Hello all, Recently procured a Feickert Blackbird w/ the Jelco 12 inch tonearm. The table is really good, and its a keeper. The Jelco is also very good, but not as good as my Fidelity Research FR66s. So the Jelco will eventually hit Ebay, and the question remains do I keep the FR66s or sell that and buy something modern in the 5-6 K range. My only point of reference is my old JMW-10 on my Aries MK1, so I don't know how the FR66s would compare to a modern arm. So I'd like to rely on the collective knowledge and experience of this group for a recommendation.
Keep the FR66s, or go modern in the 5-6K range, say a Moerch DP8 or maybe an SME.
Any and all thoughts and opinions are of course much appreciated.
" ... Raul,
Nice story, but it's a little hard to believe. You and your scientist
friend are in a lab playing records and watching the stylus with an
electron microscope? This was at normal speed and slow motion..."
It's obviously a fabricated story, fleib. Raul is really confused.
Fleib - Frank Schroeder likes the Dynavector tonearm’s bass and had this to say.
The Dynavector’s excellent bass rendition predominatly stems from the (eddy current)damping in the lateral plane. It’s mass distribution is another reason. Bass below 100Hz is cut in mono, purely lateral...
I also remember years ago in talking with Bruce Thigpen; I could tell by his voice that he thought it was a really interesting tonearm. I had the DV505 in my main room for quite some time with the ET 2.0 and 2.5. I liked it a lot. But in that room with those at the time 801 monitors; I could hear when the Dyna hit the two sweet spots on the record. Still own it.
asvjerry I'm going to go listen to some music, have a nice cup of tea, and come back to this thread in a week just to see if it finally imploded AG's server.
Asvjerry Sorry to disappoint you, but imo this thread is not even close. Not even on the radar. If I was a betting man, my money is on the Fusers thread to take down this site. Imagine if you will the posts, stories that would result, if they coordinated a movement, and all of them reversed their fuse directions.... at the same time.
Rauliruegas, re your 2/14 2:19pm post...Yep, agreed. An air bearing arm, properly set up, in MHO, just seems to have less 'compromises' in play then any pivoted arm. As to less bass, well, that's one out of how many other observations that can be brought into play. *shrug* Even the 'less bass' observation may be subject to the cart mounted on the arm, and *horrors* subject to 'perception' and 'taste' in the material being played.
The comments on tonearms, carts, and 'set up' of these seems to be akin to politics in it's ability to rankle and trigger no less than 5 and growing pages of posts just tickles me. This 'discussion' starts to remind me of the whole 'tar baby effect' in the Middle East. They've been going on for centuries. I'm just happy that some of the more 'excitable' posters don't have access to drones. It gets ugly enough, and it's just pixels on a screen....
Guy shows up, wants to play a friendly game of catch, and some participants start throwing rocks at each other...AGAIN. *sigh* 'Twas always thus...
I'm going to go listen to some music, have a nice cup of tea, and come back to this thread in a week just to see if it finally imploded AG's server.
Raul, Nice story, but it's a little hard to believe. You and your scientist friend are in a lab playing records and watching the stylus with an electron microscope? This was at normal speed and slow motion.
You can't see a record groove with an electron microscope unless it's painted with conductive coating. Vinyl is an insulator. Must have been a pretty big scope to fit the record player. Check this out:
Even if your story is true, it's an anecdote about one particular unnamed pair of tonearms. You think there are better arms than the 507 II. Okay we get it, but not everyone agrees with you. I read 2 reviews of the arm and the reviewers bought it from Dynavector. Probably a decent arm?
What don't you understand about bearing friction and inertia?
Dear fleib: """ A unipivot maintains stability by the distribution of mass and the center of gravity in relation to the pivot. .......... If the center of gravity is too low or high, it will be unstable. """
Weight or no weight during playing stability is not mantained:
a friend of mine that is a scientist and was the director of science area in the principal of México universities and that works for the NASA and today is working somewhere in Asia has three hobbies: first how the Universe born?, live music and home audio system to listen music.
One day I received a call from he to invite me the Sunday of that week to one of the University science laboratory and that’s the only information he gaves me. I attend to and he brought his TT with two mounted tonearms ( the one that uses I seen at his home. ) and 3-4 LPs and our meeting main target was to observe through an electronic microscope the cartridge ridding on the LPs at microscopic level ( I only seen that through internet latter on. ), I was really exited to see it for the first time in my life live. Everything started and through a screen I seen those LP groove modulations in macroscopic way even at normal speed and in low and very low motion. Both very well regarded tonearms and cartridges ( but diferent in between. ). We were seen it different kind of track modulations including the 1812 overture and was amazing to see what really happen there when the cartridge is " fighting " against those modulations to ridding it.
Well, suddenly I noted/observed that in one of cartridge/tonearm combinations exist a very especial kind of minuscle motions when seen in low motion status through the micro screen and I told to my friend and as a researcher he wanted to " investigate " what could be happening in that combination and over some tests/views that he runned we took in count that those minuscle motions were coming from the tonearm pivot. Then he did it the same tests with the other cartridge combination and had not those minuscle motions. This combination was with a gimball tonearm and the other was an unipivot design.
I don’t took this in count was only an experience and I bought unipivots tonearms additional to the pivoted ones but " today " that " old " experience was and is a learning one.
What produce that to low or high center of gravity in any pivoted tonearm design is that the cartridge could starts to mistracking.
""" The difference between bearing friction and high inertia is in the type of resistance to movement. Effective mass and inertia are the same. """
everyone knows that and as many times happens my meaning was not to ask that
""" Neither the DP8 or 507 II are unipivots. They both use high mass (inertia) in the horizontal plane to optimize tracking and bass response """
I can’t speak for the DP8 but for the 505/507 and I can tell you that the bass response is not up to the quality level in other more " simple " tonearm designs. So, for me is a faulty design, not a bad one because nothing is perfect but maybe you can tell us the 505/507 first hand advantages through your experiences.
