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

Dear @westcoastaudiophile : "  great arms + headshells + carts don’t need damping!  "

 

I agree with you if that happens in an LP analog perfect universe, unfortunatelly that statement is way elusivein the real world where some where we all we need to take care of damping down there.

But that's a personal choice due that that choice depends ( at least ) on two factors: what's  great for we and which one is our system MUSIC reproduction main target.  Our choice is a compromise down there according those factors I mentioned.

Almost nothing is wrong in our choice because it's way PERSONAL.

 

R.

@lewm  : 55 554390 0518, please say me Hi down there. Could you?  Appreciated.

 

R.

Dear @audiomark1234  : Things are that for several years I owned the first the 4 and latter on the DP-6 that's almost an unipivot design ( has 2 bearing points. ) and with not good microscopic stability for the stylus tip ridding.

That's why came or comes with silicon oil damping for the horizontal plane and independent for the vertical movements and in this we can choose the " quantity " of damping we need or not but this fact depends more that what the designer says but  the cartridges we own and our sound reproduction preferences.

With out vertical damping we coulkd think is more open/cryztaline the sound but that could be the added non damped distortion levels.

R.

Dear @mijostyn  : My audio world is truly small and inside it I have estrict and specific critical issues and targets to make the MUSIC really an enjoyment the near I can to the live event MUSIC experience. I'm not complicated.

 

Things are that for me what we can't avoid and always is there is all what I posted in mt last 6-7 post that is happening at the stylus/cantilever ridding and been here where the MUSIC source starts we all should be to care about to try achieve that real MUSIC enjoyment  with the any kind of developed distortions at minimum. This is my target here and now. Which yours?.

 

R.

@mijostyn : You need to go out for a few minutes from your little world.

Btw, the key in this cartridge main issue is the choice and quantity of silicon viscosity level we are using it.

 

R.

Dear @mijostyn  : With all respect to you what in " hell " you did not undersand from my last post that are not my words but the gentlemans/researcher Crandfield Institute where them belongs to the Departament of Design of Machine systems.

Townshend was not one of those researchers he was the investment gentleman that decided to run out with what those gentlemans discover and proved.

I said all that because you insist: " there are tonearm cartridge combinations that will benefit from damping.........there is more to resonance that just frequency....there is also sensitivity, amplitud and duration ."

 

Btw, in those white papers all those about amplitude and the like comes with not wide explanation but measurements about.

 

Anyway , my main issue is not about the tonearm/cartridge resonance but the characteristics that surround the cartrdge riding the groover. This is what is happening down there and what is eveloping by the cartridge it self ( forgeret about the tonearm even if is a " perfect " tonearm and good mated to the cartridge. ).

Please think in the cartridge ridding grooves in isolation that it's something that those researchers concluded along other conclusions:

 

I have several years posting about that analog jitter/mistracking way before I started this thread or that P.Lenderman video and way before I knew about the white papers I mentioned here.

Those white papers are around 250 pages, it’s truly bigger to read it but yesterday for the first time I read there:

 

 

" this is atributed to cartridge vibration at high frequency upseting the subtle phase effects...."

 

" The name clamp or stabilizer seems more appropiate than damper, as the device only damps over a very narrow frequency range: 8hz-15hz but clamps from 20hz to 50khz. It is the clamping which gives the improvements:

 

a) bass coloration reduced

b) mid band "openess" improves

c)distortions at all frequencies is reduced

d)stereo imagery improved

e) tracking problems " eliminated " and

f) feedback greatly reduced. "

 

Clamp down there is the name of the game and the silicon is what it does " clamps " the cartridge to the groove surface in a % that in many ways stop that the cartridge ridding follows developing higher distortions. NO it does not really clamps it's only a little help that even a deaf audiophile can listen if it's using the rigth silicon viscosity and the good news in this clamp is that we achieve only benefits and nothing " wrong " that you can detect and only testing you can attest about in positive or negative way. I repeat: you have to test it with several cartridges in your system.

 

I already posted that I builded trays for the silicon dedicated in specific to around 8 different arms where I tested the same cartridges using the same LP tracks and with different silicon viscocities.

I know what I'm talking about and you DON'T only theory and good imagination/desires and the like. You need facts or to make your own measures with and with out the silicon tray in you tonearm ( I know that you think that your tonearm does not needs that damping but it's not for the tonearm but for the cartridge ridding. )

 

R.

@dogberry : Yes, could be that way.

I have several years posting about that analog jitter/mistracking way before I started this thread or that P.Lenderman video and way before I knew about the white papers I mentioned here.

Those white papers are around 250 pages, it’s truly bigger to read it but yesterday for the first time I read there:

 

" this is atributed to cartridge vibration at high frequency upseting the subtle phase effects...."

