TriPlanar Tips
@jtimothya Looks like it to me. Thank you Ralph. Yes, SRA, VTF, azimuth, overhang - one can iterate 'til the cows come home. This was as much an exercise of curiousity and to get a sense of how much range do I have with the Tri-Planar with the arm level for a given cartridge height. I've given up using a scope to get to 92 degrees and went back to my ears. On a normal day thin, medium and thick.is fine-grained enough. |
So moving 2 whole number increments (~5 mm) changes the arm angle a little more than 1 degree (~..6mm more.) The pivot to stylus tip distance will vary depending on cartridge.@jtimothya Looks like it to me. A more effective method would be to vary the angle of the cartridge in the headshell, but there's no good way to do that and the VTA tower does it pretty well anyway. The only fiddly bit that isn't worked out is that as you vary the VTA tower, the overhang will vary somewhat as well. A tiny bit compared to the resulting rake angle... In case its not mentioned earlier though, one issue is that while 92 degrees is a nice central point to set the stylus rake angle, almost any LP is going to be slightly different than that on account of the actual stylus used to cut the groove. Mastering engineers don't set for 92 degrees, they set for the lowest noise in the groove, which may or may not be 92 degrees. |
Why not send Triplanar an email requesting the thread pitch/count utilized on their VTA tower? Conversely, if you can unscrew and remove the vta tower, you can count the threads per inch and that will allow you to calculate the change in height per single revolution. You can also use this tool https://www.boltdepot.com/fastener-information/Printable-Tools/US-and-Metric-Thread-Sizes.pdf |
Borrowing some magnifying headgear, I believe the distance between two whole numbers on the vertical VTA tower is 2.5mm. I’m guessing that raising the arm from, say, 7 to 8 moves the arm 2.5mm. In my case the distance from stylus tip to pivot point is ~252.5mm. Multplying x 2 = 505mm, the diameter of a circle made by the tonearm + cartridge. Circumference = diameter x Pi (3.1416) = ~1586.5mm. Circumference divided by 360 degrees = ~4.4mm per 1 degree.of arc. So moving 2 whole number increments (~5 mm) changes the arm angle a little more than 1 degree (~..6mm more.) The pivot to stylus tip distance will vary depending on cartridge. Did I get this right? Perhaps Nsgarch or another expert would kindly say. (and correct if needed.) Thank you. (Best I can tell this has nothing to do with compliance.) |
| Post removed |
Dear @jtimothya : My answer was directly for your " follow-up ". Due that all cartridges comes with different suspension compliance you can’t have a rule that works with any compliance about how many mm equal 1°. A high compliance cartridge will needs different mm. that a low compliance. Only an opinion and sorry for this " distraction ". R. |
Thank you Raul for your opinion; your response is a distraction. My arm is the Mk VII. My question is about the increment on the VTA tower. If, for example, the VTA tower vertical scale pointer is on a whole number, (say 5,) and the arm is moved to the next whole number.(say 6), how much does the arm move in millimeters? My follow-up asks this: how many mm (or increments) equal a 1-degree change of VTA? |
Dear @jtimothya : I don't know whay you need that degree of " accuracy " in that specific VTA issue. With or with out Triplanar does not exist a rule about because the cartridge suspension compliance and the stylus tip position in the LP ( not all cartridges coincide where the stylus tip seat on after its set up. ), both parameters impedes the degreee of accuracy you ask for and remember that each time you change the VTA/SRA the VTF can/could changes too so it needs a re-set/check the VTF after the VTA change. Normally audiophiles makes the VTA set up by ear through listening sessions with recording tracks that they know very well. Regards and enjoy the MUSIC NOT DISTORTIONS, R. |
This classic thread remains relevant today. Thanks to Doug and all contributors. My arm is the Mk VII. My question is about the increment on the VTA tower. If, for example, the VTA tower vertical scale pointer is on a whole number, (say 5,) and the arm is moved to the next whole number.(say 6), how much does the arm move in millimeters? My follow-up asks this: how many mm (or increments) equal a 1-degree change of VTA? (My eyes aren't sharp enough to read the mm markings on a ruler.) TIA |