Btw, all your posts comes to tell you disagree with my experiences/opinions but with no better solutions to.
The three ( 3 ) questions I did it to you are in stand by by you with no single answer.
Now, please tell us your overall solution to wrm ( op ) and why that solution is better than mine. Why your solution or solutions meets better the cartridge needs? WHY?
I hope that sometime you can answer about.
If you decide don’t post your answers is useless and futile you go on and on " over " me because you share no real contribution to help.
Dear chris: """
Multiple grounds are not a good thing Raul. """
I don't explained well whar I really want mean:
when I said " grounded " I'm refering a mechanical grounded not electrical. Air bearing tonearm are " floating " and pivot ones are mechanical grounded and maybe this solid " grounded " bering/surface or whatever is what gives that overall " solidity " to that bass range against a vaccum bearing and I said: " seems to me ", only an opinion.
I use MM and MC cartridges and with my ET 2 90% of the time was with MC ones. Your information about is appreciated.
"""
The erratic pivot arm, armtube behavior with the attached external wire
.."""
I respect that Take Five people but I kow they have not real experiences with an external tonearm wire or at least not the right ones.
I try it this for the first time several years ago with my SAEC pivoted tonearms ( 506/8000 ) through the silver Van den Hul wires that gone directly from the cartridge output pins connectors to the phono stage inputs. After that I tryed with other of my pivoted tonearms and with diferent silver wires including the almost non-existen silver Audio Note that are almost " mechanical resistence cero ". So, that TF people have to try it again before give that kind of advise
It's an AudioGon forum search on ET2 Yellow Sticky
I think I evolved into some sort of project manager on this thread ? Now if I can just find a real project management job that lets me work from home........
You can read the manual too available as a download from Eminent Technology here.
But I think the ET 2 thread is more fun. I feel we learn better when it is fun. Any questions please say hi on the ET 2 thread.
My moniker Ct0517 - are my initials and month/day I joined on here. I am in Southern Ontario, south of Lake Simcoe.
**********************
Hi Raul I would not be happy with the ET 1 myself. The ET 2.0 and 2.5 allow you to tune the I Beam compliance for different compliance cartridges. No other tonearm I am aware of allows for this. If I was using only MM's I would stick with the ET 2.0 hpm - high pressure manifold. It was introduced when MM's were most popular. That is the tonearm I use in Room B. But my main cartridges are MC. The 2.5 is designed with a thicker lower resonance spindle for MC's.
I had Bruce build me a special ET 2.5.
Now you can use MC's on the 2.0 version and MM's on the 2.5 version; and in fact a better setup 2.0 version with an MC, will outperform a weaker setup 2.5 version with an MC. Its all about setup. But for most potential, the general guide is MM's with the 2.0, MC's with the 2.5.
The Air Bearing affords isolation, and allows me to run a straight shot of unshielded wiring. The person that makes the loom - Take Five Audio, tells me NO pivot arm customers can use this loom for two reasons.
1) The erratic pivot arm, armtube behavior with the attached external wire. All pivot arms are like buying a new car with a low front right tire. The only way to fix it - lower pressure in the front left tire. Called antiskating.
2) Hum issues with the pivot tonearm itself being being bolted to the plinth. Multiple grounds are not a good thing Raul.
Remember a long time ago we used to plug all our stuff into the back of the preamp ?
Dear ct0517: Yes I said that and I’m still with: the ET is an Icon in the audio history.
My first tangential arm was the Dennesen ( that unfortunatelly I sold it. ) followed by the Southern and then the ET and after that I listen several tangential arms like the Rockport, Walker and Kuzma.
Nothing is perfect, tangential arms makes verty especial kind of sound from mid bass and up that for some of us could make the difference. I was with my ET till its ET 2 version and then sold and from all my experiences with this kind of arm design the one that I " keep " it is the ET but I like a little more the overall quality performance of a well designed and a well excuted design on pivot tonearms.
I’m with you in almost all about the ET but things are that my main audio/music priorities are a little different from yours, that’s all. Seems to me that the fact that the pivoted arms are true grounded to earth ( to arm board and then TT, and then platform and then to floor and and ) instead in the air gives that bass range characteristics I posted that air bearing does not have.
Can I live with the ET tonearm? sure I can as any one else.
While I love how digital keeps improving, assuming it is perfect Is a non-starter for me. I guess, when digital sound, near its beginning, reminded me of AM radio, but was called, "perfect sound forever", it has left me skeptical.
**Unipivots works during playing in continuous desequilibrium, its bearing damping is not to really damp the whole tonearm but, mainly, trying to put at minimum that unstability during playing and that’s all.**
A unipivot maintains stability by the distribution of mass and the center of gravity in relation to the pivot. It's like a platter on the bearing. A well designed table will have the mass of the platter distributed so it does not have a tendency to wobble. If the center of gravity is too low or high, it will be unstable.
Some unipivots use no fluid. How would they work if they relied on fluid? A unipivot feels unstable with manual cueing because there's no weight on the stylus. The system isn't loaded. As soon as you let it go, the cart straightens. If the bearing was in a constant state of disequilibrium (good one), you would not be able to listen to it. A fluid damped unipivot is damped, any way you cut it. There might be suggestions for the amount and viscosity of the fluid.
Neither the DP8 or 507 II are unipivots. They both use high mass (inertia) in the horizontal plane to optimize tracking and bass response. The difference between bearing friction and high inertia is in the type of resistance to movement. Effective mass and inertia are the same.
The 507 is designed to have high inertia (mass) laterally. You call it friction, but it's part of the design. Less than 50mg lateral sensitivity and less than 40mg vertically - also part of the design. The little vertical arm is so light, that pivot is damped to keep it from flying away. With all the damping going on, I would think you would be enthusiastic.