 

" The name clamp or stabilizer seems more appropiate than damper, as the device only damps over a very narrow frequency range: 8hz-15hz but clamps from 20hz to 50khz. It is the clamping which gives the improvements:

 

a) bass coloration reduced

b) mid band "openess" improves

c)distortions at all frequencies is reduced

d)stereo imagery improved

e) tracking problems " eliminated " and

f) feedback greatly reduced. "

 

Maybe could be a good test with higher viscosity than 60K, at least this is my first hand experiences with different tonearms where I builded its dedicated trays.

 

R.

Dear @dogberry  : Of course that you need to hear it.

 

I shared those measures only for we can see that damped vs undamped valuations.

They used 34 different cartridges as the Decca London Gold, Ortofon MC 30, Denon DL103D, Empire 2000, Goldring 900, Nakamichi MC 1000 ( I owned this and was a great performer. ), Shure V15, Sonus Silver and many more with different compliace/weigth, characteristics.

@mijostyn  I know that this gentleman has very good experience levels and very god knowledge levels and  I think that to post something that enhamce the subject dialogue he has to " open " a little his way of thinking.

 

R.

Dear @mijostyn ​@dogberry  and friends : Here what the gentlemans at Cranfield Institute of Technology found out about damping that Townshend decide to took and manufacture with a lot of success.

Same measures with and with out damping and they used a low viscosity at 10K when SME V use 60K and I already tested 100K, 300K and 600 in different ways. Mijos please do not makes a critic as is usual in you and try to enhance the dialogue with real solutions on this cartridge ridding subject that is what we all need. Critic is totally easy and any one can do it but real solutions that's a different history:

 

Raúl (canva.com)

 

R.

 

@mijostyn  : Cranfield Institute of Technology is whre everything were do it where Townshend was the manufacturer who was interested to go a head with.

His take was about the tonearm and overall developed " distortions " in TTs but through the time I learned about and my take is a little different and relationed to the cartridge groove ridding it self.

From the point of view of cartridge/tonearm perfect resonance frequency level you are rigth but thast is not my take.

Even that we can be out of that ideal resonance frequency level things happened and happens that goes against what we all learned about. The Ortofon MC 2000 real time measures under its review confirm that because its tonearm/resonance frequency was below 5hz and the reviewer can't detect any trouble with and was not any reviewer but an engineer/audiophile/music lover and proffesional reviewer.

R.

Dear @mijostyn : " I assure you, none of my current cartridges mistrack any record I have played, "

 

All your today and past cartridges has that analog jitter and you can’t avoid it. That you just don’s accept it is only your attitude or " ignorance " because evidence are there.

 

Shure, Stanton, Pickering and the like knew about and thta’s why its cartridge stabilizers to help a little on that regards.

 

If you are happy with that analog jitter in your system it’s fine with me but that you post after post tell that you don’t have that problem is just something " stupid for say the least: the day is nigth as not the other way around.

 

Btw, what you don’t understand yet is that that specific regards has nothing to do with which tonearm which kind of tonearm are you using and if it’s good matched or not: THE ISSUE BELONGS TO THE CARTRIDGE/GROOVE /FRICTON riding.

 

Till you understand that you will stay in trouble.

 

"  You do not want to know what I think about Townsend. "

What you think about has no importance what has importance is that you can prove it that what Townshend and his surrouded external enginners measures and all the science behind them tha are facts. You have not facts and you know that I respect you but what you are posting in this specific regards is only you ignorance levels about because you don't belive that could happens then you never tested.

 

Now you are very shilled working with wooooood and mayvbe metal too and own all the necessary tools to make a tray and test in your system.

 

Your posts does not help you till you experience as first hand in your system. This is not about our believes, this is about reality and again it's not a tonearm issue.

 

R.

@dogberry  : What I try to say is that we need that to amke comparisons with and with   out silicon damping we need that the in the tonearm tray came facilities to do it because if each time you need to remove the silicon oil to test with out and have to fill each time you need to test with silicon damping then maybe not a good idea because the test with and with out we need to do it " almost " in the fly ( not in the fly really ) very fast in the same track.

I can't remember how came in the SME but in my today tonearms and in the MS MAX you can do that and is easy to listen with and with out.

R.

Dear @dogberry  : Yes, I owned the V and IV  and its add-on tray. 

No, the intrinsical character do not changes but improves. Now I think that could be more easy for any one of us to detect that analog jitter not with LP tracks recorded at high velocities but more easy in a " normal " recordings. 

 

For years I developed my overall test proccess where I usem almost everykind of LP tracks and always the same.

 

As I told you, it's not easy to fall in count what to look for, we need patience and no we don't need " golden ears " to do it.

 

R.

