there are a few classic 9" tone arm verses 12" tone arm points to consider. this is assuming all other things are equal between the 2 arms.
1--a 9" arm will have less mechanical resonance. just by being shorter.
2--a 9" arm will be less set-up critical. if you make the same degree of error in geometry with a 9" arm it will have less audible consequence. put another way, more care is needed setting up a 12" arm, more precision.
3--if you do nail the 12" arm set-up then you do get better performance overall, simply because the wider arc has less overall distortion than the shorter arm. less the issue of lower mechanical solidity. the 12" arm likely has more soundstage size and scale.
so there are trade-offs. if you are a beginner learning set-up i would tend to recommend the shorter arm to begin with. but if you are the type to work at it, after a few go arounds of set-up the 12" will have a higher ceiling to reach.
i’m not commenting specifically about these particular arms, just the advantages of each length generally.
as you move up the ladder of tone arm quality, the length is down the list of factors in terms of performance significance. but at the modest end it matters more where there are compromises in the build. you look for advantages where you can find them to compliment your needs.
|
@mikelavigne Thank you for the thoughtful insight. That makes a lot of sense.
What little I know about this, the benefits of the longer arm (#3) apply mostly to the inner grooves.
|
Another factor to consider is the effective moving mass of each length. I don't know how much emm the 3" adds, but the lower a cartridge's compliance is, the more it "likes" a higher emm arm. And of course the inverse is also true.
|
@OP. One logistical issue to consider is that the 12inch arm has a bigger footprint due to the longer cantilever mounting plate
As regards sound quality, be sure to consider the Professional PSU. Versus the standard wall wart PSU, this will make a much bigger difference than any differences between the two arm lengths.
The Universal is a superb arm and you won't feel short changed in sound quality which ever length you specify.
|
Go Big or Go Home.....12 in. .all the way. But have a professional set it up.
|
@yoyoyaya thanks for the feedback. The professional power supply is only compatible with concept and performance TT according to their website.
im curious how the PS improves sound if TT speed is optically controlled and the motor is decoupled from the platter?
|
I have heard, and liked that table/arm combination. This is a well behaved combination that does a good job of damping resonant energy from the cartridge tracking the groove (as evidenced by how well it damps large, sharp impulses such as ticks and pops; they are less obvious than is the case with many other table/arm combinations). For some listeners, that kind of behavior is considered "dead" sounding, so taste and system synergy issues matter when it comes to whether this is a very good combination. A local dealer who usually hates well damped table/arm combinations likes this combination, so it is not extreme in this respect.
Others have discussed the various tradeoffs of longer and shorter arms so I will only add two more points--the longer arm will mean less variation in vertical tracking angle/stylus rake angle when changing records of different thickness. I don't fiddle with VTA/SRA when changing records, but, I do know from experience that even small changes do affect the sound, so in this respect the longer arm is better. The longer arm also means a smaller offset angle of the headshell and correspondingly less skating force. Because the skating force is not zero, antiskating is still required, but, less anti-skating is required and so issues with skating/antiskating is reduced a little. With newer materials and technology, the rigidity/damping behavior of longer arms has become less of an issue than in the past. Still, there are many designers who think it is such a high priority that they favor the shorter arm lengths. I've heard enough good examples of both lengths used in arms from the same manufacturer and I don't think it makes that much difference.
|
@OP There is a 24 volt version of the Professional PSU for use with the Innovation series of turntables. Hi Fi news found that the Professional PSU significantly (measurably) reduced rumble - so it's not just about speed stability. However, the motor itself and the optical control circuit will benefit from a more stable, lower noise supply. The deck used with the professional PSU has blacker backgrounds, better low level linearity and more articulate bass.
|
|
@mbi
Go Big or Go Home
Ha! The price difference is less than $500 so why not.
The only negative the dealer pointed out was the additional over hang when not in use. He said most leave with the 12".
The Smart Power 24v will have to wait though.
|
Wanting; Knowing; Hearing: ’different’, ’better’, ’preferred’.
Long Arm was why I joined Audiogon in 2019. I found the longest that I could fit under the dust cover when on.
TT, 12" Tonearm. Who tried and ended up preferring 12" arm?
Asked about, ended up choosing Blackbird 12.5" arm from Russia
Revised 5 Pin Din Version
We usually change more than 1 thing at a time, in my case I changed Plinth/ Spinner/Arms(3)/Cartridge Types/SUT/Alignment Tools/Methods so what can I say except I love the choices/changes I made that wanting a long arm set in motion.