You're innocent until proven guilty? You keep saying the same thing over and over as if that makes you right. As soon as the thread gets interesting you start up again. You're the only one trying to prove something. Lighten up, life's too short.
Hello ct0517, It's clear from your response, and I'm guessing, of course, that the Ct in your name stands for CT in the good old USA, as I am also from CT and experiencing EXACTLY what you describe in the weather pattern.
was -13 this AM when I got up, with a wind chill of -34F. A tad colder than we're used to here.
It's even to cold to fish ( and that's cold ).
I'm going to look into the ET arms. At this point, anything goes. Thanks for the tip.
BTW CT0517, I'm trying to be as patient as possible, though it DOES NOT come naturally.
You certainly are full of surprises aren't you Raul.
Raulireugas That's why no single tangential arm I heard it can gives us the right bass range with the definition, precision, tightness and transparency that a well damped non-unipivot pivoted tonearm shows us.
Well I was the one you quoted on this thread that was comparing vinyl to the 15 IPS tape master dub. The part I left out during that specific Dv505/fr64s/tape comparo; is that it was Room B. Not even my main room. The Studer tape deck is on a stand with wheels.
It makes me wonder Raul, why you posted this on our ET 2 Tonearm Owners thread ?
raulireugas Dear ct0517: Yes, I remember the first time that I saw that very good picture and was my wife who took my attention about.
Obviously that beautiful house is a house where the owner likes music and know what this means in a home audio system ( I'm talking not of RR but the real owner. ).
IMHO, the ET tonearm is today an icon/sign in the audio history.
raulireugas In theory tangential tonearms must be the best alternative but as always in audio when that theory goes to reality during playing that theory can't be confirmed because unfortunatelly the analog experience is way imperfect and theory comes and has foundation on perfect world.
I can agree with this to a point. And having been doing this vinyl stuff for about 40 years, since I was 13, I will say this again. This is all about setup - vinyl. A lesser design set up well, can indeed out perform a better design that is setup just so so. But the better design will always have more potential. I enjoy my vinyl music only my ET 2.5 Air Bearing Linear tracker. A custom build from Bruce. details on my virtual system.
Now based on my personal experiences and some friends over the years. Here is what I found. The audiophile with one table, tonearm, cartridge at a time, will achieve greater potential with that one setup; than some one running multiple tables and 6- 8 tonearms. It comes down to time, learning and experience. Like in real life, you can have someone that knows something about many things; or you can have a person that knows a lot about one thing. Now when I see a setup that has a couple 2-3 tables, and 5-6-7-8 tonearms without a properly set up air bearing Linear tracker, I say to myself first. That person is very biased. And then I say what a shame. All that effort and not one tonearm that can track an LP properly all the way through. No grin No smile. Just being audiophile serious, and I consider myself a music lover.
fwiw re: The ET tonearm - original 2.0, and the newer 2.5 (meant for MC cartridges). The owner requires time to learn how everything that was designed on it works. Most audiophiles that contact me; I tell them to stick to their pivots because I know they don't have patience. Even though all professional reviews of the older base ET 2.0 I have read were rave reviews. None of the reviewers demonstrated knowledge past basic setup. Best rating of 6 out of 10. No reviewer ever discussed how to achieve highest vertical inertia with it for example. This is how one gets the best bass - master tape quality. This has been discussed in detail on the ET2 thread if you're really interested in learning. All I need to do is ask a ET2 previous owner how they managed the weights on the I Beam, and I know if they knew what they were doing based on their knowledge.
So it is a unique tonearm that requires out of the box thinking, and time with it to acquire the knowledge. Like I said most audiophile friends I know lack patience, and old habits are difficult to break. This is why I never recommended the ET2 to Crazy Bill on this thread. Maybe you really need to be a little crazy to own it.
Wish I was Mexico right now. Our so far mild winter went to record breaking cold. Fun hobby. A hobby for some of us anyway.
fleib: Unipivots works during playing in continuous desequilibrium, its bearing damping is not to really damp the whole tonearm but, mainly, trying to put at minimum that unstability during playing and that’s all.
What is your " sientist " relationship between that high inertia and high tonearm bearing friction in that tonearm design?
I own the 505 and I bougth it because I like it that design and looks " diferent " but the reality is that cartridge after cartridge, with diferents headshells and using Stevenson, L/B set up geometries I never achieved in no one of those top cartridges what those cartridges shows me in other tonearms and not only because is not a well damped tonearm, high bearing friction too but that high very high mass that looks the cartridge when it’s ridding the LP surface. I like the tonearm but not its overall performance, it does not really helps to the cartridge task.
It does not matters your " scientist " opinion unipivots are unstable during playback and till today no one can change it yet.
What did it some tonearm manufacturers to " hide " in some ways that critical stability problem?: choose better tonearm build materials as VPI and Duran gone with is blend material choice to damp in better way everykind of distortions but unstability is there does not disappears.
One point dissipate better that 2-3 way street: your opinion, not mine.
I remember carefully when appeared for the very first time the tip-toes by ( I think ) Mod Squad that works exactly as the unipivot bearing. All the high end community jump of hapiness and maybe there were no single audiophile that did not use it. The tip-toes were designed to dissipate vibrations and convert it on other kind of energy and for the electronics or TT been stables with the 3 point configuration instead 4 footers.
I bought several sets of those tip toes and learned through many years that in reality are not in favor to " eliminate " those generated distortions but in some way amplify it or changed in other that still does harm the quality reproduction and because the feedback of those " vibrations " that pass trhough those tip toes never disappear the problem, are very uneffective but thank’s to tip toes todays we have all those and diferent kind of footers/dampers to use it in almost all our system links.
