Tonearm recommendation

Hi raul
i compared it against a vpi 12, micro seiki ma 505, sme3. More importantly when I first got it I did experience a lack of bass. Then I learned how to set it up and it produced at least the equivalent with a better soundstage and detail. 

chakster, twice now you've used the term "budged".  First time I thought that was a typo and you intended to say budget.  That is why I suggested Jelco.  And BTW, without checking compliance numbers I did use a couple of Grados and possibly a Shure or Stanton in my Premier FT-3 without issue.  All that was several years ago.  Anyway, I don't know what budged means.

But now you speak of Reed, Schick, EPA-100 and 100 Mk 2.  None of those are budget arms.  There was an EPA-100 Mk 2 on Ebay not long ago for around $1,800.  Your situation may be different than mine but I would not consider that a budget arm.

Hello all - Chakster mentioned the Stax UA-7, which I'm currently using with a handful of different cartridges whilst mounted on a TD-124.  It's geometry is a bit unusual, putting the inner null point substantially inside even the Stevenson solution (at 56mm), even though it has a longish (for a "9-inch" arm) 240mm effective length.  I like this tonearm's general design and versitility, the low pivot friction, the consistency of its anti-skate mechanism, the graceful aesthetic, and the overall quality of fit and finish.  I'm consistently happy with the sound quality from a wide variety of different cartridges.  But I've never understood why they chose the geometry they did . . . mainly because I have yet to find a record that has modulation so close to the center as to justify it.

In exploring other geometries, my main fork in the road was whether or not the stock 20-degree offset is to be observed . . . and if this is the case, one cannot pull the inner null point toward the outside of the record without also pushing the outer null point towards the center, and if the tracking error is to be kept fairly constant at the outside of the record, then there must be a corresponding increase in both the effective length and the mounting distance.  If one alters the offset, then it's possible to move the null points both further apart and further away from the center . . . that is, towards the Baerwald solution.

I personally consider the act of changing tonearm geometry in the same vein as that of all equipment modifications . . . it's worth it to the extent that one is solving specific issues with a reasonable amount of elegance and precision.  But there's a point after where a certain amount change starts to fly in the face of the original design, and then you have to ask yourself . . . "If I'm changing it this much, do I really like this thing enough to own it in the first place?"  On tonearm geometry, it's obviously a matter of degrees (couldn't resist the pun) . . . 

I ended up mounting it at the stock mounting distance from the spindle . . . I wanted to try the stock geometry out of respect for the designers and so I could thoroughly correlate the sound with my own preconceptions of what the "correct" geometry should be.  I've found that it leaves little to be desired with elliptical and spherical styli (i.e. Shelter 501 and Denon carts), and it also sounds great with an integrated-style headshell for B&O cartridges (MMC20CL and rebuilt MMC6000) . . . the latter with a custom lighter counterweight, which combined with the headshell, gives an appropriate reduction on mass for the higher compliance cartridges.

For the fancier MCs (Cadenza Bronze and Delos) I've pulled the overhang up to 15.5 mm and the offset to 21.7 degrees (2.5mm and 1.7 degrees from stock) - this is a solution "in the Baerwald direction", and the results are outstanding.  I arrived at this by playing with the fit of a few cartridges in the stock headshell, and coming to the conclusion that there was only so much extra mounting room before it really started to "feel wrong" and become a decidedly inelegant setup.  I do understand the concern that altering the overhang creates a variation of azimuth with vertical deflection of the tonearm, but when you actually see it in practice, 1.7 degrees is extremely small to affect this compared to the length of the arm and the deflection of a moderate record warp.

I will echo the sentiment that whatever the geometry is chosen, precise alignment is an absolute must.  I'm very much an arc-protractor guy, and I have them made as required for every turntable/tonearm geometry solution I set up.  My approach is to calculate the geometry with an Excel spreadsheet, generate an HPGL file using my PC-board design software that has the appropriate arc placement and null points, and have them machined to order by Front Panel Express, usually for about $30 apiece.  I verify the spindle-to-pivot distance on existing mountings usually with a 12" dial caliper and a bit of basic math . . . for new mountings I have a variety of dummy tonearm posts machined locally, combined with the caliper and/or mounting-distance bars/plates sourced locally or from Front Panel Express.

The key to precise alignment is to use methods that allow each dimension or angle to be verified against each other, to make sure your measurement techniques properly fit the specific hardware, and to understand what the required tolerances are for each dimension.  Being a mm away from perfect on the spindle-to-pivot is VERY different from being a mm off on the overhang.