The best thing is the long arm led to a large plinth which led to 2 arms (far more important IMO) (stereo and mono ready to play instantly). In my case I squeezed a 3rd arm on for MC Stereo/MM Stereo/Mono.
After a few years, I realized I am benefitting from more accurately maintained anti-skate outer to inner tracks as well as the benefits of the stylus tip’s position in the grooves due to a longer arc’s geometry.
Imaging absolutely requires proper anti-skate. it’s also the major factor in avoiding uneven wear to your expensive stylus and lp’s grooves. Tracking force wants proper anti-skate, freedom to react to the groove wall info.
I would prefer a removable headshell, as I never hear the long arm benefits thru my alternate cartridges. I compare/enjoy them on my 9" arm. And I don’t hear my ’best’ cartridge on the 9" arm, so comparisons always involve the benefit or lack of extra length.
..............................
12" is not always 12", check the specs, i.e. many are less, i.e. the JVC long arm 7082 is only 11-1/8" effective, whereas their short arm 7045 is 9-5/8" effective. I went for the longest I could find with a design (price of course) I wanted, that was compact enough to ’just fit’ on the arm-board of my large 2 arm plinth.
........................................................
2 arms, one long, both removable headshells is the most flexible setup, that’s what I helped a friend put together, a 2 arm Luxman PD-444 with long and short Micro-Seiki 505 Arms.
Luxman is ’normal’ depth, wider, my JVC PL-2 Plinth is both deeper and wider, I had to have a ’deeper’ glass shelf made, the Luxman would have fit the existing glass top.
my 3 arm TT seen here
|
@elliottbnewcombjr Thanks for the extra info - I’ve checked out your 3 arm TT before - very cool.
I'm going with the 12" and the dealer will set it up for me.
|
A 12" arm will not resonate more simply because it's longer, it certainly will resonate at a lower frequency. The amount of resonance is far more a function of materials and design. Also a longer arm is easier to set up because it has lower tracing error, and thus minor misalignments are less noticeable, the same way that minor VTA changes are less noticeable. Typically a long arm will have higher mass and so favor lower compliance e.g. moving coil cartridges. And all of those things together enable high performance stylus designs like Shibata, Fineline, Microline, MicroRidge, et al to perform optimally.
Personally, I find that the 10-11" length to be the best compromise. Like the VPI JMW Memorial 10.5. With its 3D printed epoxy arm it is well damped, long enough to enjoy lower tracing and VTA errors, and I don't ind it being a unipivot - they do not bind or have bearing chatter, maintenance is easy, and swapping arms takes about 30 seconds. OK, the second arm tube isn't cheap. But it sounds great, and puts the fear of God into people who shouldn't be using it anyway, e.g. party guests.
|
From 1970 to almost 1980 including all of my college years, I worked in hifi retail stores first in Seattle and after graduation in San Diego. The stores I worked at were primarily McIntosh dealers and at that time a great deal of emphasis was placed on clinics including turntable and cartridge setup. Every dealer was required to have a very expensive bifocal microscope (Wild-HerrBrugg) specified by McIntosh that was actually capable of seeing if the stylus was mounted squarely on the cantilever; seeing if the stylus was wearing evenly over time and so forth. Customers were encouraged to bring their TTs in for periodic inspection. Some of us who took an interest were trained and became proficient at TT setup and evaluation. I still own two of those microscopes. Over time I became convinced that all things considered the 9" tonearm was the better option. This is not always true, but it is so more often than not.
|
@billstevenson
Interesting and thank you for sharing the insight. By any chance did you ever hop on the ferry over to Victoria and if so, did you visit Sound Hounds?
Interested in selling one of those scopes???
btw I've bought the TT with the 12" so that's that.
|
My wife and I enjoy Victoria very much and try to visit there every chance we can. Perhaps our favorite city. I will try to visit Sound Hounds next trip. I am quite sure you will enjoy your new set up.
|
I almost forgot about the microscope. We are summering at our home in New Hampshire. The microscopes are both at our winter home in Florida. If you are really interested send me a private note and when we get back in late September or thereabouts I'll send you photos and we'll take it from there.
|
@billstevenson
Nice! Thanks Bill, will do.