You can test in easy way what I’m saying ( and you don’t have to be a scientistific that certainly you are not. ). Take 3 tip toes and put under your CD player or TT or preamp or even your amps and see what happen against the damping " tools " you are using today and what you experienced is exactly what happen with unipivots on that regards. Additional the unipivots has that unstability " problem ".
Fleib " I’m inocent till the prosecutor can prove I’m guilty ". It’s not me who must prove anything. I made and make my posts and if you disagree with then you have to prove " I’m guilty " and certainly till now you showed and proved nothing at all.
Btw, do you know why you can’t do it and never will?.
Dear asvjerry: Nothing is perfect. Tangential, unipivots and pivoted non-unipivot tonearms designs has its own trade offs.
In theory tangential tonearms must be the best alternative but as always in audio when that theory goes to reality during playing that theory can't be confirmed because unfortunatelly the analog experience is way imperfect and theory comes and has foundation on perfect world.
That's why no single tangential arm I heard it can gives us the right bass range with the definition, precision, tightness and transparency that a well damped non-unipivot pivoted tonearm shows us.
As I said the name of the game are those trade offs with tonearms designs and whcigh of those trade offs do lees harm to the cartridge needs for it performs at its best.
I'm for the well damped pivot tonearms and from this kind of design my choice is for the non unipivots.
The real and main subject here is: which are on each one of us the prefered trade offs?, sounds easy but way hard task we have.
The unipivot has some advantages which are undeniable. Those advantages are reflected in the number of top performing unipivot designs. One advantage is damping, a feature so highly touted in this thread. When SME came out with the model V, many design features were to control resonance. That included the tapered armtube and the fixed headshell. High end "contenders" in the '80s were Zeta and Alphason 100S - fixed headshells. The advantage of a fixed headshell is to eliminate the physical boundary and its tendency to reflect vibrations back to the cartridge. This might not be an insurmountable advantage, but an advantage nonetheless.
By its nature, a fluid damped unipivot can easily be critically damped. The potential to over or under damp a unipivot should not be considered a fault. Any arm can be set up improperly.
Most of the mechanical energy from the cartridge does not get converted to electricity. That's why top cart designs today use exotic materials and design features to dissipate energy. An elegant solution for excess mechanical vibrations from the cartridge is to dissipate down the armtube and convert to heat by the mass of the arm or plinth, or run it out of a foot. The contention is, this is more easily accomplished by a unipivot; one clear path for vibrations to exit, while conventional bearings are a two way street.
The task of a tonearm seems impossible and contradictory, to be a stable platform while completely free to move laterally and vertically. Two dimensions of movement is an oversimplification. If an arm is moving laterally and vertically at the same time, the movement is angular or three dimensional. Are conventionally pivoted arms necessarily more detailed and exact? I think performance defies that generalization.
Our Mexican friend likes to use the word distortion. This is meaningless without supporting evidence. The Dynavector 507 II is a bi-axis design with intentionally high inertia laterally, and low vertically. This type of inertia scheme is used by the DP8, apparently to good effect.
I'm not writing this in support of arms I haven't heard, but an arm designer shouldn't be expected to answer ignorant, unintelligible assertions.
....and no mention of a tangential arm in this entire thread.
Just an observation...don't mean to throw gasoline on anybody's embers 'out there'. It's all preference IMHO, and where that leads you...and leaves you.
Dear wrm0325: Unipivots? Moerch, Talea, VPI, Graham and some other unipivots are good tonearms. I own some unipivots and tested others too.
Years ago when the Talea appears for the first time somne one started a thread to speaks on that new tonearm and there not only posted many persons but included Agoner's that were beta testers of the tonearm and MR. Durand posted too. Well I gave my point of view about unipivot tonearm designs and all its drawbacks/disadvantages, against non-unipivot tonearm designs like Triplanar or any other pivoted one, that does not really helps for the cartridge can shows at its best. I don'ty want to repeat what I posted there where I invited to the designer to put some light on what I posted but unfortunatelly he did not and stay in silence.
What is the first cartridge critical neccesity that asks to a tonearm: STABILITY with CERO TOLERANCE for the cartridge can ride " freely " the LP grooves modulations. That STABILITY reside/belongs primary in the tonearm bearing design that not only must has low friction but totally tight with no loose anywhere in that bearing design.
By " nature " unipivot is an unstable design and we can't change it it does not matters what unipivot designers do about ( at least till today. ) and that unstability is reflected at micro levels when the cartridge is ridding the LP. We have to think in that huge demands that represent all the generated forces down the stylus and grooves modulations when cartridge is in the trackibg motion and those huge ( every type of forces and its feedback ) forces and tracking must be controled by the tonearm bearing and it's not posible yet for a unipivot to achieve this main and critical cartridge/tonearm targets.
I'm not saying that unipivots are bad because sounds good but as everything that sounds good has different quality gradding and certainly unipivots are not at the top of that grading because that unstability only is in favor to help to generate additional distortions and " push " the cartridge tracking abilities against it when must be the other side around: to help to that LP ridding.
Every one thinks that unipivots has very low bearing friction when in reality is not in that way because all the tonearm/cartridge weight/mass is concentrated at only one point that not only means not low pivot friction but that everything and everykind of distortions and feedback goes through that single point doing things worst that in a non-unipivot tonearm design and instead to help de cartridge goes " against it ".
The Technics EPA 100 has the lower bearing friction of any pivoted tonearm I know, it's only 4mg even well regarded non-unipivot tonearm designs are much much higher as is the Dynavector 505/507 MK2: 50mg!, yes you read it well: 50 vs 4mg. Unipivots can't compare in this regards with the EPA 100 and obviously has not all itys advantages.
I own two top of the line Grace tonearms, one unipivot and thwe other with gimball bearing design. I made several tests where everything the same: cartridge, tonearm wires, IC cables, etc. the gimball always performs with better quality level.
Unipivots are knows for its fast, open and transparent type of sound but those are the transparency or " alive " that some us are accustom to: higher distortions and that's all.