@pryso you're right, forgive my english. I believe any tonearms under $1500 considering a budget arms in hi-end business. Vintage Stax and Denon from Raul's list cost only $500-700 normally which is really cheap. Ebay is not the right place for vintage japanese stuff (tonearms or cartridges) imho.

I'm looking for light effective mass vintage tonearm for second system for high compliance mm cartridges. 

I already have Reed 3p for mid compliance carts and Schick for very low compliance cartridges.  

dover: """   do you have right now on hand the 505?

If yes just try Baerwald or Löfgren alignment changing the P2S distance from Stevenson. Then listen and listen in between ( B, L and S alignments. ) and return here to share your experiences there.

If not, your post is useless and futile this time. """

That's what I posted and ask to you looking for your in focus/precise answer or answers and this is what you answered:


"""  You are wrong again.
I own a Dynavector DV501 ....."""


I can't see why I'm wrong because I'm not saying you don't own a Dyna tonearm and things are that you own the 501 that shares exactly the same geometry design than the 505. Where is the problem because my question was very specific for the 505 or the 501 that is similar.

Instead to give a in focus answer your first sentence was trying to disregards ( as always with no single real contribution. ) mine but things are that in that same sentence who is wrong is you. Go figure!

Now, instead to say something in direct reference to my questioning post you followed your starting sentences with a " history/tale " that has no apparent reason to do it other that try to justify your self in some way ( what did you try to justify with that " tale "?. ). Has no sense to me that history that I really don't care because don't gives  any " light " in my questioning to you.

Never mind, I really don't care about your answers about because you have no real and serious answers.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.

chakster, with apologies to the OP for this sidetrack I will offer arm suggestions specifically for high compliance cartridges as all were introduced during their peak popularity (no particular order).
-  Infinity/ADC
-  Mayware Formula IV or others in this series (I adapted one to an AR-XA table)
-  SME 3009 Series III

Dear kirkus: I agree on the STAX build quality level. 

I never like me the cartridge quality level performance using the manufacturer alignment specs and if I remember I used Baerwald with better results.

Something in your post that hold my attention was and is:

"""  and it also sounds great with an integrated-style headshell for B&O cartridges (MMC20CL .... """


I respect your opinion and I never mounted my same cartridge sample by B&O in the STAX but I did it in at least other 4-5 arms and always with a degraded sound quality level against the same cartridge mounted directly in a universal headshell.
That plastic headshel type used with the 20CL is more or less the same concept for some of the Acutex models and I experienced the same disappointment with: sound degraded quality level.

Good that you share same opinion about the critical importance of accuracy on tonearm and cartridge set up alignments.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.

Dear fleib:  """   It's good you gave opinions on some arms. """

I already gave my opinion about tonearms for wrm0325. What other kind of tonearm opinion you are refering to?

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.

Dear analogluvr: I posted that it will be useful to know which cartridges and which audio system to evaluate quality bass response.

It's desired that for that overall system bass management evaluation one of the audio system links be a pair of active subwoofers wired in true stereo fashion, that the system electronics link be SS using cartridges with not only flat frequency response but very good trackers and natural tone and wide separation between channels with no bias to any frequency band preferences and with very well damped tonearms and TT.
Yes, sounds as we need the " perfect " system but we really don't need a perfect one but one that at least goes in that " road ". We need an overall low distortions system.

In the other side that the tracks used for the evaluation we choosed ( between other things. ) because we own the digital counterpart too. IMHO to evaluate bass quality level a digital counterpart is a must to have.

Of those tonearms you named I don't know nothing of the SME 3: I own/owned the IV/V/3009/3012. The unipivot for this evaluation is no real contender ( at least that model. ). The one I heard but never did that bass evaluation was the MS that is a good vintage tonearm.

As you can see it's not easy for any of us try to make bass management evaluation and probably the hardest frequency band to evaluate.

Btw, I already posted that the ET-2 is an audio icon in the audio industry history. Good, for you.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.

I respect your opinion and I never mounted my same cartridge sample by B&O in the STAX but I did it in at least other 4-5 arms and always with a degraded sound quality level against the same cartridge mounted directly in a universal headshell.
That plastic headshel type used with the 20CL is more or less the same concept for some of the Acutex models and I experienced the same disappointment with: sound degraded quality level.