I lived on the island from 1971 to 1992. My first visit to sound hounds was around 1980 .It was a bit dingy - geeky back then but super cool. Had all the MAC stuff including their first CD player. Looks like it's had a refresh but still in business AND in the same location which is amazing.
|
Hi Mac,
The shorter arm is ALWAYS going to be better for several reasons which always are going to be more significant than any benefit from marginal improvement in tracking error. The shorter arm is stiffer. It takes more energy to get it to resonate or looking at it from the other direction it is better at holding the cartridge still. The shorter arm has a lower moment of inertia. It follows the record more effortlessly interfering less with the cartridge. The shorter arm has a lower effective mass allowing it to work perfectly with more cartridges. You can always add more mass if you need it, but it can be very difficult to remove mass.
Some very respected turntable manufacturers like Basis and Sota do not even give you a choice. Many very smart engineers look at 12 inch arms as being foolish. If they make them at all it is only to satisfy customer demand so as not to lose business.
|
Some very respected turntable manufacturers like Basis and Sota do not even give you a choice. Many very smart engineers look at 12 inch arms as being foolish.
Although Basis does offer its TOL SuperArm as 12.5" and 16". And Origin Live, while acknowledging the downsides of longer arms, still says it prefers the 12-in sound of its arms. So sonic preferences, the final arbiter, do play a part.
OTOH, Bob Graham famously said the 9-in arm was his best sounding, and many people say the 9-in is the best sounding 4Point.
I’m about the install a 12-in Phantom on the same turntable as a 9-in for the first time, which should make for an interesting comparison.
|
I’ve spoken at length about this topic with two audio pioneers who are some of the most knowledgable people on the planet when it comes to vinyl reproduction.
George Merrill (whom I assume needs no introduction here) strongly prefers 12-inch arms for the most obvious reason: geometry. If you focus on optimizing cartridge alignment, a longer arm is clearly superior when it comes to things like optimizing the placement of null points.
But JR Boisclair of WAM Engineering (that’s "Wallytools") disagrees that this benefit outweighs the real-world performance benefits of a shorter arm. For those not familiar with WAM, JR is known for his years of extensive testing and analysis of arm & cartridge characteristics. Sure, resonances & whatnot are factors to consider, but qualitative factors don’t automatically translate into quantitative differences in performance. If a cartridge is properly aligned -- something that JR insists must be done by means of microscopic analysis -- arm bearings become a crucial factor. JR has found that too-loose or too-tight bearings may be the most important cause when an otherwise good arm exhibits a lot of mistracking. (He even sells a WallyTool that checks bearing play.) And he’s found empirically that a 9-inch arm, all things equal, will almost always be more stable than an equivalent 12-inch model.
Me, I've always been in awe of George's expertise and still love the bespoke table he built for me many years ago. But I gotta say that JR is a brilliant engineer, is not given to hyperbole, and has a fanatical commitment to basing his conclusions on high-precision empirical measurements. So when I upgrade to a Hana Umami next month (after my unit has been analyzed by WAM, of course), I’ll probably be picking up one of George’s 9-inch arms to go with it.
|
After reading the descriptions of JR Boisclair's thoughts shared on TA Bearing accuracy, it seems the Designer / Producer of the TA I use are sharing similar thoughts.
The TA has beatings produced using interface materials that are extremely stable, machined to low microns as a tolerance and are with the lowest coefficient of friction. Other parts used are also capable of less than a micron adjustment.
Reports like your own help to underpin my own thoughts behind the reasons why such a positive impression is made when experiencing this TA in use.
|
Interesting that JR’s preferred arm seems to be a 4Point-14, or so I’ve gathered from conversations with him. Maybe it’s just a convenient tool for analyzing cartridges.
|
Dear @macg19 : I’m in agreement with what wereposted by @mikelavigne and @mijostyn.
This link confirm it and came from the SAT tonearm designer ( the tonearm has a tag price of over 60K. ) :
https://swedishat.com/SAT%209%22%20vs%2012%22%20paper.pdf
The main subject of your thread as any thing in the analog audio world has many trade-off.
If you have only the 9"/12" alternatives then go for the 9".
In my case my " best " compromise ( trade-off. ) is the tonearm 10" length where I can have the 9" advantages and some of the 12" one with out any of the 12" disadvantages. As I said:a compromise that for me means the " best " equilibrium to reach my targets.
Regards and enjoy the MUSIC NOT DISTORTIONS,
R.
|
There's much wisdom (and a bit of controversy) in this thread.
Suffice to say that I fall in the camp that there are many reasons to advocate long arms, but significantly improved tracing distortion is not one of them.