I totally agree with atmasphere because at least in that regards that's my experiences with each single unipivot tonearm and I know that in the Kairos just can't be in other way because the tonearm bearing has the same unipivot principle:
"""
The Talea was very sweet but simply lacked the bass impact. No amount of adjustment brought it out. """
That the Kairos likes more to folkfreak than the Triplanar does not change in any way the premises posted here. Triplanar is more faithful to the real music information with better definition and lower distortions on the fundamental and harmonics frequencies and bass range and more important: RIGHT bass range reproduction is not only the foundation of the home musioc sytem performance but what gives the exactkly and precise frame to all the frequency range.
I don't posted about to open a new window in this thread is and was only to share my experiences and of course that I can be wrong but if I'm you I mantain some distance from the unipivots if I want to obtain the best of my cartridges.
A friend who worked as an engineer in the aircraft industry has a favorite saying, "Don't worry about picking the fly sh*t out of the pepper."
Good one Pryso :^)
I have this Technics SL1200 that I have loaned out over the years. It has a black Grado on it. It was returned to me a few months ago and it's there staring at me so I got curious. From my earlier post I set it at its lowest VTA setting and took VTF reading, then went to the highest VTA setting. The difference in VTF was about .15 gms. ( 2.00 gm to start and then it dropped to about 1.85gms) But the overhang was way out. I have tried this in the past on the Dynavector DV505, but you need to be careful with that tonearm. If not careful when adjusting VTA, the heavy arm could come down on its column and maybe toast the cartridge.
While I don't pretend to have expertise in such things it seems reasonable that many LPs (i.e. not being perfectly flat) will cause more variation in VTF than that. As a folk freak, hill and gully rider?
A friend who worked as an engineer in the aircraft industry has a favorite saying, "Don't worry about picking the fly sh*t out of the pepper."
To be clear, I’m talking about changes in VTF of +/- 0.05g here so nothing that’s going to do any long term damage to anything. It may be just as much room temperature interacting with the damping in the cartridge, who knows and it’s certainly nothing I’ve ever heard an issue with on listening. Also if I was that bothered I could simply take off the smaller counterweight and adjust only the main weight which has a locking screw, that way no concerns
Personally I find VTF the least important parameter in tonearm setup, unlike alignment, SRA and Azimuth the difference between being perfectly on (to +/- 0.01g say) and accurate to +/- 0.1g has never seemed that big, at least with my Air Tight PC-1. For example on going from the TriPlanar to the Kairos I was able to go from 1.85g to 2.05g, the former had been necessary to get the cartridge to be open and lively on the TriPlanar wheras with the much better controlled Kairos I could take up the VTF into more of the typical manufacturers recommended range and get a better sound without losing energy. And lets not mention my other cartridge the Miyajima Zero which tracks at a whopping 3.5g and shifting things 0.5g or more is no big deal
I am surprised. I did think about a tonearm part problem when I read your original findings, but I guess I assumed due to its cost/low production, that a part as critical as this would be addressed. But then I believe that I also read this week, something about another expensive tonearm’s part actually changing its shape.... Hard to believe.
Maybe I should add a small dot of locking compound to the thread and all will be well.
Personally I would not accept this kind of solution. If it was me its going back to the manufacturer. I realize that depending on where one lives, in relation to where something is made; could prove challenging from a logistics and time period.
If anything I would try something non permanent first. Maybe a tiny dot of Blue Tac - but Blue Tac also dampens.
No, not what I meant at all. I am well aware of the VTF/VTA interaction you describe and appreciate the need to adjust the two iteratively. First time I observed this was on my old TriPlanar and the effect was not subtle (from recollection 0.5G or more going from my initial VTA/SRA setting to where I finally settled)
What I am referring to is that the small counterweight on the Kairos is rather loosely threaded and thus with gross movement of the arm (i.e. moving it on and off records) it may wander slightly. I've never seen this happen but have merely observed that when I recheck VTF it has sometimes shifted despite my having made no adjustments. Maybe I should add a small dot of locking compound to the thread and all will be well.
Hi Folkfreak - thank you for the reply and for sharing your experiences. If I may comment on a couple of your points.
Critical to this is the ability to go backwards and forwards on tonearm height to dial in SRA very finely.
My one knock on the Kairos however would be that I think the small VTF weight may wander (i.e. drift on the thread) in use -- keep rechecking VTF regularly and you are good however.
I am making an assumption here not having used this tonearm personally; that assumption being the issue of VTF drifting in this case, is not with the tonearm part itself, but physics. Please allow me to use a crude analogy to illustrate my point. Anyone can try this. Gather a blank piece of paper, flat shim whatever material - say one inch think, and a long marker.
Place the piece of paper on a table, draw a straight line with the marker using the shim to make the line straight. Now hold the marker with your thumb, middle and index fingers, and lay your hand sideways, on the line. Hold the marker level like a tonearm armtube, and lower the tip until a dot is made on the paper. Now put the shim on the line and your hand on top of the one inch shim. This represents a higher VTA position. Lower marker again. This time the dot will be closer to the line (over hang has changed) because of the height change, if you could weigh the marker dots the first one - with the lower height (VTA) would be heavier. Again a crude example, the experiment came to me many years ago when I observed this phenomena.
To observe this phenomena using an actual tonearm; set your tonearm on its lowest VTA adjustment point. Measure the overhang and VTF. Now raise to the highest VTA position and measure overhang and VTF again. Overhang and VTF will have changed and if one wants to be the double A - Accurate and Anal, both need to be reset as well as Azimuth depending on the specific tonearm, each time VTA needs to be changed in ones listening room. From a listening aspect, my experiences have been some stylus types are affected by VTA more than others; but that's a cartridge/stylus thread discussion.
Folkfreak - I would look forward to the results of you trying this with your tonearm.