Hi Raul . . . I'll admit that I haven't tried the 1/2"-mount adapter with a conventional headshell to mount the B&O cartridges specifically on the UA-7 . . . quite frankly, I'm a bit short of headshells, but on your recommendation I might give it a try when I get the chance.

I have found that it's quite the moving target to get B&O cartridges to perform their best . . . and will concede that I've seen quite a bit of variability in the manufacturing and condition of their adapters and "headshells" for non-B&O tonearms.  I actually had to combine parts from three "integrated"-style adapters, carefully trim the molding flash, and use a stronger clamp fastener before I ended up with one where both parts fit well together to allow positive overhang and azimuth adjustment, as well as firm grip when the cartridge snapped into place.  There's also the issue that the integrated-style headshell grounds the cartridge case to one channel of the cartridge leads, rather than to a separate pin as on the 1/2"-mount adapters . . . I can see this being an issue for some phono stage designs (notably some with balanced inputs) I've seen.

It does also seem that in general you've had better luck with lower-resonant-frequency cartridge-tonearm combinations than I have, and I can only speculate as to why this may be the case.  IIRC the measured resonance peak I'm getting is about 9Hz with the integrated headshell, and since I've never had a good experience with any combination from The Land of Five Hertz . . . maybe the lightweight Ortofon wooden headshell will be a good match.

@pryso

I will offer arm suggestions specifically for high compliance cartridges as all were introduced during their peak popularity (no particular order).
- Infinity/ADC
- Mayware Formula IV or others in this series (I adapted one to an AR-XA table)
- SME 3009 Series III

I was thinking about Infinity Black Widown latest version with graphite armtube. Never tried it myself, so i need some feedbacks from experienced users. Anyone?

Dear kirkus: Through the B&O adapter the audio experience with those cartridges you own is a good one.

Those models you own along the MMC2/1 are great performers. Normally only a few audiophiles cares about B&O and the ones that did not try it are loosing a very good audio experience.

I still own my STAX tonearm but is in its box, maybe some day I will mount it again and try with my B&O cartridges.

regards and enjoy the music,
R.

SME III´s very low mass hyper rigid titanium-nitride armtube is damped by teak strips, a small oil reservoir under linked to armtube adds extra damping if necessary. SME III is a superior performer with high compliance carts, with oil or without depending on a cart used, IME since 1987. I think it can get the best out of any HC cart, and it works nicely with lower compliance carts as well due to adjustable counter balance system (thin lead plates). Obviously designed especially for HC carts. A classic SME at finest.

Raul,

Please accept my apologies for those that would make fun of you for your "not perfect English'...:-(

In addition let me state that i have read dozens of your posts or replies and have even joined you with discussions on several topics and NOT ONCE did i ever feel you were spiteful or just plain mean!

Those above [and they know who they are!] are accusing you of having an opinion...:-)

And we all know that opinions are like "Assholes" everybody has one!

Do not be deterred by ignorance or the millionth person who beats his chest to the sad "my comparison is to real,unamplified music" and i have GOLDEN EARS syndrome!

Be well,

Azjake

Dear friends: Curious, this is what Dover posted at the end of 2013:


"""" I prefer Baerwald A for all my pivoted arms including the Dynavector which was designed for Stevenson. """


and in this thread he disregards me " severely " because I used/tested Baerwald/Löfgren B with Dyna tonearm !!!!!!!!!!!

Btw, that’s the first time I read: Baerwald A, maybe a new kind of alignment by dover. Now, I understand why dover posted his " history " and seems to me that was to justify him self with other people eyes about his audio " knowledge " level.

Anyway a learning day as always.


Regards and enjoy the music,
R.

Dear azjake: I really don't care of those people trying to " insult/disregards " my opinion. Some one, like me, that post and posted several times a day always exist persons that because their audio knowledge level disagree or because they can't understand my points puts at " defensive " attaking me with out success and normally ends in the frustration of each one of them but that's how things are " around here " or " around me " because it happens in other forums through the net. All these kind of people still think that each thread/post is a contest and each one of them wants to win when my self only want to learn and share first hand experiences, that's all.

There is a telling people here in México ( please is not an insult to any one, far away from that. Is only a way to say things in some ocasions.): " let the dogs shout ".


Nice to know from you again. It's pity that many of the " regulars " in this analog forum suddenly " disappeared "   ??????


Regards and enjoy the music,
R.