Does anyone know why my TriPlanar VII UII on a record without tracks skate very fast inwards even with the maximum of anti-skating ... I can not stop the arm ... I already checked if the tonearm cable was very pulled, it seems normal...If the LP has no tracks this would seem pretty normal. Is the needle intact? |
xupakabras Does anyone know why my TriPlanar VII UII on a record without tracks skate very fast inwards even with the maximum of anti-skating ... I can not stop the arm ... I already checked if the tonearm cable was very pulled, it seems normal...Is the turntable level? |
The tonearm seems to want to skate outwards, even with zero anti skate applied and the weight removed from the little anti skate arm. It is evident at various settings of VTF, VTA, etc. The platter is very level and everything seems to be aligned OK. This outward skating force is very light in the outer grooves and becomes stronger as the cartridge gets closer to the end of a side. In fact, as it traces the lead-out grooves at the end of a side, the tonearm sometimes thrusts outwards across those grooves back into the last track. Very scary!This is caused by the tone arm cable having been pulled too hard. This causes the wiring through the bearings to be too tight. Its a fix of a few seconds- at the base of the arm, simply pull the small wire bundle back out of the cable sheath to relieve the tension. Also make sure that the tone arm cable routing to your preamp does not stretch or pull on the cable. This solution is on another thread devoted to this topic, but since it was unanswered here I have made this post. |
Hi all, I have been trying to research a solution to a recent issue with my TriPlanar VII UII tonearm that I bought from you a couple years back. The tonearm seems to want to skate outwards, even with zero anti skate applied and the weight removed from the little anti skate arm. It is evident at various settings of VTF, VTA, etc. The platter is very level and everything seems to be aligned OK. This outward skating force is very light in the outer grooves and becomes stronger as the cartridge gets closer to the end of a side. In fact, as it traces the lead-out grooves at the end of a side, the tonearm sometimes thrusts outwards across those grooves back into the last track. Very scary! A visual check of the cantilever azimuth seems to confirm an outward pressure from the tonearm since the cantilever is leaning with the stylus end closer to the spindle. I can’t seem to find any information online about this phenomenon. Any insights and recommendations would appreciated. |
My problem may be connected with Syntax ''discovery''. But first thing first. My armboard is made by Kuzma for my Kuzma Stabi Reference. The distance spindle -pivot is exactly 233,5 mm. I also own Mint tractor made specific for my Kuzma /Triplanar combo. My problem is this. I use the so called ''tracking ability'' test records as a kind of orientation for the needed VTF. My goal is to get 60 microns ''pure'' for any MC cart I use. Don't ask me why (grin). Well my problem is that my Triplanar ''refuses'' to track better than 50 microns with whatever cart. Even the carts which track 70 microns with my FR-64 S. |
Syntax, that strength of the Phantom is one shared by the Triplanar. It really sounds to me that you had either incorrect setup or simply a poor match between arm and cartridge. You are correct that all cartridges put energy into the arm- this is how the arm moves across the LP after all. The trick in the setup is such that the information is transduced by the cartridge rather than applied to the arm tube. This is done by setting up the proper effective mass, which has nothing at all to do with the materials of the arm as long as the resulting mechanical resonance falls within the target area. IOW the last sentence of your first paragraph in the post above flies in the face of tone arm theory in general. |
All cartridges can put energy into the arm if they are not set up right. Well, I know it is a secret and - confidential - only between you and me: All cartridges can put energy into the Arm even when the set up is perfect. The next hidden secret, the resonance 8-12 is just an information but more or less useless because the materials in the Arm can vary (steel, aluminum, ceramic, wood .....) and it has absolutely no influence to the Arm geometry for example, or the bearing...(when it is done wrong it is wrong, even with a theoretical data of 10.0) The Triplanar VII was ok when nothing better than a Graham 2.0 was available but when the first Phantom was launched, it was a total different chapter from the sonic result and the matching with all kind of cartridges.The strength of the Phantom is that everything is adjustable so that the cartridge can be set up precisely. |