@OP Crazy Bill - if you are using the B60 Base accessory with your FR66, I would be interested in you trying this as well. Only takes 2 minutes.
**********************************
A little about my approach.
I play all kinds of records meaning old records, new ones, all genres. They were pressed all over the place and I am all over the place with my selections as well. I can get into routines, but then one day I pull a record on a whim, like it, and that gets me on another routine/ genre. Love discovering new music. So, I have found some records are, to use one common word, brighter, than others. Why ? Many years ago I found the findings in the Eminent Technology ET2 tonearm owners manual very interesting.
Just a summary - pulled from there, not word for word. These are basic guidelines.
Many records are cut with a 16 - 20 degree vertical angle.
Average cartridge vertical angles are slighter higher than 22 degrees. This leads to a mismatch.
European cutting standards closely match vertical angles of phono cartridges.
If a cartridge vertical angle is higher than 22 degree its performance may be improved by tilting it back 2-3 degrees.
If the measured vertical tracking angle of a cartridge is 18-20 degrees it will probably perform best with its top parallel to the record.
Some cartridges are sensitive to VTA, others are not.
Vertical Tracking Angle . See this link pic. quick grab from the internet.
So, for someone like myself that plays all kinds of different records from different pressing plants. This tells me the vertical angle cut in the record itself could vary. The record is the Alpha here - no question to me. Does anybody doubt this ? I do realize this AudioGon site is mostly about the gear. And I also recognize that if an Audiophile is listening to the same type/pressed records - the value or importance of VTA may become less important. But I still feel its important to understand what is going on when we do hear differences; especially when the only changed variable in a given listening session, are the records themselves.
My reference tonearm has been designed to optimize the vertical tracking angle. And if you think back to the marker dot example above. This tonearm's VTA "block" contains a worm gear /cylinder that actually moves the armtube in and out, as you raise or lower the VTA, for different record angle cuts and thicknesses. Its frequency of use is all based on what I hear in my room. I have found how much it is used, depends on the cartridge/stylus type, and my tolerance level, the latter part varies day to day. The VTA mechanism on this tonearm is patented and keeps the VTF, overhang, azimuth from changing.
ct0517 -- further to "repeatability" when it comes to tonearm setup. Firstly I should discuss my approach to setup. It’s the typical iterative VTF/SRA approach using a Cartridge Man stylus gauge (best device of it’s type I’ve found, unreliable little buggers however that are prone to breaking down) and then setting SRA using a DinoScope. Azimuth is set roughly using a Fozgometer then fine tuned by ear using mono female voice (method per Durand, see his site for reference)
Critical to this is the ability to go backwards and forwards on tonearm height to dial in SRA very finely. Of the four arms I’ve owned recently the SME-IV is a joke (one way only adjustment and for that even you needed to buy the FD-IV setup). The Wand+ is a set screw and manual raise/lower, obviously rough but bear in mind the price of this arm is much less than all the others. The Triplanar at first glance seems fine but the reality is the dial based approach is quite confusing -- you have to remember a) which way you turn and b) how many times -- in reality I was always needing to do multiple turns to remind myself if I was raising or lowering and then dial back -- a real pain. The Kairos is a simple gradated dial on the base, easy as pie.
Finally to dial in azimuth on the Triplanar you do have a grub screw which is quite precise but again there’s no direct easily visible feedback between adjustment and the arm wheras on the Kairos being a unipivot you can directly see how raising the balance bar tilts the arm clockwise (as viewed from the front) and vice versa. The Wand+ is also quite intuitive once you get the hang of it, you move a set of offset weights left or right to tilt the arm to one side or another, seems clunky but it is actually very precise and repeatable.
In conclusion repeatability and ease in adjustment comes from a clear visible link between the adjustment and the impact therof which is true for the Kairos while it was not for the TriPlanar. My one knock on the Kairos however would be that I think the small VTF weight may wander (i.e. drift on the thread) in use -- keep rechecking VTF regularly and you are good however.
Dear lewm: """
Probably Raul himself did not mean to go there. """
exactly. My post was only like a paragon/example of something with the same effect to explain why we like higher distortions and do not like lower distortions.
To Fleib and anyone else who was apparently offended by my post. I do apologize for going off topic. I was responding to Raul. But I too dislike the old analog vs digital shouting match, and I let myself fall into that trap for a moment. Mea culpa. Probably Raul himself did not mean to go there.
However, if there was something else I wrote that was provocative in a negative way, please clue me in.
Dear ochremoon: """
not another boring digital vs analog one! """ ????
That vs exist NO any more what today exist are two valuable alternatives: digital that's the one that performs nearer to the recording with the lower distortions and the analog one that performs a litle more away from the recording and with higher distortions.
My advise is that if we can then try to enjoy both and I repeat this: if in our system we don't like what we listenen through the digital alternative or what we listen through a well damped tonearm then we have somewhere a heavy system problem and we must to find out where and make the right changes in our beloved home audio system.
Dear syntax: I stopped for almost 3 years to post/participate in Agon forums and it's incredible ( as people say in my country: " a case for the spider " ) that people like you still are hevy sticky to the same distortions generators proudly showing your very high ignorance level and I said proudly because that's " recorded " through your virtual system. It's pity that peple like you just do not grow-up and you have to give thank's for that to your audio advisers/sellers that are very happy to take money from you, you are the audio paradise for any audio seller. Nothing wrong with me, go a head: to where? because you just don't move anywhere.
Now, you came to this thread not as a contributor that have something on hand to help and if you want to do it please do it a favor and a favor to all of us and answer this question:
in what way or how your 66 distortion generator item helps for the cartridge can shows it at its best? where belongs its " wonderful " advantages " and which are those advantes and why is that way?
You are or at least think you are an expert and for sure you can give us the ight answers. Thank's in advance for that.