Dear @dogberry : The issue is that it’s not an easy task to detect the analog jitter/natural mistracking, you can see that here mijostyn just has no answer or solution or as you think that it’s not need it.

 

All cartridges in all tonearm need it and to detect the " phenomenon " we need a self very good test proccess especially with LP tracks recorded at high velocities.

Now that I know what to look for I have not many trouble to detect it but first we need to make several tests til we can be " there ".

Before I started this thread I was over 0ne year making almost everything of cartridge damping to know if it’s need it or not and as Townshend my conclusion was and is that it’s need it.

 

How each one of us do it that cartridge damping is all about each one of us the easy way to go is with the silicon tray but if any of you have other " solutions " then are welcomed if decide to share it. Remember that’s it’s not to damp the tonearm but the riding cartridge: this is the real subject.

 

SME had and have its reasons to have that silicon tray as did it Micro Seiki that was a cartridge manufacturer too and other tonearm manufacturers.

Say it does not need it can’t help to the issue and if that does not need it is your way of thinking at least share an explanation why does not need it.

 

Again science and Townshend tesis says it's need it.

R.

@mijostyn  : I have to say that time later that when started this thread and in some ways " following " what you said I came back to listen my cartridges/tonearms with out use of the silicon tray and I did it in the last 6-8 months till I decided ( due to some kind of improvements in my room/system ) to tes again the silicon tray that it was an is revelatory for say the least and it's in this way as I decided to folow with that kind of cartridge damping.

 

R.

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

 

R.

@mijostyn  : In this thread and through the Townshend white papers/tesis exist the scientific/measures facts that tells your theory of not silicon damping is wrong and Townshend proved with his design.

I think that you are not aware of that jitter distortion because you never listened/tested the same tonearm/cartridge with and with out that tray.

 

You need to do it and remember that the you don't need to immerse totally the rod in the silicon tray because you always can put at diffeent immerse distance an additional to that we can make the test with different silicon viscosity values. 

If you decide do not do it then you can't make any critic inside this very specific subject.  You like science and there are those white papers and your own first hand experiences that can or not corroborate your hypothesis showed till today.

Have a good trip if any.

 

R.

 

R.

Dear @mijostyn : " I certainly do not. " wrong, every cartridge with perfect match to any tonearm lost contact with the LP groove during play ride. Name it mistracking or jitter it does not matters the issue is that you can’t avoid it and if you can’t detect it that’s is your room/system/ears problem not mine.

Many times like in this thread you read but do not in true " read " just read and that’s all.

Anyway, that jitter/mistracking needs tobe disappears and that’s the question fo you: how other than damp the cartridge ( not the tonearm ) stylus/cantilever? and again you are ( for me ) in serious trouble if you can’t detect that phenomenon, really serious even if you don’t care.

Btw, you are very good to critic something as the dust in tha video but even that you are not very good to offer solutions about ( not to clean that dust. That video was an example just to shows what you can't detect yet. )

R.

 

 

Dear @dogberry  : " Does it sound more dynamic without the damping trough? I can’t say I can tell the difference. "

During LP play we can't avoid the jitter cartridge tracking " phenomenon " that's a kind of " mistracking " because suddenly the stylus tip lost contact with the LP groove. This sudden contact lost develops a kind of " high frequency distortion " that we all are already accustom to and that we all are not really aware when it's happening, so it's not easy say is a mistracking but it's.

Now, the V and IV have different quality level bearings: ABEC 9 in the V against ABEC 7 in the IV. It's weird that you can't detect those two " characteristics ": different bearing and damping.

Now, remember in the V the cSt silicon viscosity? 10K, 100K, etc etc. ?

 

Thank's in advance,

R.

Dear @mijostyn : Phonograph needle slow-motion microscopy (youtube.com)

Even inside the ideal cartridge/tonearm resonance frequency how can help the cartridge stylus jitter?

We can see several things, first of them is the way very hard task the stylus tip has to ride those tortuose groove modulations, cartridge/tonearm job should be really fenomenal for been faithful to the groove modulations information recorded there the other thing we can see is that the stylus tip ridding is almost " out of its control " almost at " random " as the self cartridge tracking habilities permits it.

And it’s these critical microscopic out of control stylus tip movements the ones that must and should be " tamed " to lower the developed distortions/to lower the additional non recorded movements and for the stylus tip pick up a higher true groove modulations.

 

 

Could you share what to do about? because jitter means higher added distorion levels. Due that you posted:

 

" With proper tonearm matching damping is not needed and indeed is a negative. It is like adding friction to your bearing and forces the cartridge to work harder "

R.

Dear @lohanimal  : I did it in massive way to the point where the cartridge tonearm can't goes on after the last recorded groove, stop there and can't pass through the end of the non-recorded LP surface before the center label.

