Tonearm for rega Planar 3

I always miss something in these threads. Why should one tonearm be better for one turntable than another? It simply doesn't follow logic. Get the best tonearm you can afford, and put it on the deck you have. I suppose that if the turntable in question was a springy type, one too heavy wouldn't be optimum, but how could it matter otherwise? You buy tonearms to suit cartridges, not turntables. A turntable is merely a device intended to quietly spin a record at the exact speed without imparting anything detrimental to the outcome. If it does that, it has done its part.

Hi Stanwal,

Of course, it is always the old "garbage in, garbage out" scenario. I don't contest that. I do challenge the concept that a turntable can be good, and still not let a tonearm that fits do its job to the fullest extent. If that is the case, a new turntable is in order. Also, I fully agree that many things are at work in a properly designed turntable. It is never as simple as it appears, but good turntables are flexible without sonic hits due to their operation and makeup. Whether the tonearm is any good is another question, altogether.

Stanley,

I suppose the "without imparting anything detrimental to the outcome" part should have been emphasized more. Anyway, you are correct in that speed alone isn't the end of turntable design. It should be in there, if you want to get the overall design right, though. So, I concede that a great many turntables should have some tonearm that is somehow matched to them for sonic reasons, but I maintain that those turntables are flawed when that is the case.

Regards,
Win

Stanwal,

Actually, I don't know if the perfect turntable will ever be built. I do know that the interaction between the device and the associated pieces should be as minimal as possible, no matter who makes it. I don't believe I am the only turntable builder who believes this should be the case. Sorry if you are somehow offended, but those are my beliefs on the issue. I told you I made a turntable in an e-mail because you treated me as if I were a novice. I never intended my status as a manufacturer to cast a shadow in the conversation, which is why my correspondence to you was offline. It was you who published that private correspondence, but carry on.