Dear kirkus: Maybe people do not give especial attention to those B&O cartridges because its very low weigth that gives some problems to balance it through the tonearms. IMHO, is worth to listen to.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.

fleib: In page 6 of this thread you posted:

"""   I won't be back to this thread. I'm too busy now ... """

since then you posted 21 times starting in that same page six and those 21 posts were only because you were " busy ". Go figure!!

Now, I understand your very high level of frustration through this thread that between other things hurt/damage your health, emotions are a human been " killer ".

I can't understand why you follow trying that I stop to living in the " error " in this audio subject, just leave it that way because I just want to live in the " error " and this can't hurt you.

I think that something that can help you is that I can accept not only that I live in the " error " but I can accept and accept that is your " bible " the right answer and that you are " the One ". Fine, there is no problem with me.

Btw, there is another " people say " in my country :

" even what you don't eat it hurts your organism/stomach "

Please be happy following the  Lewm's advice: " life is to short ".

You don't need to increment your today very high frustaration level in this thread.

Btw, I posted that the Dyna tonearms are not my cup of tea so I don't care about any more.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.

Raul,  Suppose I did want to use Baerwald (for one example) with my DV505.  You've implied here that it can be done by changing the P2S distance from the factory-recommended value.  Does this maneuver end up with the cartridge/cantilever in alignment with the long axis of the headshell?  If so, please tell me how to do it.  Thanks.

Fleib, Since this IS a hobby, and since Raul has never changed his attitude and shouldn't be expected to, at this point, why get angry?  Raul es Raul. I would like to hear Raul's response.  Seems to me, if you increase P2S while maintaining the longitudinal relationship between the cantilever and headshell, so that the two remain "in line", then the null points would approach each other on the LP surface, until at some point they merge into one null point, with underhang.  If you decrease P2S, then the null points separate until one or both no longer lies on the LP playing surface.  But the headshell offset angle is confounding factor.

Dear Lewm: I will do by email.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.

Let’s talk about tonearms

@rauliruegas as could you please explain me what is the real advantage of boron EPA-100 MK2 over classic titanium EPA 100 based on your experience with both ?

Fleib, Sounds like you've had far too much coffee already.  Try decaf.

"My intent is to get him booted from this forum for unethical behavior "

Only if you berate Raul enough to get him to lose it. Great goal.

Dear chakster: EPA 100 or MK2?, that's a hard call because both are almost the same design in all but the build material.

For good reasons boron was choosed and the favorite material for cartridge cantilevers and from this perpective the MK2 coukld be the better, however I can't remember remarkable differences in its quality performance.

Perhaps what we have to take in count are its own customer facilities, the MK2 VTA/SRA on the fly is ( IMHO ) the best mechanism ever made like a dream to use it, the output connectors are RCA type and I prefer it over the DIN Pin 5 because today we have very good RCA connectors and other factors is the difference in the tonearm internal wiring. Of course that always exist the felling of be a proudly owner of a MK2 but any one with the EPA 100 can be prodly also.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.

Fleib, Pinky up at all times, of course.  Knees tightly together. Raul doesn't need me to defend him. He is as he is. No point letting it get to you.

Hello all,
Still here and immensely appreciating everyone's contributions.
Please keep them coming.
And I do mean everyone. 
I have learned a lot.
On another note,  my buddy struck again.
Regardless of how good the FR66s is, he wanted a more modern arm in the mix. So a Moerch chrome DP8 12 inch arrived yesterday. It will be a while before it is mounted, as I'm awaiting a Mint protractor, and a full set of Wally tool;s to set it up. But eventually I will have to compare them.
It is entirely possible that both stay and play.
As it unfolds I will, of course, report back, though it will take a while.

Cheers, Crazy Bill

BTW Flieb, nice to see the olive branch. I have learned A LOT from you. Please keep contributing.

Wrm, If you don't mind I'd like to post a question to some of the other FR tonearm users.  Over on Raul's now quiet thread about MM cartridges (I think that's where I saw these posts), there were several who said that they used the FR64S and even the FR66S with relatively high compliance MM cartridges, and they claimed great success. I am finally about to audition my FR64S, several years after I bought it, and as it happens, I may like to use it with a MM type.  To those who have done it, did you use an FR headshell or a very lightweight headshell?  If neither, what headshell?  For that matter, what MM cartridges worked well? I'm not about to stick an ADC XLM on that heavy pipe. Thanks.