 

I can say that I tested everything you can imagine and in my " natural " well damped tonearm the best  trough is not trough at all. That's what my very high resolution system tells me and to my friends too. Diffreneces for the better are just obvious but as almost always depends on the whole room/system resolution and the kind of test proccess each one of us have for comparisons.

 

R.

lewm, posted yhe best answer to your stupid post.

 

"  not so much whether it can be bent by a human exerting strength to bend it. I doubt many arm wands of any kind except maybe steel ones could resist such an effort. "

 

R.

Titanium is used by Lyra, Audio Technica, Ortofon, etc, etc and I think was used by Graham.

 

Cartridge manufacturers even in the cantilever.

 

So your history is only to hit me but youknow what? you never had and never will has success about.

 

R.

@dover  : Not wrong because the Technics blend in the MK2 is way better in the arm wand that sapphire.

 

" The EPA-100Mk2 arm was a titanium alloy tube with boron fiber surface inside and out. The fiber gets there by chemical vapor deposition (the method by which the EPC-100MkIV cantilevers were strengthened/stiffened). Because of the way the boron was applied, it created a super-stiff super-light arm tube, which had both longitudinal and torsional stiffness but which absorbed micro vibrations. "

 

R.

Dear @rsf507  : In theory the sapphire used in the arm wand Kuzma tonearm could helps for the tonearm been " well damped " but those 60grs. in EM goes against the cartridge needs matching resonance frequency inside the ideal frequency range: 8hz-12hz and in the other side that really high inertia moment is nothing good for the cartridge ridding and its suspension in higher ways than in more normal tonearms.

Kuzma says that is the best ever tonearm arm wand by its rigidity and low resonant figures but the Technics EPA 100MK2 was and is in reality the best one about by its boron arm wand that has better characteristics than sapphire and not so weigthy and for that synthetic sapphire arm wand Kuzma ask 20K for its tonearm.

 

I can say that " on paper " I do not buy even at 2K tag price.

 

R.

Dear @lewm : First I’m not attaking you.

 

" are mixing together two different phenomena "

In my latest post I was not mixing anything but only said:

 

" It’s not that the cartridge /tonearm match can achieve that absolute necessary FREE MOVEMENT in the ridding cartridge stylus but that along that match the tonearm ( any ) must be a well damped design. "

 

both phenomena must exist always, no matters what and there is no conflict.

 

Btw, I’m talking for me. All those is only about the cartridge/tonearm but we must add that always we need a good damping TT mat and a good damping clamp as the reflex Bais audio and that the TT be well damped at its plynth and the plattform that's supporting it and we need not forget the tonearm arm mount that needs be well damped too.

 

R.

 

 

Dear @lewm  : Certainly you had not experiences with the main subject thread and seems that you did not read carefully may latest posts.

It's not that the cartridge /tonearm match can does achieve that absolute necessary FREE MOVEMENT in the ridding cartridge stylus but that along that match the tonearm ( any ) must be a well damped design.

 

When we achieve those the rewards are unimaginable specially for audiophiles with out the " very good damped tonearm design ". NO, your love for the FR and the 505 is only " your love " but it's full of distortions/colorations that you love and that's all. It's wrong to use that kind of audio items if we want to stay nearer to the recording and as always that's my target and when any one achieve that target he will has an experience in MUSIC reproduction way better than never before. Of course that that gentleman needs to own a good room/system with high resolution and obviously with very good first hand experiences with live MUSIC events seated at near field position.

 

I still own your FR and owned the 505, that's why I'm posting about. 

 

R.

Dear @lohanimal  :  You are rigth that perhaps I need to experience in my system the Townshend one but  my point is what said the tonearm patent that whith other words I understand like this:

 

" different damping levels at frequency ranges with the trough at the cartridge position and at the same time allowing for " free movement " at the cartridge stylus  "

Both actions can't live together or is dampened or exist that critical and extremely important FREE MVEMENT but not both together.

 

As everything in audio exist trade offs that I'm not discovery yet in my well damped tonearms with out the trough. Till today in all frequency ranges with the " free movement " Ithe system achieved a not tiny improvement and the better of those improvement started with the low bass that's the one range that puts/colored all what in any room/system we are listening.

 

Now, I gone from 500Kc silicon density to zero silicon damping. I know that I need try something from 10K and from there make more tests and this will take some weeks or months to have a conclusion because is not to easy to clean up the tray to change new density silicon along that my test proccess is a little with long time.

R.

I forgot that's more important than what we could think that exist a good match between cartridge/tonearm in the way that can achieve a resonance frequency number inside the " ideal " resonance range : 8hz to 12hz  or really near it.

