tonearm(wand) that exhibits pronounced high frequency resonances(a "metallic" sound when tapped) will emphasize(read: exaggerate) the leading egde of the note, followed by some, more or less well damped, ringing. The ringing obscures fine detail and decay and corrupts the harmonic envelope of a sound(of an instrument), the exaggerated upper harmonics content of the low note might be perceived as "better attack". But, when a double bass player lets go of(fingertip releasing) the string instead of plucking it, the resulting sound is quite soft, dominated by the resonating body of the instrument(sometimes difficult to locate in space). Most arms can't capture that bloom realistically. Much more in demand seems to be the kind of "funky" bass that I hear at show demos left and right..
Over the years many audiophiles have gotten used to an exaggeration of upper harmonics, resonant arms(platters, too), bad amplifiers(often solid state, sorry) and cartridges with high frequency resonance peaks as low as 12kHz(!) being some of the contributors.
And sometimes this little added "spark" might just be what is needed to compensate for a poorly designed(weak) turntable drive system or the WRONG step up transformer(veiling the original signal), creating an overall quite pleasant, nevertheless inaccurate, and ultimately dissatisfying facsimile of real music played by real people(or the event as recorded by the engineer). We have all witnessed others mistaking MORE highs for MORE detail.
So, should I design my arms to match well with severly flawed components? Certainly not.
It is not this "HiFi sound" I'm trying to adhere to, but rather produce a component with as little a sonic fingerprint as possible(there'll always be SOME signature, if only because no perfectly neutral wiring exists), one that allows the listener to differentiate between "soft" and "tight" bass, one that keeps not just the sound of A violin, but the sound of any violin reproduced as distinct and recognisable as that recording engineer managed to capture it.
I have built tonearms for more than 25years and tried ANYTHING that you could possibly(lets say reasonably) use as a material for the various elements of a tonearm. Initially I did use metal(sandwiches) and carbon fiber as armwand materials(and, upon request, still do!), but when comparing the properties of some woods to the more "traditional" materials like aluminum, steel, ceramic tubing or carbon fiber, I found those woods to be superior in many respects. For a mass produceable arm wood is a poor choice. Too many variables to compensate for, possibly inconsistent supplies, etc... But you can use the differences between various woods to your advantage, see my comments on maintaining outer dimensions while having a wide choice of eff. masses on this forum and elsewhere.
You mentioned the wooden Grace arm. Let's just say you'll never see one of my arms with a Teak armwand(but Teak was and is easy to come by in decent quantity and quality).
BTW, Ebony is not a particularly hard wood. Snakewood, Grenadill, Acacia, Horizontalwood are much harder(to name but a few). If I were to use the different woods without any treatment(this doesn't refer to a coat of wax...), each would indeed have an identifiable sonic character. But I do saturate the armwands with a variety of oils, some remaining liquid, others solidifying over a period of three to six weeks, until they all exhibit the same internal damping properties. This is rather important as the cartridge tracking a signal will "send" spurious energy down the armwand, which in this design needs to be dealt with(damped) in the arm(wand) and bearing as there is practically no energy transmitted via the bearing to the armboard to be dissipated there(the conventional way of doing it).
Reducing the internal damping or using, say carbon fiber for an armwand, will yield a sound closer to "conventional"(no disrespect intended) arms, with the benefit of near zero bearing friction(more importantly, zero "stiction"). The added sense of "zing" at the cost of a natural, non-mechanical character might be prefered by some people, all reasonable inquiries will be executed...(and so will be all unreasonable inquirers, - just kidding ;-)
Now, lastly the issue of bass "authority" or power. An example: At the last thorough comparison with a Triplanar arm, the consensus was, among other things, that the Reference arm had more authority below 80Hz and lower bass extension too(not that the Triplanar was flabby sounding, on the contrary!). Now put the Triplanar onto a different deck and the situation might be different. That's because most other arms do not only depend upon the mounting board for dissipation of energy, they also pick up energy and relay it to the cartridge. Put your turntable in the adjacent room(I know it is impractical...) and you'll see(äh, hear) what a fabulous microphone it was, sitting so close to your speakers(or in their soundfield). A SME V on a Linn LP12 has terribly illdefined and bloated bass, the same arm on an SME 20 or a Sota Millenium is capable of excellent bass performance.
My arms are far less dependent upon the mounting surface, which was one of the design goals from the start. But, as there is no possible mechanical incompability, there is also no chance for that lucky case of perfect synergy....:-).
It's late over here and I'd better hit the sack. Feel free to comment or dig deeper.
Cheerio,
Frank |