Lewm -
When I’ve run lighter MM’s on the FR64 I used 12-13g headshells - Denon PCL300 & Audiocraft AS12 in conjunction with the lighter W170 counterweight. The last 2 MM’s I ran were the Glanz MFG61 and Victor X1 - these are medium compliance and track around 1.5-1.7g. Personally I think you are pushing it with such a high compliance as the ADC.

Lewm,
please feel free to post whatever you desire.
As to your other question.
I use an AT150MLX on the FR66s from time to time. The headshell is light, being I believe a NOS Supex from the 80's. Combination works just fine.

Dear lewm: I have a direct culprit because years ago I spread everywhere that we can use any kind of tonearm effective mass with light-weight/high compliance cartridges. That the resonance frequency values between the effective mass tonearm and cartridge compliance were not critical.

That kind of statements were a big MISTAKE/ERROR that I had it by some kind of self " ignorance ".

I posted several times in the long MM thread and other threads about. As a fact way before FR came ( in this specific subject ) to this forum I posted that using my heavy mass SAEC tonearms and other similar EM ( including FR ones. ) tonearms the cartridges I mounted on them performs very good and through these kind of experiences I spread my mistake.

Suddenly I experienced what means and how sounds the IMD when I added to my audio system my active subwoofers and left out/off from my main speakers the frequency range: 80hz and down ( any one can read about here: page 1 in my longest post " Dear friends ":
https://forum.audiogon.com/discussions/do-you-think-you-need-a-subwoofer ).

Now always exist the bass frequency intermodulation distortion and you can read about here:

https://books.google.com.mx/books?id=L38MrvScG3gC&pg=PA38&lpg=PA38&dq=low+frequency+reso...

read specifically on tonearm/cartridge resonance.

So, right now I really care that in my tonearm/cartridge combinations I can stay inside the " ideal " resonance frequency range: 8hz-12hz, but even here we have those bass/subsonic modulations.

If we are out of that resonance frequency range the distortion levels goes higher and this is what I was hearing over several years. Today I still have distortions but at low levels.

So we have to take in count that kind of BID before decide which tonearm or headshell weight we are using it.

That BID is an additional kind of distortion that we can’t avoid 100%.

Through the years some tonearm designers/manufacturers were/are trying to have better ways/mechanisms to design a better DAMPED tonearms. I don’t know if they are aware of that additional kind of " problem " or are not.

That BID is other form of generated distortions that we have to avoid and one way to do it is not buy or use NON DAMPED or NOT WELL DAMPED tonearms: ANY.

That we can like those kind ( and other ) of distortions is not the subject and only can tell us that we are wrong in what we like.

Lewm, you can use almost any well damped tonearm with any cartridge if the combination is inside that " ideal " resonance frequency.

One problem with the tonearm specs about effective mass is that the manufacturers just give the EM value with out any sign of where the tonearm counterweight should be positioned for that EM can be meeted.

Btw, independt of all that acomplish with that resonance frequency value and when we are outside we are not helping the cartridge ride on the LP grooves and we can exite subsonics bass frequencies that make that the cartridge " jumps " at micro levels in a higher level that's normal way of tracking and in extreme cases even we can see how the tonearm/cartridge jumps over the LP. I had only one time this extreme experience and I can't remember with what cartridge/tonearm or LP track.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.

You need the Riggle Audio Woody.
Barbee

Dear L.: We can use any of the net resonance frequency calculators over the net like this:

http://www.vinylengine.com/cartridge_resonance_evaluator.php?eff_mass=35&submit=Submit


Regards and enjoy the music,
R.

Thanks, Raul.  Indeed, I thought you were one of the guys who advocated not paying attention to tonearm effective mass.  However, even back in those days, were you not running those active subwoofers.  More than once back then you emphatically advised me that I should do the same with my Sound Labs. Perhaps you upgraded your subwoofers which enabled you to hear problems that were not evident earlier. Would you care to list a few tonearms that you consider to be "well damped"?

Pete Riggle Woody has always intrigued me.

Dover, Did not see your last post until now.  Rest assured I was joking about using an ADC XLM on an FR64S.  That would be an extreme worst case scenario, indeed.  I don't own an XLM anyway.  I just got my TT101 up and running for the first time, on my basement system. With the FR64S and an Acutex 320LPMSTRIII.  It's what I had lying around, in a Dynavector headshell.  Just at the moment of truth, my wife entered the scene, wanting to use the exercise machine in our basement.  When she gets done, I will give it another go.  I thought I might have heard some bass rumblings, per Raul's warning, but she had the TV too loud by that time for me to be certain.