Many of us are accustom to like the reproduction sound in our room/system witrh a total cartridge/tonearm mistmatch and we like it but we have to think all what we are losting with out all those additional developed distortions that we are accustom to and that impedes that the cartridges can shows at its best.

 

R.

Dear @mijostyn : That " free movement " that unfortunatelly the Townshend tonearm can’t achieve is the real key to stay nearer to the recording if and only if the tonearm in use is a good damped design.

All what heppened in my room/system using that " key " was nothing " tiny " but higher improvement that I was not expecting and prepared too and that I had to increment the SPL in my subwoofers says a lot about because is not only that distortions goes lower but the clear definition of the low bass that’s not an easy task to achive. Overall I’m really happy .

Btw, of the really good vintage tonearms that I remember and owned only the MS MAX 237/282 came with a silicon tray that the owner can use using two different silicon density depending of the cartridge in use and MS gaves a list for the cartridges for one and the other silicon density.

Today those vintagey or new tonearm not well or undamped designs always could be benefiated by a not to wide riboon around the arm wand in an helicoidal way. Iyt does not affects the tonearm EM and improves the cartridge resolution during listening sessions.

 

About your MC Diamond maybe needs more playing hours.

 

R.

Technics knew very well and that's why used Boron blend in its tonearm arm wand and headshell along a resonance operation " Dynamic damping  balance weigth " through the tonearm counterweigth but Technics did not use the silicon tray as SME several years ago and today in its series V model and Triplanar and others.

The other Technics critical design characteristic is that the friction level in the bearing is as or lower than 5mg.

R.

Dear @mijostyn  : "" With proper tonearm matching damping is not needed and indeed is a negative. It is like adding friction to your bearing and forces the cartridge to work harder pulling the tonearm back and forth particularly on an eccentric record. Vertical damping might cause difficulty negotiating warps. 

Don't use crutches. Fix the problem.  ""

 

Well it takes me 2 full years to stay very near your statement meaning due that over those 2 years my room system fine tunning proccess arrives to an incredible top position in the quality level of sound reproduction.

There is no single tonearm that totally " Fix the problem ", however tonearm designers work hard to do it and they try to do it using different alternatives but today tonearms in one way or the other were designed taking in count seriously the damping issue. Some made it choosing the tonearm build material or blend materials or other solutions as the SAT that not only choosed a material but how they use it for the arm wand.

Please read here something interesting about and that's not easy to avoid it even today:

https://worldradiohistory.com/Archive-All-Audio/Archive-Audio/70s/Audio-1979-03.pdf     (page 42 ).

 

 

and from the radical damped Townshend tonearm patent we can read:

 

" for damping a range of frequencies of vertical and horizontal vibrations of the carrying means, so as to provide relatively low damping for frequencies below 5 Hz, moderate damping between 5 Hz and 20 Hz, and relatively high damping for frequencies above 20 Hz.

It is therefore an object of the present invention to provide a phonograph having damping means which is effective over a wider range of frequencies than hitherto known.

It is a further object of the invention to provide a phonograph having a vicous damper which has direct effect at the position of the pick-up cartridge.

It is yet a further object of the invention to provide a phonograph having damping means which can substantially avoid unwanted high frequency complex modes of vibration caused by the arm vibrating, and damp out other unwanted audio frequency vibrations of the cartridge and of the arm, whilst allowing free movement over warps and eccentricities. "

 

But in the last statement about " free movement " this can't be acomplished through silicon damping tray and certainly can't even in the Townshend and I said this because through my latest tests and due that I own very well damped tonearms ( that I was using the silicon tray ) with out the silicon tray sound reproduction I mean quality sound level reproduction is way better with out the tray specially from the midrange up range and all the high frequency range.

That clearly improvement is because now exist that " free movement " but we have to be really carefully that the tonearm/cartridge resonance frequency stays in the 8hz-12hz range.

Obviously that with out using the tray some cartridges that runned very well the canon shoots in the 1812 now have problems especially with the last 2 shoots however with the 1812 and other recordings  the bass range performance is extremely good. Even and talking of the bass range with out tray I had to increment the SPL in my subwoofers that means that with the tray probably existed higher developed bass distortions with lower definition due that was not ridding with " free movements ".

 

Seems to me that the free movement is the key here if the tonearm design is a good damped design.

 

R.

Dear @ihcho  : The DP 80 is a good vintage TT that even in its Denon plyth needs damping even at the arm board where it's seated in the plynth and with its footers.

You need to a better clamp and different mat than the stock one.

As you said when you have all mounted you can " know " what to do which " road " take.

R.

Dear @ihcho  : Damping is need it. You need a good TT mat and a good TT clamp. You can help your cartridges in the 309 using a good damped headshell: build material is the key here as wood or magnesium or even blended material builded headshells. You can't do that with the 401 that came with a dedicated headshell.