The Triplanar is recommended for cartridges which do not reflect ANY energy into the Arm. The Arm looks solid, but it isn't. All cartridges can put energy into the arm if they are not set up right. What is supposed to happen instead is that the stylus motion is transduced into electrical energy. That will be impaired if the cartridge is putting energy into the arm (usually the result of improper effective mass: the combination of cartridge compliance with incorrect choice of counterweights, resulting in a mechanical resonance outside the recommended 7-12Hz) The strength of the Triplanar is that everything is adjustable so that the cartridge can be set up precisely. When this is done the energy applied to the arm itself will be minimized. The arm tube is also internally and externally damped- it is one of the more dead arm tubes made. |
I am borrowing it and getting it up to speed for a friend. The Monaco table was designed with the Triplanar and Atmosphere likes the arm a lot, so it must be a good arm. It is a little agricultural looking in person compared to the Phantom and the vintage Pioneer Exclusive arms. Sounds seems good thou. It would be nice to put my Phantom on the Monaco and see how it compares to the Triplanar, however that would need a new armboard. |
First up, I tried the Triplanar for a couple of days, then this morning took off the damping trough. Well, the Arm is very problematic with energy transfer (It has none, the whole Arm vibrates with certain cartridges). It started as an Amateur Design and the new owner never was able to improve it. Of course it will sound better when you take off the damping trough, another part which does not add vibrations . The Triplanar is recommended for cartridges which do not reflect ANY energy into the Arm. The Arm looks solid, but it isn't. But, to be fair, it also has its Fans, like everything else in "High End" :-) (I had one) |
Never paid much attention to the scale, always adjusted by ear. The only way to get zero AS is to prop up the dogleg so it applies no force to the fishing line. As I was reducing AS toward zero, I spent some time using just the weight of the dogleg plus a few tiny rubber O-rings... no metal weight at all. I spent a little time with just the weight of the dogleg, nothing else on it. When I decided to play with zero AS, I removed the entire mechanism. This made a similar improvement to removing the damping trough, although more subtle. |
I've always assumed that you have to remove the weight to achieve zero AS. That's what I do when aligning cartridges, for example. Unlike a number of users here, I do like a little anti-skate on my arm. But I found the minimum to be a bit much in some cases, so Tri sent me a lighter counterweight. Not sure of the scale; I don't really use the rings at all, adjusting by ear. |
Currently having a listen to a Grand Prix Monaco table, Triplanar arm and Benz LP-S. Nice thread this for the tips. First up, I tried the Triplanar for a couple of days, then this morning took off the damping trough. No brainer - it sounds better. better upper frequency extension and air, bass is a little faster and this has opened up the midrange for more realistic vocals and alike. Re, the anti skating. I assume that the weight against the inside of the arm is the least and the outside is the most ant skating. Is there an approx scale from lowest to highest when the outside goes along each ring on the shaft? ie, is it zero on the inside? cheers |
If you have problems with the arm engaging the arm rest and not allowing you to play the beginning of the LP, or of the arm seems to stop and skip before getting to the end of the LP, it is because the arm is not set up properly with respect to its base. This is easy to adjust. Lock the arm in the rest and remove the three screws holding the arm to the arm board. Turn the arm over and you will see a single large screw dead center in the bottom of the base. Loosen it slightly and make the required adjustment, such that the arm can track past the label of the LP and also so that the arm rest is not in the way. Tighten the screw and remount the arm. |
