TONEARM DAMPING : DAMPED OR NOT ? ? USELESS ? ? WELCOMED ? ?


Dear friends: This tonearm critical subject sometimes can be controversial for say the least. Some audiophiles swear for non damped tonearms as the FR designs or SAEC or even the SME 3012 that is not very well damped in stock original status.

Some other audiophiles likes good damped tonearms.


In other thread a gentleman posted:


"  If a cartridge is properly matched to the tonearm damping is not required. " and even explained all what we know about the ideal resonance frequency range between tonearm and cartridge ( 8hz to 12hz. ). He refered to this when said: " properly matched to the tonearm ".


In that same thread that a Triplanar tonearm owner posted:


" This is the one thing about the Triplanar that I don't like. I never use the damping trough...... I imagine someone might have a use for it; I removed the troughs on my Triplanars; its nice to imagine that it sounds better for doing so. "


At the other side here it's a very well damped tonearm:


https://audiotraveler.wordpress.com/tag/townshend/


Now, after the LP is in the spining TT platter ( everything the same, including well matched cartridge/tonearm.  ) the must critical issue is what happens once the cartridge stylus tip hits/track the LP grooves modulations.

The ideal is that those groove modulations can pass to the cartridge motor with out any additional kind of developed resonances/vibrations and that the transducer makes its job mantaining the delicated and sensible signal integrity that comes in those recorded groove modulations.

 That is the ideal and could be utopic because all over the process/trip of the cartridge signal between the stylus tip ride and the output at the tonearm cable the signal suffers degradation (  resonances/vibrations/feedback ) mainly developed through all that " long trip " .


So, DAMPING IS NEED IT AT THE TONEARM/HEADSHELL SIDE OR NOT?


I'm trying to find out the " true " about and not looking if what we like it or not like it is rigth or not but what should be about and why of that " should be ".


I invite all of you analog lovers audiophiles to share your points of view in this critical analog audio subject. WHAT DO YOU THINK ABOUT?


Thank's in advance.



Regards and enjoy the MUSIC NOT DISTORTIONS,
R.






Ag insider logo xs@2xrauliruegas

Showing 8 responses by dogberry

Thanks, Raul. I need to hear those differences rather than see them on paper to know if they are significant. And SME silicon is 60cS rather than 10, which I assume is a significant difference. I shall have to experiment some more, but it should wait until I finally move cartridges around on the tonearms so that they are in their final places (I'm being influenced by the idea, still, that the Decca will benefit the most from damping, if any of them do.)

Zombie threadpocalypse!

I used damping on an SME V because I read it would help the mistracking (which I had not experienced) of the London Decca Reference and these days the same cartridge sits on an SME IV without damping and still exhibits no mistracking. Does it sound more dynamic without the damping trough? I can’t say I can tell the difference.

The Series V holds a Benz LP-S now, and the damping trough has had all the silicon removed.

it's not easy to fall in count what to look for

Can you rephrase that bit, please? I don't understand what you mean.

Btw, @dogberry: how much time ago did you that tests with the V/IV  with and with out silicon?

Within the last 18 months the Reference moved off the Series V, initially when it went for a rebuild. When it came back, I put it on a Series IV (as the V now has an LP-S), where it sounds just as exciting. Recently I removed the damping silicon from the V, to see if it made a difference to the LP-S, but I don't think it does. It may be that those cartridges just don't need any damping on those arms.

Raul, you may be right, and it is hardly for me to argue. But if my one, poor, remaining ear cannot hear the difference, what then?

I shall note that SME do not include any damping trough on most of their tonearms: it is standard only on the V (but is offered as an add-on for some of their other models). I have a good deal of respect for Alastair Robertson-Aikman's engineering decisions.

Might it be that you are referring to some more esoteric effects of damping rather than obvious mistracking?—when I got into Decca cartridges it was received wisdom that they would probably mistrack in an obvious way without a damped tonearm. My experience has been otherwise, but I don't have any of the classic Decca cartridges before John Wright modified them into something more refined and capable. And if we are to consider more subtle things than obvious mistracking, what of the supposed loss of dynamics that goes along with use of the damping trough? It is the (I'd say unrivalled) dynamics of Decca cartridges that makes us love them, and to dampen them down might remove their character.

It took two albums this morning for me to change my mind and get up and swap the London Reference and the BM LP-S, moving the former on to the V and the latter on to the IV. Set the VTF, adjusted the overhang, set the anti-skate and rechecked the VTF. Refilled the damping trough with the last of my SME silicon, rechecked the level of the tables and off I went. Naturally everything sounds wonderful, as it always does after such exertions. I’m not sure it sounds different though! It had to be done at some stage, anyway, so no harm done. Maybe prolonged listening will make it all clear.