Now, read the first 1.5 page on this thread where Agoners posted " things " that could help tonearm/cartridge damping issue.

R.

Dear @bdp24 : Yes, that resonance can't be avoided and some audiophiles think that if it's in side that " ideal " frequency range: 8hz- 12hz everything is fine but the harmonics of that kind of resonances always " color " the whole frequency range of what we are listening, this is: paint it.

Damping is welcomed playing LPs.

R.

Dear @bdp24  : ""  it addresses the issue of the tonearm/cartridge resonance that is inherent in the LP phono system, REGARDLESS of the specific arm and cartridge.  ""

That's the great contribution to the analog alternative but historically several of the vintage tonearm manufacturers, some way or the other, took in less " dramatica/effective " way the issue on the necessity of some kind of damping in their designs.

One way or the other all tonearm designers know the importance of damping and they try that their designs have it.

Triplanar, SME, Jelco, Technics, Schroeder, Reed, SAT, etc, etc did it. 
A non-damped tonearm is just out of question and today and with all respect a design stupidity.

R.

Dear @mijostyn : The worst deaf-man is the one that does not wants hear in the same way that the worst blind-man is the one that does not wants see.

Know you or not and rigth from your first post in the thread you did not posted any evidence, fact, true explanation that supported your posts and rigth from your first post you are wrong and you showed and still show your very low common sense levels.

" poorly designed " ? well everything is " poorly " designed because xist tube dampers too. Damping is used everywhere in the audio world: speakers, cables, amps, preamps and even DAC units to lower vibrations.

Now, the origen of what you said: " poorly designed " audio items belongs to the media it self bacause the design of the analog/LP alternative is way faulty and it's a " brutality " ( for say the least ) the existense of those recorded grooves in the way were designed in that black kind of vinyl material and that's why the media/alternative needs to many " bandaids " everywhere in the analog chain.

It's really " unimaginable " that the transducer ( mounted in tonearm. ) job is dependent of the extremely hard task in that tiny stylus tip ridding that extremely tortuose randomly grooves LP surface path,. It's  incredible ! ! !

All the evidence and facts ( almost. ) that supports the damping necessity are very well detailed through the thread including why M.Townshend choosed that damping design.

Again, you are wrong and trying to support your self by the high dover misunderstood on the main subject was a mistake from your part that only confirm the same: you are wrong, have nothing on hand.

Please don't try to justify your self  posting no true facts. Rigth now and maybe just from your first post you are acting as a simple troll and nothing more.

Regards and enjoy the MUSIC NOT DISTORTIONS,
R.

Dear @dover  :  "  Tonearm damping is a bandaid for poorly designed arms or turntables and/or mismatched arm/cartridge.  "

A bandaid?, well all after market devices as: protractors, mats, tip toes, still points, clamps, treatment, amp damping, TT damping, system item racks, power conditioners, power cables, etc, etc, according your point are bandaids for audio items poorly designed ones.

Well, in audio does not exist any single audio item and after market devices that are PERFECT and that's why everywhere we need " bandaids ".

All what you said already posted other audiophiles and through the thread to all of them were proved that they had a misunderstood about and that were not true their opinions and that damping is always welcomed, obviously you share with them the same misunderstood.

Here some links that between other gentlemans @antinn shared with us that one way or the other tell us the damping needs no matter what.

Obviously the @lohanimal  links and posts as the bdp24 and from other gentlemans:

https://worldradiohistory.com/Archive-All-Audio/Archive-Audio/70s/Audio-1979-03.pdf   ( page 33 )

http://www.laudioexperience.fr/wp-content/uploads/2017/04/Bruel-Kjaer-Audible-Effects-of-Mechanical-...

https://worldradiohistory.com/Archive-All-Audio/Archive-Audio/80s/Audio-1981-03.pdf   ( page 21. )

https://worldradiohistory.com/Archive-All-Audio/Archive-Audio/80s/Audio-1982-06.pdf   ( page 24. )




https://forum.audiogon.com/discussions/tonearm-damping-damped-or-not-useless-welcomed/post?postid=20...


After read all those information and even the whole thread if you insist in your false statement then please share with us your true.

Regards and enjoy the MUSUIC NOT DISTORTIONS,
R.

" More subtle " if you pass from 300Kcst but if you pass from 100Kcst is truly high.

R.

Dear friends: I was making several tests all these days " playing " with the silicon viscosity and using different compliance cartridges.

I used from 50Kcst to 600Kcst and what I found out with all cartridges is that the more significant changes belongs between 100K to 300K and this does not means that at 500K-600Kcst there are no changes but are subtle changes where you need very high resolution room/system and a good evaluation process to be aware on it.