In the other side your you-tube link is the third time you posted on Agon and coming from you has no effect in me. Here too you can go on! and please show here your expertise and enrich the thread.
Friends, I know that this gentleman will not post about but we will see if this time disclose him-self.
Folkfreak It is easy to set up once you get a handle on how to do it and once set up allows excellent and repeatable fine tuning of VTF, SRA and Azimuth -- the latter via adjusting the height of the "outrigger" that controls the lateral roll.
@Folkfreak
I am curious what you mean by the word "repeatable" in your sentence ? Looking to learn. thank you.
Lewm Even Durand has now eschewed the use of wood and gone to some sort of synthetic material for their arm wands. Seems odd, because the company was founded on the principle that their particular choice of wood from a particular species of tree was key.
Dear ninetynine: Certainly I don't care of your " teacher ". In the other side, because seems to me that you agree with that " teacher " please tell me where and why losted I the " point "? and which is your point?
Dear lewm: No it’s not but in this thread some gentlemans like more the additional distortions generated in a non-damped tonearm ot that one That I refereing who posted that the vaccum hold down LP ) after market item suck out the music life and here some one else posted almost the same and the digital alternative is a good example of what we don’t like when something is " overdamped " because is " life less, suck out the music life or something like that ".
It’s clear to me that almost all want to listen not what is in the LP grooves modulations but all the system generated distortions and as greater the best ( for some. ).
"""" But the digital process, both A to D and D to A, brings with it its own set of distortions, ones that apparently are far more noticeable and irritating to the human brain .... """
yes, nothing is perfect but certainly digital has more music information with lower lot lower distortions because what some of you don’t like are lower distortions than what you are accustom to.
Please read again my post and you will " see " " thousands and thousands " of added distortions in the LP experience that does not exist in the digital one. This is a fact.
ct/chris posted a first hand experience between the master tape and the LP same traks and he listening " huge " bass distortions in the LP experience that does not exist in the R2R master tape. Even that all my posts detractors don´t take in count, maybe all they think that can " close " the sun with their finger even that all they know that they can’t.
Now, with the today digital alternative comes a purer music information with lower lower distortions than in the LP experience. That we like it or not is another matter and a confirmation that almost all likes higher distortions and that’s why we don’t like digital alternative that I repeat is nearer to its technology advantages as never before.
D to A and A to D is not any more a problem for our brain. Native 32/384 digital technologies has almost no distortions that can ( as years ago ) offend our " ears " and still today improving each single day.
You only have to read all the new digital items around us as: clock’s, iphones, tv’s , tablets, laptops and the like: incredible all the news about and fortunatelly for us that like the music at home all those digital developments migrate and migrated to our music hobby players.
We still can deny the digital alternative but is useless to do it ( there are not arguments to. ) and instead of that what we must do it is enjoying it along the LP one alternative.
This is what mikelavigne posted last november here in agon:
""" now happening is the Debussy solo piano recording by Ilyn Iten from Wave Kinetics Music. this was recorded last May in upstate New York from the same mic feed in 30ips 1/2" tape and Quad dsd. there will be analog tape offered along with 45rpm pressings, and Quad dsd along with 2xdsd, regular dsd, and all manner of PCM too. not sure there will be a PCM based vinyl pressing, but this recording will certainly demonstrate the best of analog verses the best of digital. right now I have a few cuts from the recording in Quad dsd and it is an outstanding recording. """"
I think every one knows who is ML and knows his Agon virtual system, well on that post please re-read this:
""" I have a few cuts from the recording in Quad dsd and it is an outstanding recording ..."""
If you remember my posts more that 4 years ago I said something very similar to what I posted here: that the digital alternative has more music information and less distortions and this statement not only stay but today improved!! and you said that b" modern " digital become very excellent and you are right.
In my self evaluation methodology/process I use some digital tracks because nothing in the LP can tell me what is really happening down there: I need to hear those track with the lower distortions recorded and digital is a champ.
Btw, if any one of you can enjoy the LP experience in your audio system and can’t enjoy it at least at the same level then you have a system big problem and digital does not counts on that and is not the culprit link and no one needs a digital megabucks player to attest what I'm saying technology and 0s and 1s makes that low distortion music!.
It’s the same when we don’t like a well damped tonearm and we prefer the undamped one: big system problem, that’s all.
What's wrong with you? Why did you post that digital crap in a thread about tonearms? Apparently science, reason and logic have no affect on your opinion, but you're off topic and way out of line.
If you're having emotional problems, please get help.
**I suspected that was the case and so made sure that I clarified my position, which is that there are two forms of damping- one of which cannot be overdone as I had previously stated, and the other (which I never use) which most definitely can!**
You never used the fluid damping trough on the Triplanar?
There are many kinds of damping schemes and it can certainly be overdone and/or misapplied. Try some rubber washers between cart and headshell and hear how it sounds.
Raul, Is it your thesis therefore that you and we ought to be listening to digital sound reproduction? But the digital process, both A to D and D to A, brings with it its own set of distortions, ones that apparently are far more noticeable and irritating to the human brain. That's the brain we are stuck with. In fact, the whole premise that measured distortion ought to be a determinant of what we listen to and how we listen is flawed, because we already know that most of our methods for measuring distortion, starting with THD and going on from there, do not describe what it is or isn't that makes an audio system sound "real" or not real. So, while I admit it's an imperfect way to go through life, subjective judgement is relevant, especially when there is collective majority agreement on the subject of analog vs digital sound reproduction.
My private thesis is as follows: (1) Real instruments and voices in real time produce harmonics. (2) Microphones fail more or less to pick up these harmonics in their fullest extent. More is lost during processing of the resulting signal, and some irritating distortions can be added, too. (3) Reproduced music from which such low level harmonics have been stripped sounds less real because of the loss of harmonics. (4) Thus, a little bit of added harmonic distortion at the end of the chain results in music that is perceived as more real than if no or less harmonic distortion is present.