Dear lewm: Yes, I learnen about the IMD critical factor on speakers when I added my subs and that's why I gave my advise to you with those great Sound Labs. Before that I was unaware exactly on the speakers IMD problems.
Subs always help but qwe can't avoid 100% of the speakers IMD, so mantain it at minimum must be our each one target.

In the other side and contrary to my last audio years " preach " that: it does not matters if we like what we are listening if we are listening high distortions then we are wrong and must change about.

I can't remember exactly why I just forgot that because as I said I spreaded everywhere that if we like what we are listening we have not care about tonearm/cartridge resonance frequecy.
Big mistake/error that fortunatelly I already fixed. I know for sure that some of us still live " in the mistake " and are happy as I was.

People with FR or SAEC tonearms can't be satisfied with what they are listening. These tonearms has 30+ effective mass even with a lightweight headshell and if we mount on it a MM high compliance cartridge that normally has 6 grs. of weight and at least 35 cu the resonance frequency will be around 4hz and maybe lower. Has no sense to do it but I did it for years.

I posted several times from years now and every where that the most critical and vital frequency range for a truly excellent audio system quality performance is the bass range and mostly the low frequencies in that range. Any audio system quality performance level depends on the system quality of its bass management. Well this is an overall subject that needs other thread.

regards and enjoy the music,
R.

Seems to me that more people enjoy the confrontations and debates, which then turn into mean spirited attitudes with absolutely no practical application to those seeking opinions. After all, we all have ears that most likely hear differently, and come from different backgrounds of cultural sophistication and exposure to what we have allowed the void between our ears to be filled.

No one has all the answers -- not even the so-called experts -- especially those who arrogantly place that crown upon their own head and demand everyone recognize their title. People also develop an obvious loyalty to the products they buy, because otherwise, they have to admit they bought poorly . . . and that then becomes for some, a matter of pride; therefore, when someone INJURES their choices in audio gear -- they are also injuring the character and integrity of the owner.

Obviously people are duped by skilled and cleaver advertising that is made to convince the public to buy their product over another. Tonearms are about as numerous as cars these days. So one likes the style, the mechanics, the road handling of such and such brand over another, but the problem as in tonearms, is the pride of ownership in saying without controversy: “I have the very best!” BUT, for how long? The consumer food chain claims this one “tastes” the best today, only to be degraded to a piece of junk the next, and anyone who disagrees is also downgraded to moron should they try to defend it. Unless one is earning big bucks, I would venture to say that the rest of us simply cannot keep up with the Jones . . . and why should we? If you like what you like, and someone else does not -- so what! Both of you don’t have to listen to the other person’s choices . . . and apart from the macho and testosterone attitude being exhibited . . . I don’t see where much else is being accomplished -- do you?

Even among those who afford the “very best” tonearms as they come out today, they still can’t agree, and when you get the so-called “experts and interpreters” who supposedly have the superior golden ears and the public’s attention -- THEY DON’T AGREE on every point either, as they still have their own favorites based upon their own reasons, which professionally they then must dogmatically defend or lose their jobs as reviewers (not to mention their big fat paycheck). Accept that, and you will be that much further ahead of the game. Use people’s opinions as a guide for what they are worth -- most definitely fallible (I didn't say worthless), because that is what mankind in general is all about . . . imperfection; however, whether we like to admit it or not, we supposedly also learn by our mistakes until the next one occurs. Personally, I still haven’t met any of my contemporaries who have achieved any status or level of perfection . . . but I have met many who have the attitude and arrogance to think so and make it a point to tell you so.

Please, enjoy the hobby and get over it -- the fruitless arguments and insults -- not the debates, mind you . . . they're entertaining and quite informative. The best tonearm/cartridge -- is the one you bought, listen to, and thoroughly enjoy.

Hello all,
I guess it's time to resurrect this thread and move it in a new direction.
My buddy struck again, and the Blackbird has been replaced by an Amazon Grand Referenz. I've got the Moerch ( 12 inch ) DP8 on it.

My phonostage is presently a Decware ZP3. The only high output cartridge I've got is an Audio Technica AT150MLX, and that is mounted on the Moerch. Set-up via a MF Geodisc. Got a Mint on the way, so set-up will be better.