So, the ones of you with a tonearm with trough it's worth to test different silicon oil viscosity and the amount of deep you most place the rod/paddle in the tray.

The tonearms with out trough we have to damp the arm wand in some way, the rewards/benefits are more important that what you could think.

As I said somewhere in the first page damping everywhere in the room/system is critical and a necessity to achieve the best top quality sound reproduction levels and increment our MUSIC listening enjoyment times.

Btw, your findings or ideas on the whole subject are welcomed and appreciated.

R.

Dear @lohanimal : Of course, at the end is what you have and you can’t enjoy nothing but what you own and normally you have it because you are satisfied with.

But in the tonearm damping we are not talking to invest thousands of dollars when you can damp your tonearm arm wand ( tape or O-rings, etc. ) and inside your same system you will detect a quality improvement.

Yes we can be a little lazzy to do it or just do not like how the tonearms looks with but these is another matters.

Many audiophiles made or make by their self modifications in their speakers or electronics that are way more dificult and expensive and some of these gentlemans own non damped tonearms as the FR ( only an example. ) where they can do it. Yes it’s up to them but remember that tonearm damping lower distortions and this fact is important, at least to me.

R.

Dear friends and @lohanimal  : The ones that use the trough fron/back in tonearm/cartridge combinations coincide in that the bass is truly improved and this fact gives " ligth/shine " to the other frequency extreme and obviously at the middle range too.

Some audiophiles here or in other thread acused me to insult japanese people and vintage manufacturers as FR/SAEC that desifned very bad damped or non-damped tonearms when I posted that they just like things different and I understand this coming from an audiophile but coming from a tonearm manufacturer only means very low knowledge levels about that's what I posted not as an insult but a fact.
Even SAEC in its information puts pictures on how heavy mass damps almost " everything " and puts that information with out any tonearm research on the issue.

Several manufacturers do not design with the trough but their designs have a good level of damping in other ways.

R.  

Dear @lohanimal : Great, I think that all of us appreciated.

The Cranfield Institute of Thechnology made a true deeep reasearch and measurements about rigth what @bdp24 and you posted, it's not just bla bla bla.

Well, here and in other threads I posted " similar " way of thinking ( bla bla bla. ) on the whole necessity of tonearm/cartridge damping where several audiophiles first don't cares enough about and second don't makes to them " click " my empirical/common sense way of thinking, well maybe not only common sense but first hand experiences even with out scientific measurements.

A critical issue in that patent information that again I always talked about is that every kind of developed noised and distortions at any frequency develops harmonics/overtones that modulates/colored all the frequency range and in that patent they remarks that the frequencies developed even been to low: 0.56-3hz its harmonics goes to 20hz.
Damping puts at minimum that problem either that the damping trough stays at the front or back in the tonearm.

That's why I always state that as better the room/system bass range quality level as better will be the whole room/system quality MUSIC reproduction. From here came my first hand experiences with a pair of powered subs that I shared through my subwoofer thread.

So, a tonearm needs at least to be designed and builded choosing the materials not only by its rigidity/stifness but taking in count the necessity to be well damped even with out using the silicon oil trough.

Well there are many things to comment on that patent and the damping benefitial effects and for me is a learning lesson that I hope could be that way for other audiophiles.

I know that always exist the audiophiles that no matters what they are entilted to that horrendous: " that's how I like it " even if he choosed the " wrong " road.

Regards and enjoy the MUSIC NOT DISTORTIONS,
R.

Dear friends :I already linked in this thread my caps thread, so you can read here the latest up-date about:

https://forum.audiogon.com/discussions/best-harmless-signatureless-speakers-capacitors/post?postid=2...

In the midrange crossover I use caps in parallel too, 4 of them and only in the band-pass and tweeter crossover filters use only one.

Thank’s that in that forum ( techtalk. ) the experts in the subject ( some of them are DIY. ) gave me the normal audiophile advise to use some of the boutique caps and that no one of them gives me nothing different ( I’m not blame in any way to any one of them, as a fact I already appreciated their opinions. The best they can. ) I started to make a deep research by my self ( for moths and " thousands of tests with several models of Wima/Kemet/Vishay caps. Tests mainly in the midrange/tweeter crossover filters. ) through the internet and after I took in count that I had many Wima ( different models. ) caps that I changed in my electronics for many past years that I changed for in theory " better " caps type: more or less " boutique " type of caps.

In that research I found out with no single doubt the very good reasons why Wima, Vishay and Kemet are the true Industry Standard devices and I mean in all kind of Industry from the aerospace, automotive, militar, medical, audio and the like and at the same time I found out and learned why audiophiles and some high-end audio items manufacturers use the " boutique " names that they used/choosed not with very good reasons but for the very " wrong " reasons with out knowing theirt bad caps selections: I was one of them as and audiophile/manufacturer.