I recently fired up John Ellison's seminal work - his Baerwaald / Löfgren spreadsheet to model various geometries, setups, the relative significance of getting zenith right vs. overhang, and several other scenarios.
If anyone is interested, here's the link: Modeling Various Setup Parameters
Thom @ Galibier
|
Dear @thom_at_galibier_design : Nice to see you in Agon again.
I only want to make some comments about the information in that link:
first is that J.Ellison made his spreadsheet geometries named/labeled it in the rigth way ( because he knows very well the Löfgren w.papers. ): Löfgren A and B.
Baerwald has no merit on those alignments other that his solution 4 years latter to Löfgren was exactly the same/similar to Löfgren A. I’m not saying it’s a copy but certainly nothing new or better than Löfgren or a modification.
second is that Stevenson made as Löfgren 2 solutions: Stevenson A and B where the latter is similar to Löfgren A alignment. Not only you but even the tractors manufacturers never specify the correct way: Stevenson A. Are important this issues? well I think it’s. Other issue about is that you named uni-din where this is not a universal alignment an even is not a new equations solution but only a manipulation parameters using Löfgren solution and it’s too what SAT tonearm designer did it ( to set up the cartridge to his tonearm. ) with that kind of manipulations to the original input parameters : innermost groove and outermost groove radius values. These kind of manipulations means that you, me or any one else can have our personal alignment if we want it. You can do it through the Ellison spreadsheet or through the VE alignment calculator. Not big deal as the Löfgren solutions. Btw, VE calculator has the advantage that at the same time gives you both Löfgreen ste up parameters and Stevenson A too and diagrams/charts with the 3 alignments curves to compare visually between them.
in the link I pasted :
" In contrast, the math developed by Löfgren (and subsequently used by Baerwaald), derives a unique set of 3 parameters (effective length, mounting distance and offset angle). "
Not exactly as you specified it and please let me explain about because I think is way important to any audiophile:
what are the input parameters used in the Löfgren equations that used he?
only 3: effective length, innermost groove radius and outermost groove radius and from those 3 input parameters the Löfgren equations solutions gives/output parameters: both null points ( inner/outer ), off-set angle, overhang and linear offset. The pivot to spindle distance then comes from an atritmetic subtraction: EL - overhang.
Been mathematics we can do whatever we want as could be to have a TT convenience P2S distance and use this parameter in those equations making the changes necessaries but is only a manipulation of the original equations/parameters and not a new alignment. As I said It’s only mathematics.
In reality the Stevenson A is an extreme input parameter change/manipulation ( innermost groove radius. ) but this gentleman made something truly different to what existed and some tonearm designers choosed Stevenson A alignment.
Again good to know from you.
R.
|
Btw, those ( inner/outer most ) parameters ( radius distances ) are different depending of which Standard values we choose and the alignment cartridge/tonearm is different on each one,
Exist 3 Standards in audio industry for this specific subject: IEC, DIN and JIS where: IEC is the International Electrotechnical Commission ( and it’s the one that comes by default in the Ellison calculator. ), DIN is Deutsches Institute für Normung and JIS is Japanese Industrial Standards. Using either we reach different tracking distortion levels.
Now if we want the whole lower tracking alignment distortions the way to go is with the SAT tonearm choosed parameters that comes in the link I posted in this thread.
I forgot that that " extreme " change that Stevenson made it in his A solution is that he decided that instead to have an innermost groove distance he choiced that there be the inner null point and this " move " is full of compromises ( I think negative trade-offs ) but many Japanese tonearm manufacturers took Stevenson A as their prefered alignment.
R.
|
I use Stevenson A as my method for Alignment.
I have not been needing to consider any other Alignment Geometry, I am more than content with Stevenson A.
I have not suspected anything negative is present in relation to the effect of the Geometry used for the Cartridge Alignment.
|
Hi @rauliruegas,
Long time ;-)
This exercise got me started as I’ve been handling quite a few vintage Japanese tonearms recently, and I’ve been wondering why they specify the same overhang for various effective lengths (15mm for both the 245mm FR 64, and 229mm Jelco for example).
Well, I still don’t know why they fixed the overhang, but when I modeled the FR64 and 9" Jelco, I realized that if you play with the offset angle, you can get reasonably good distortion characteristics with these specifications.
Of course, the problem is that you’ll have difficulty finding a protractor for their geometry (unless you have a factory protractor), which is why I tend to recommend mounting them for Baerwaald or Löfgren when possible ;-)
So down the rabbit hole I went, thinking of various scenarios to model.