While I will build a board to mount the FR66s on the Amazon to compare to the Moerch, the Moerch is so sublime ( and it's not optimal yet ), the FR66s has an uphill battle. But I will listen with an open mind. The bass response of the Moerch is superior to anything I've ever heard, and will be tough to walk away from. But I want this to be as good as possible within the following confines.

I'm seriously looking at a couple of other arms instead of the Moerch or FR.
1). One of the Reed arms ( 12 inch ).
2). A Durand arm ( either the Talea2 or the Kairos ).

Has anybody ever had a chance to compare, or listen to, any of these arms.

The Moerch and FR66s are really very good. But if the Durand or Reed arms will elevate the musical experience, I would like to know your thoughts.

I'm not getting any younger, and I want to finalize my path to vinyl nirvana.

Thanks for any help.

Cheers,                                  Crazy Bill

If I were you Crazy Bill....I'd be investing my funds in better cartridges.
Much greater 'bang for buck' in that department IMHO and your arms are more than adequate to reap the benefits.

Thanks Halcro. That clearly is on the horizon.

I've always felt the various Denon's I've had here, and the Koetsu Rosewood, would not be my final resting place. While they are good, with both of them I've always felt something was missing. It's entirely possible the problem has been my setup and I need to work on this. I may end up satisfied, but I don't think so.

That said, I have a Grado Statement here. It does need a retip. I bought it in 2000, and its got a few hours on it. Its a high compliance cartridge, so obviously the FR or the blue wand on the Moerch need not apply. I'm waiting for Grado to come up with the new Statement and I may upgrade. ( Or maybe a Soundsmith retip ).Problem is, on the Moerch, I would probably need the lightest wand to match it, and that's only available in the 9 inch version, so I would have to accommodate that ( new wand and new mounting board for the Amazon ). I really like what 12 inch arms bring to the table so I probably won't go this route. But it still sticks in the back of my mind as I've got it here. We'll see.

If I had half a brain ( and that's stretching it on a good day !! ), I would stick with the Moerch DP8. Sell the Blackbird, the FR66s, the modified Jelco, the Grado, and everything else I won't need and get a very high end cartridge. With a little luck I can probably raise 10K. I'm in the process of building a very high end SET amp, and I still need about 2.5K to finish that. So I'm hopeful I'll have around 7.5 K for a new cartridge.

At that price, I feel, the world opens up. The Amazon importer, Sorasound, is very high on ZYX cartridges. I should probably take a serious look at what ZYX  will mate well with the Moerch at around that price.

More to come. 

Thanks, as always.

Cheers,                      Crazy Bill
P.S.  As setup is such an important consideration, I need to address that properly. Now I am using my MF Geodisc. I know that it is not the end game, which is why I ordered the Mint for the Moerch. Again, if I had half a brain, I would get the Smart Tractor and be done with it.

If after the Mint is in house and I do get the Moerch set up properly with it, and I still feel something is missing, I may opt for the SmartTractor to try the UNI-DIN alignment. We'll see where it leads.

Anyone, please feel free to offer your two cents on what I'm thinking. as I've posted previously, I'm a neophyte compared to most of you and I covet your thoughts and experience.

Please feel free to chime in.

Cheers again,                   Crazy Bill

Before you spend 'silly' money unnecessary Crazy Bill....can you maybe try something cheap and easy....?
I have had dozens of high-compliance MM cartridges sound amazing in both FR64s and FR66S tonearms so please park that misunderstood audio 'myth' in the corner where it belongs and start enjoying the possibilities 🙈
High cost in audio is rarely a guarantee of 'greatness' but particularly with cartridges....I have constantly been disappointed with the 'über'cost MCs over the last 20 years and I have owned many of them. I find the sound of a current $12,000 multi-awarded MC cartridge to be simply unacceptable.
The world does not "open up" at this price point.....rather, the world opens up when you discover that most of the great cartridge knowledge and design occurred in the 'golden' age of analogue....the 70s and 80s.
This is true, not only for MM design but also, as I've discovered......with LOMCs as well. The vintage SPUs and FR-7 series and Sony X-55 and MIT 1 leave every modern MC I've heard, gasping....
For approx. $200 you can buy a used Shure V15/III from HiFiDo and purchase a Neo SAS from Jico for another $200. A carbon-fibre Yamamoto HS-4S for $140 more will give you an under $600 cartridge/headshell combination for your FR-66s that will leave a ZYX UNIverse (and I have three) sounding insipid.
What do you have to lose?.....😜