In my case my mistake/error was not made comparisons between the " boutique " caps and the way humble Wima/Kemet.

Nothing can compare against those Industry Standard caps, nothing at all ( at least not any " boutique " one. ).

Some of you like to make some DIY up-grades in your systems and for you I urge to try these caps in electronics and speakers and you will find out that all those euphonic distortions you like it and that are developed in your system just disappers leaving the signal MUSIC just " untoachable "/alone. It’s a total extasis about and I mean it.

At the begining you can experienced, as some audiophiles that do not like damping because the sound is lifeless/dullness and the like but the reality is exactly the latest @lohanimal experiences when at the first moment he thinked exist some " trouble " with the stage performance and bass but latter on he posted that that was not in that way but more music information with lower distortions and this is what you will find out with those caps: the true and only the true, you can’t deceit your self.
You can lost nothing because at the end of those changes and after your brain/ears been accustom to if even this you don’t like it then always can come back at the same place where you started with.

Anyway, I want it to share with all of you my caps discovery because the rewards are extremely high and worth to do it or at least try it.

Regards and enjoy the MUSIC NOT DISTORTIONS,
R:

Btw, today I can listen my system at any SPL you can name it and imagine does not collapse and even very high SPLs my ears don't ask to go lower but even can " support " higher levels that are really dagerous for my ears.
I never imagined that the female voice sshhhh was developed by the system or at least making it with higher SPL.

@lohanimal  : That's why you have to make additional tests. With the trough at the back of the tonearm 10cst has no real benefit.

R.

Dear @kps25sc : Yes, that's was I figure out due that in the Townshend the damping is applied at the source and not at the back of a normal tonearm trough.

R.

Dear @lohanimal  : well, the VDH advise and my self experiences that even that advise can helps with any tonearm with trough/paddle that normally has it at the tonearm pivot distance and this fact makes things different with the Townshend that does exactly at the source/cartridge and here it does not need it so high viscosity.

Anyway, at the ends test it is a must with. Appreciated that you share in the thread your coming experiences, thank's.
R.

@lohanimal  : The great Townshend characteristic is that the damping happens where everything start: rigth at the LP surface/cartridge and this is it's unquestionable advantage.

About silicon viscosity I think that 10cst is to low and you wil try higher. I posted this statement from Dr. A.J. van den Hul:

""  The higher the viscosity figure in centistokes, the stronger the damping effect ( his advise is no more than 500cst. )  ""

I tested as higher as 500cst and you will need to test 100-200-300cst with low/medium compliance and even with high compliance and after your self experiences you will know and can decide about.

Regards and enjoy the MUSIC NOT DISTORTIONS,
R.

Dear @lohanimal : " At first you think images are smaller - in fact they are far more precise and occupy spaces much better. In addition to this surface noise comes down and bass was more preisee to my ears "

That’s what you stated with the Sigma2000 and that’s preccisely ( more or less other than improved tracking. ) what makes the silicon oil damping even with a tonearm/combination out of the ideal resonance frequency.

All kind of improvements are important for us but for me the main and most critical improvement in both kind of damping: directly on arm wand or the trough is the improved quality level of the bass range and this improvement permits per sé that all the other frequency ranges really shines too. Btw, I mentioned " arm wand " because there are good tonearms with damped arm wands and with out trough and performs fine as the : Cobra or the VPI Fatboy. Other tonearms use a blended materials in the arm wand to take advantage of its damping characteristics of those materials.

Any thing that helps to improve the cartridge signal quality of the bass range always will be welcomed because it’s the frame of the whole " picture " we are listening and as better the bass range as better our MUSIC/sounds enjoyment no matters what.

R.

Dear @lohanimal  : ""  I had a short listen to the FR64s and thought it sounded perfectly good...""

Good even that the resonance frequency is ouit of the ideal range. Your experience with confirms the benefits of tonearm damping.

Some audiophiles think and post even here that the heavy mass tonearm as the FR provides " damping ", well damping against what is one of the questions but other critical issue with heavy effective mass in tonearms is during the LP play process where the cartridge has to deal with that heavy dynamic mass that complicated more its already hard job.

If I remember in the measured numbers og the MC2000/Technics combination the effective mass ( tonearm/cartridge. ) ( static. ) was 24grs. but the dynamic mass was measured over 31grs. that it's not a good number and that affects what we are listening through.
Maybe if LP were perfect with no off-center, micro/macro waves and the like that dynamic mass could makes lower/less harm but unfortunatelly it's not this way.

Regards and enjoy the MUSIC NOT DISTORTIONS,
R.