After viewing the subtle differences, I don’t want to get into heated discussions about Baerwaald vs. Löfgren vs. Stevenson vs. (dare I say it?) Uni-DIN. Life is too short 
Be well!
Thom
|
Probably many of us have experimented with Baerwald vs. Lofgren vs. Stevenson until we were so frustrated we wanted to take up a less challenging hobby...like chess. :-) I suspect most of us concluded eventually that the difference between Baerwald and Lofgren was so difficult to detect that it becomes a coin toss for most practical purposes as to which to choose. For new comers, unless you are very certain that you will only be listening to certain types of classical music (i.e. loud passages occurring near the inner grooves) , Stevenson is not as versatile and will result in greater tracking distortion over a broader arc of play for every record every day. FWIW, I find Stevenson can be annoying particularly on piano, classical or otherwise. As to the many excellent points made in this quite erudite discussion I find merit in the majority. Yes it is true that a 12" arm that is properly set up will have less tracking error and distortion than a 9" arm. Yes a 10" offers a useful compromise between the two. My best current VPI HW-40 has a 10" arm. Yes a 9" arm has lower mass all else equal and offers many advantages due to lower inertia. What needs to be said is that all of these differences are subtle and any of these sizes works splendidly if set up correctly and if the user cares for the equipment properly. In the end set up and care are at least as important as which equipment you choose. One of my TTs is 40 years old this year (VPI HW-19) and the 9" SME Tonearm underwent a rebuild by SME Canada last year and the whole set up works and sounds very good indeed.
|
Chiming in just to say I’ve been following the thread and learning, thank you.
I’m about to set up my 12” on as I have a new cart coming.
I have some Wally Tools arriving soon.
|
Dear @thom_at_galibier_design : " I still don’t know why they fixed the overhang "
Overall the japanese vintage tonearm manufacturers really did not care to much about or had a misunderstood on the alignments subject.
I owned/own over 12 of those tonearms and after took in count that the specs can't " even " the Lögren alignments I just took the EL specification and set up with either of those Lögren alignments.
@macg19 : "
I’ve been following the thread and learning, thank you.
I’m about to set up my 12” "
I can see not really " learning " .
R.
|
The Japanese have throughout the 20th Century produced innovative designs in all areas of Technology, to the point where they were a World Leading Authorities.
Like all Business Models based on Technology there is the High Turnover Market and the Bespoke Market, Japan pretty much had both Markets sewn up and was proved to be very difficult to penetrate.
They did also contribute to a rise in Home Grown Markets cashing in on the Trends that Japan was so successful at bringing to the Mass Market Arena.
Questioning the design intent behind a range of Japanese TA's is futile as a activity, these designs are secure in their roles and very special to their owners or alternatively witnessed to be endlessly resurfacing as the option that proved to be better than many many others experienced.
|
I've 9" and 12" Jelco 850 arms on a well-fettled 401 so I can make direct comparisons. Bass is a little tighter and the overall sound slightly drier on the 9". The 12" has more authority, liquidness and musicality with more dimension to the soundstage.
|
I have an Innovation [Wood - which is no longer used for the model name]. I have two 12" Universal arms on mine, and I used to have a 9" instead for one of them. Both have Lyra Atlas cartridges. One is the SL (stereo) and the other is the Mono. I use the SMARTTractor alignment tool and Löfgren B DIN alignment for both cartridges, but I spend a bit of time really getting the alignment nailed as perfectly as I can. This is the best sound I have gotten from the TT. I play everything from older (60s/70s) classical records to modern 33 and 45v RPM reissues.
|
@rauliruegas
I’m not sure what this means? I can see not really " learning "
@dwette @mikelavigne
To Mike’s point #3 (2nd post). I ended up with a MSL Signature Platinum analyzed by JR at Wally Tools and installed the cart to those parameters which included a custom shim to correct for SRA as well as data to adjust azimuth and stylus zenith error.
So I’m pretty confident I ended up maximizing the benefits of the 12" with a much better than average cart alignment.
In any case, I’m done and happy. Stunning amount of never-before-heard detail yet very musical, relaxing presentation.
Cheers all.
|
@macg19
congrats on the 12" arm with the MSL Sig Platinum, and having JR optimize it. it's all about being happy after all the effort is rewarded, and now just the music.
enjoy!
|
@mikelavigne exactly - thank you Mike. Have an awesome weekend!
|
