Tonearm without off-set

Johnbrown

"irrational concept"

We are among people who spends in excess of $50,000 on their hifi system. Some Like DD and Raul would probably be in the range of $250,000.

Some at AG buy 2 watt amplifiers that cost $25,000 and say a Garrard TT made in 1948 is better than a $30,000 SACD player. I could go on.

So if I do not think like you, I become irrational?

No I have not bought the arm, but is seriously thinking about it. By asking for opinions and discussion before any purchase means "validation" to you. You would be criticizing almost half of what is written in this forum. Isn't that what forums are for?

"unless your goal was to be the dj 'scratcher' with the 'biggest, baddest, longest arm'."

You don't have to belittle me because I do not agree with some of the people at VA or here.

So sorry I can't agree with you and make you happy.

Thanks for you post.

Doug and Raul

Thanks for both of your very informative reply. I hold them in high regard.

After reading the huge thread that discusses anti-skate where both you and many others contributed, made me come to the conclusion that rather than to cure skate with anti-skate, we should look at avoiding designs that adds skate - such as an arm's off-set.

The option of a linear arm does not thrill me, and if I do go for an off-set arm, it should at least be 12 inch to reduce tangential tracking error.

This is where I am in my thoughts at the moment. I do have an ARO and a PU3 at the moment. will probably be also buying a Lab 47 RSA-1 too. So having this non off set arm is just something I am toying with to install in my DIY Lenco which will ultimately have at least two arms.

it should at least be 12 inch to reduce tangential tracking error."

Johnbrown

"but don't expect me to support your ill-fated dream."

None was asked for. It is just a bloody arm that we are discussing. I do not understand why you are so worked up about this. You want to kick my dog or something?

And regarding "math (sic)" logic, so how come some highly regarded contributors here removed their anti skate devise on their ET tone arm and not use them? There is no maths in that.

Some of us actually use our ears to determine what Maths can't explain.

Also if we are so dogmatic about perfect tangential alignment, we should never ever use any pivoted arm - off set or not. How much distortion is acceptable or discernible? Choosing by numbers is a worry when it comes to sound.

And in your opinion, it seems that the only criteria for a tone arm to sound good is to have perfect tangential alignment. There are other factors that can make a tone arm great sounding. And if you do not know already, all tone arms sound different regardless of perfect geometry or not.

Anyway, I respect your opinion and let's just say that you do not agree with me on this topic and perhaps many more.

Nice talking to you.

Thanks Thom. I really enjoyed reading all your posts in AG.

Over the years I have owned or still own: Grace 707, Lenco, LE1, PU2, Alphason HRS100, Rega RB250, Well Tempered, PU3 and Aro. So I am not new to pivoted off-set arms or has anything against them.

You are absolutely right that tangential alignment accuracy is very important. I can hear the difference you mentioned. I even slotted my Aro head shell which only had two holes so that I get it perfect.

The thing that most interest me in trying non off-set straight arm (which is only one of the 3 arms that I am intending to use in my system), is the fact that the cantilever will not be subjected to inward force (or even stress) created by off-set arms. What I am interested to know is how much more we can gain from a cartridge when there is no inward force caused by off-set arms.

Perfect tangential alignment aside, there must be benefits from having a "less" stressed cantilever.

I am now almost certain to have a 12inch arm with both off-set and non off-set straight arm wands. Both will be exactly the same except for the head-shell geometry. (So Johnbrown, I do actually listen to other people's opinion.) I will report my findings if there is any interest on this topic.

It really surprised me that I did not get any response from people who have tried or taken this path before. I was really hoping to hear from someone with actual listening experience of a non off-set arms. They have been manufactured before and I am sure there are some still in service out there.

The RSA-1 has somewhat of a cult following for those who do not mind fiddly toys. This arm has no offset and the tangential alignment is way off, but it is acknowledged by some to be a great tracker with very low distortion (soundwise). I will also be getting one of this to see what the buzz is all about.

Don't know if what I am intending to do will be any good, but I am certainly going to enjoy the experience.

Later.

Raul, thank you for taking the time to write. You are a passionate man I could tell. More power to you.

Yes, yes and yes. Alignment is very important - even paramount you would say, but no one has actually touched on:

The inward force that "may" stress the skinny skinny cantilever that is inherent in off-set arms.

Some suggest not using anti skate, but it does not make the inward force go away.

So my big question is:

Will the benefit of a "less stressed" cantilever outweigh a perfectly aligned cartridge that has inward stress imposed on its cantilever?

The cantilever is the weakest part of the arm cartridge system. By eliminating undue stress on the cantilever must be a good thing eh?

I don't know, which is why I am intending to find out. I was also encouraged by the reports from several heavy weights that the RSA-1 which is a non off-set arm - performs flawlessly despite "bad" tangential alignment.

I do not write often these days in vinyl forums as I have found most of what I am looking for in the archives or my personal experience. But on this subject, I have found nothing in any forum.

Like you I am passionate and feel the need to explore, even if it is beyond other people and my comfort zone.

Thanks again Raul. In time I will reveal more madness for us to discuss. You're the man.

Later.