The Jig is up. Thank you, Michael, for informing the public and I about your difficulties with the Tri-Planar pivot-to-turntable spindle measurement. I extend my apologies to any Tri-Planar customers who may have encountered similar set-up issues. If your turntable spindle-to-tonearm pivot is more than 233.5 mm then loosen - but do not remove - the three mounting screws at the base of the tonearm and move the tonearm slightly toward the turntable spindle or rotate the Tri-Planar tonearm clockwise to achieve 233.5mm. If the turntable spindle-to-tonearm pivot is less than 233.5 mm, move the tonearm away from the turntable spindle. When setting up the cartridge, the arm may need to be moved slightly. This is why #10-24 screws are recommended for the 0.250” mounting holes on the tonearm base, allowing for 0.065” of free space to move in all directions. Based on your feedback, I will develop additional tools along with the drilling template to assist with achieving the exact 233.5mm dimension. In addition, I will update the instruction manual with pictures so setting up the turntable, tonearm and cartridge will be correct and consistent. If you have any difficulty, please give me a call at 612-623-0922 or Email: tri@triplanar.com. I am available 9:00 AM to 6:00 PM, Monday to Friday and most weekends too. We are here to serve you! Thank you for supporting Tri-Planar. Wishing you well and enjoying music. Tri Mai |
FWIW the Triplanar protractor has not changed at all in the last 5 years. The protractor is not incorrect- it is intentionally built with a slight amount of slop and it is expected that the exact and final position of the arm will be corrected during cartridge setup. It would seem that Michael Fremer is so focused on finding fault with Triplanar that he missed this simple fact. I discussed this with Tri Mai yesterday and he forwarded this note:
|
Hi Doug, Forewarned by your Tip #1, I was very careful never to raise the arm when it was locked down. What I did do, however, was to leave the arm resting on the cueing bar, lever raised, rather than on the arm rest, lever down. Over time, the weight of the arm itself apparently was too much for the seal. Black goo oozed. Ugh. So, maybe this should be Tip #1a: Always return the arm to its rest and lower the cueing lever to prevent the oozing of black goo. |
I'm aware of several instances of incorrectly made mounting jigs. Ran into the problem twice when setting up rigs for people 6-7 years ago... just as Fremer described. OTOH, my own (10+ year old) jig is correct. So are the newer ones I've seen. A batch of incorrect jigs got sent out at some point. Hopefully a one-time goof, but who knows? I always check pivot-to-spindle with a ruler when setting up an arm. You should too. |
Wrm57, Thanks for the interesting report (and for keeping his long-running thread alive). The rounding off you mentioned is very visible on the website, and of course any reduction in parallel surfaces will tend to reduce standing waves and feedback by scattering reflections. The DIY inclined are tempted. This could be the next TriPlanar Tip... is anyone with a fine mill file feeling brave? |
I sent my 18-month old Mk VIIuii in to have the cueing device repaired after it lost damping compression. Unexpectedly, while he had it, Tri rounded off the front corners of the headshell, "for better standing wave resonance control," he said in an email. No charge. Looking at website pics, I see this new shape is now standard. Might be my imagination but I think this change made a real difference. The arm seems more resolving in the highest frequencies than I remember, and more balanced overall. Whereas I used to think it seemed a little fat, with a bias toward the mids, I no longer feel that way. Hats off to Tri Mai for the excellent customer service, and for finding new ways to make his excellent tonearm even better. |
Seems like the new Tri Planar 12 inch is out and available. $9800 Here's a pic if you scrol down just a bit http://cybwiz.blogspot.com/ Looks lke a carbon fibre arm tube and some different stuff around the bearings...and damping trough integrated into arm rest support...another post said silver wire now (vs what I think is discovery wire in my Tri VII u2) |
I think the design differences between a good 9" arm and a good 12" arm are more than trivial, ie, the length of the shaft. Otherwise, we would see a lot more 12" arms. Simply cutting and glueing is pretty funny advice. Easy yes, but imagine the resale value of an arm that has improper geometry. TriPlanar will soon be out with a longer arm. I think at CES on a Technics SP10 mk3. |