And again, digital does other things that are not favorable. That said, "modern" digital reproduction is certainly become very excellent. I don't close the door on anything I would otherwise like.
For years analog audiophiles expressed that: digital experiences sounds/performs " lifeless " ( overall. ) against the analog experience.
Why is that?::what are we missing in the digital alternative?:
well, we are missing several " things ". In no order we are missing: two eq. RIAA processes, at least 3-4 amplification processes ( with multiple parts on each one, at least two input/output connector and the IC cables ( 1.0’-1.5 m. and soldered joints, fragility of the audio signal more prone to be contaminated for air electromagnetic pollution, we are missing the TT, cartridge, tonearm and the like, the LP anomalies and friction and cartridge " problems " to the LP ridding, effect of the SPL from the speakers through the analog rig, etc, etc.
In all of what we are mising the audio signal has to pass through and at each of those single steps that signal is heavy degraded and " walking " on with accumulation of all kind of distortions and that’s only part of what happens on LP playback but there are other " things " we are missing on the recording process too.
So what we are missing is just DISTORTIONS. That many of us like those distortions is not the subject and it can’t does nothing to help on all those signal degrading distortions that we have not in the digital alternative.
We are not accustom to purer audio signal and that’s why we don’t feel good when listening to it. All our audio life we are listening to more distortions than pure music information so our reaction is against the sound that has a lot lower distortions and we have not to be scientist to understand that, just common sense as I posted " over and over " in this thread.
That's wy we have to " overdamp " that signal at each system audio link.
Regarding the Durand tonearms I can certainly speak to the current model the Kairos that has replaced the Talea. As noted the tonearm material is now a composite rather than wood, as well as performing better I believe this material is easier to work with and more consistent. The Kairos is also a very elegant and simplified turntable, a unipivot stripped down to its essence. It is easy to set up once you get a handle on how to do it and once set up allows excellent and repeatable fine tuning of VTF, SRA and Azimuth -- the latter via adjusting the height of the "outrigger" that controls the lateral roll. Full details can be found in my review which is linked to below. I suspect you will be very pleased with this arm.
The Kairos replaced a TriPlanar in my setup and the comparison is not even close, the Kairos was superior in all respects in particular the ability to keep control of even the most complex and highly modulated material. Since posting the review below I've had another several months experience and find myself enjoying everything I throw at it
Does anyone here have any experience comparing the Durand and the Reed ?
I've not heard that comparison but I have heard it against the Triplanar. I used my own LP (IOW, one I recorded myself, Canto General) for the comparison. The Talea was very sweet but simply lacked the bass impact. No amount of adjustment brought it out. Its easy to see why when you look at the arm design- the bearings really aren't in the right place so what happens with bass notes is you loose tracking pressure. Of course, there may well be other variables we couldn't lock down but that is one that is pretty obvious.
WRM, I've heard the Talea2 with a ZYX Universe cartridge at the home of my neighbor who was then using downstream equipment much like mine. (His system has since undergone a sea change, except for retaining his Galibier turntable and two Durand tonearms.) It's an imperfect comparison, but I thought the Talea2/UNI combo was absolutely divine. There's no way to be sure whether it surpassed my Reed 2A, but I'd have to guess that at worst it is just as good. In fact, these two tonearms have me thinking that wood done right is a good choice of material for an arm wand, although I know there are those who would disagree strongly (and I don't care to argue the point). Even Durand has now eschewed the use of wood and gone to some sort of synthetic material for their arm wands. Seems odd, because the company was founded on the principle that their particular choice of wood from a particular species of tree was key.
Dear mmakshak: """
I can see, in theory, why static balanced would be superior, but I wonder if just a little resistance, provided by some dynamic balancing, might actually work better in practice(as advocated by the 1/3 dynamic argument). That might provide a little resistance to big movements and such, while keeping the ringing.at an acceptable level.. """
the best " ringing is no ringing ". and you are right not only on the static balanced tonearm design advantage but about that " resistance " during LP playback.
Certainly the solution is not a dynamic balanced design, the tonearm designers must found out other kind of mechanisms to do it because is need it.
My advise is to stay away of dynamic balanced tonearm designs and obviously on that non-damped or not well damped ones. Same for the universal headshells.
Thanks Lewm, I absolutely intend to dial in proper azimuth adjustment no matter which tonearm I am using. I only meant I didn’t need the on the fly adjustment of the Reed 3P which Thomas referrred to. Once I set it optimally with the Feickert program for whichever cartridge/tonearm I’m using I intend to leave it. So adjusting it at the headshell once is just fine with me.
It’s good to hear you are so high on the 2A. IF I move away from the FR66s, it is definitely on my short list. I’ll also have to check out the OL arms that Thomas referred to. They look promising. The Moerch also deserves a look.
That said, however, if I do make a change, based upon what I’ve read, the Durand Talea2 really looks special.
Does anyone here have any experience comparing the Durand and the Reed ?
Wrm, I own a 10.5" Reed 2A with the optional azimuth adjustment. It's one of my favorite tonearms. I don't quite understand why you say that you don't "need" the azimuth adjustment feature because of owning the Feickert Adjust stuff. The Feickert tells you whether you need to adjust azimuth or not; it does not ameliorate the need for azimuth adjustment, if it's indeed needed. I am sure I am missing something in your logic. That said, the azimuth adjuster on my Reed 2A, located at the headshell, is not my favorite feature of the tonearm. I think some rigidity is sacrificed in favor of the adjuster. On the other hand, it's a good location for azimuth adjustment, so that the azimuth is adjusted in the plane of the headshell offset, not wrt the pivot, as on the Triplanar.
You must have a verified phone number and physical address in order to post in the Audiogon Forums. Please return to Audiogon.com and complete this step. If you have any questions please contact Support.
