TW-Acustic Arm

Dear Syntax, ... now who is Woodward, who's Bernstein ? Richard "tricky Dick" Nixon surely has no equivalent nor peer in Audio today. None has his brain and very special idea of ethics - not even me.

Very sorry to see that Dgad isn't really participating in this thread anymore.
He has so far provided quite some entertainment and I was anticipating more (maybe even some technical support for the new offspring his beloved audio-designer of choice - but I guess that hope was futile from the very beginning...) to come.

Dear Thuchan, of course you are right, but it was in fact never a real discussion. Would you volunteer to test the TW 10.5 ? Might be fun, as you certainly have a jolly good number of potential contenders ( regarding the price tag new and used as well as the claim for performance superiority) and certainly some space to mount the new white bird.
Even more so, as you do not belong in any "camp" and certainly aren't pained by jealousy regarding TWs "brand" success.
You have all the tools and experience and a set-up certainly capable showing any virtues or flaws. I know that a few of your cartridges will certainly find universal approval to serve in the 10.5".
So - that would shine some light on this dark stage.

Dear Dertonarm,
sorry if it has been said from your side:
why shouldn't TW be able to build a top Tonarm without a predecessor? To my memory, which can be false, he did so with the Raven.

Dear Difool, with the tonearm TW is the co-designer (according to his own words..). Of course a great component can be designed from scratch. There are proven designs out there testifying that it can happen.
TW's turntable aren't that good an example however, as they may be average, but certainly not "top" ( they may perform "better" in some set-ups compared to the units "tested" in those set-ups before, but that is a purely relative comparison, certainly not an absolute one ) - at least not from the point of view of seasoned audiophiles who trust their own ears and don't fall right away for the latest hype-review of an under-paid and over-rated audio reviewer with little experience.
TW missed out to address a hell of a lot of important design features of a truly great turntable in his Raven - as well as in his later offsprings.
The fact that neither his customers nor some of the reviewers did notice that, is only testifying one of the inherent rules of this crazy business.

See - my critic goes ( this point gets lost again and again during this thread, as none of the TW-supporters does really react to the technical/design issue ) against its claim for "superiority" and the instant labeling that the new 10.5 will be a top-tier tonearm.

Nothing is more easy in high-end today, then designing and building a top-tier tonearm.
It is a purely mechanical device of simple function and just about 2 handful of issues to watch and to take care of.
All you need is a good eye, concentrate use of at least one brain, a good blue-book and a clear idea of what you really want to achieve.
Shouldn't be too hard ....

As said before - ALL issues in pivot-tonearm-design have been addressed already. However they were never addressed so far in ONE single tonearm ever brought to the market (a few however came VERY close... one or two of them are still current production...).
All a designer has to do today, is to watch closely and have a deep analysis of the best tonearm designs out there. Then combining their virtues and eliminating and addressing the very few points left.
e' voila - the "perfect" tonearm.

But if I see a new design, which is sadly uninspired and misses out on a lot of those issues to be addressed no one can expect me to raise my hands in praise to the new conquering hero.

As said before - I am sure that the two co-designers of the 10.5 will see in the very near future the design points they missed and we will see a MK 2-version by 2011.
At least - I hope so.

Nothing is more easy in high-end today, then designing and building a top-tier tonearm.
It is a purely mechanical device of simple function and just about 2 handful of issues to watch and to take care of.

TW missed out to address a hell of a lot of important design features of a truly great turntable in his Raven - as well as in his later offsprings.

Well Dertonarm,
You've reverted to your pompous best again. Opinion masquerading as "fact"?
Strange how there are dozens of us audiophiles here, who are aware that we have 'Opinions' and somehow the more we read and the more we learn, the less convinced we are that our 'Opinions' are necessarily correct or borne out by empirical evidence?
You however have no such doubts!
So let me respond to you in your own inimitable 'Derblowhard' fashion:-

"Very little is known about the total dynamic forces acting on tonearms and those who reduce the problems to those of 'statics' and 'Euclidian geometry' simply display their ignorance.
This was confirmed fairly emphatically when Mark Kelly exposed your ignorance of the dynamic forces and the equations involved in the acceleration and movement of the stylus within the record groove. Unfortunately your lack of education in physics and calculus make your assertions risible and embarrassing.

But then again your listening experiences are simply lacking when you hear only the FR-64 and 66 and think it is the greatest and the Graham Phantom is the second greatest. Your little lapdog Syntax even writes love letters to Bob Graham about his arm yet the Phantom sounds like a 'stick' compared to the Copperhead with MM/MI cartridges and with LOMCs the DaVinci 12" Ref Grandezza beats it in all aspects.
But you and your lapdog can't hear these things that we experienced audiophiles hear because lapdog has the Basis Debut turntable as his reference which, with its wobbly springs and acrylic plinth and platter has bloated loose bass, no soundstage and a total lack of treble presentation.
But I've never heard a word of denigration from you about this irrelevant and misconceived product?
Only the Raven cops it....endlessly....from you and your lapdog.
There is obviously a history here where Thomas and you and lapdog have come to blows???

In any case we don't even know what turntable you are using because you are too scared to tell us for fear of derision nor do we know your amplification but we can glean that it is all tube based so you have lots of noise and no control of the lower octaves and are thus unable to hear the innermost details that a fine SS phonostage and linepreamp can provide.
These facts are immutable but you are swayed by the overpaid theoreticians of old history tube circuits and prefer to shut your ears to the sound of real music.
This is borne out by the fact that you and lapdog only listen to MC cartridges instead of MM/MI ones which produce the sound of real music that Raul, Lewm and I are easily able to hear but which escapes you and lapdog because of your blind following of the audio magazines and reviewers and lapdog's quest for more and more expensive equipment to remove himself further and further from the sound of real music."

You see how it sounds Daniel?
Not very nice. But I expect to read immediately an obtuse and supposedly humourous (but in reality unintelligible) parable or cartoon from herr lapdog?