Raul.... I believe you are correct....that's why the 2nd pivot works so well. ...as to why the unipivots work as well as they do ....if one looks at a bautiful phonograph....even though it is clear and clean, when looking very closely, you'll see that it is made of many dots that all meld as one into that picture. Many listeners will be very happy with a unipivot on their turntable (I was)....but as you said...in finding and eliminating "possibilities" ..looking for the very best that can be done....the 2nd pivot brings us very much closer to the performance. That 2nd pivot increases dynamic range, widens and deepens the stereo image, solidifies the low end, stabilizes the images within the sound field, et al. I'm sure in the future, there will be even more modifications and applied engineering to bring tonearm designs to increased abilities, but for the moment, satisfaction can be found for most people.
VPI 2nd Pivot for 3D
I just installed mine and discovering my old records anew. I thought I knew everything there was to know on the original pressing of Fleetwood Mac's Rumers......but no - there's more. You immediately hear a more solid bass, but then the dynamics hit hard. It sounds like my amp is on steroids. More cleanliness, - everything is better. Very highly recommended.
167 responses Add your response
"any tonearm suffers from that torional huge forces but the unipivots are where affects in the worst way to that very hard cartridge job." Raul I can easily see why you promote this belief because how can you have stability when the stylus is lurching from ambient temperature to something hot enough to melt vinyl and then resorts to freezing temperatures as you claimed earlier? Naturally the expansion/contraction/expansion of the pickup arm as it dissipates this extreme heat and cold must be continually expanding and contracting and expanding and contracting and expanding and contracting and so there can be no stability at all by your reasoning! Also, the "infinitely" tiny stylus combined with the "infinite" tracking force you mentioned earlier must also introduce instability because of the constantly shifting "huge" forces that are twisting the arm! It is amazing any tonearm works at all given all of the extreme forces you imagine are happening with all tonearms! What is the remedy for this Raul weren't you going to invent the ideal tonearm what happened to that effort of yours or are you still struggling with those "infinite" forces? Do please answer we all want to know I think about your efforts in this regard to achieve the perfect way to compensate for thehuge infinite forces. |
@rauliruegas is correct in pointing out that one of the challenges of designing a unipivot is addressing the question of lateral stability and providing for precise and repeatable antiskate. It is precisely these challenges that the designer of the brand of unipivots I prefer (Durand) addresses -- originally via the use of dual magnets to provide lateral stability and adjustment on the Talea and then through the introduction of a precision side bar (aka "2nd pivot") in the Telos and Kairos. The trick with the side bar is that it is engaged via an adjustable sliding weight so that you can set minimal contact force (or more if you so desire). Once this element is in place the rest of it, and frankly the cost, all is down to materials -- and yes the selection of materials in every place on the tonearm does matter. So I’m not surprised that the VPI with 3rd pivot sounds better but surely it would have made more sense to design this in from the outset? By the way inspired by the video I also closely examined needle drops on both my arms (I have a Kairos for stereo and a Talea for mono) and both go straight down and land with no sign of any wobble 😉 |
"
Imagine when in true motion ridding those grooves with all those huge ( every direction ) generated forces ! !" I know you "imagine" these huge forces Raul but it doesn't make any sense perhaps you should check your VTF todays cartridges track around just a few grams there's no need for "huge" forces if you are using huge forces you are damaging your phono cartridge/stylus/cantilever assembly AND your records! Please get a modern tonearm with a properly matched phono cartridge and the forces you'll need to deal with will be on the order of around just a few grams give or take a tiny bit. Good luck, Raul! |
Dear @folkfreak : So, those tonearms are not any more true unipivots ( good. ) but neither a fixed/gimball design. Anyway, anything out of an unipivot design is just better by a wide margin. What can be really interesting on the whole subject is to take the best quasi-unipivot design and the best fixed one and through an electronic microscope in slow motion see what is happening at the stylus tip/groove on playback becaause at micrtoscopic levels you, me or any one can't see if exist that wobble in those unipivot designs. At those microscopic levels we can see that the stylus tip is literally " jumping " in the grooves when ridding and between other things that's why is so important to achieve always a " safe " resonance frequency number between the cartridge/tonearm. I think that any tonearm must be designed to fulfill the cartridge needs. Understanding those complex cartridge needs. Regards and enjoy the MUSIC NOT DISTORTIONS, R. |
Raul....Interesting that you mention your objection to VPI arm regarding their serious needs for anti-skate. I've listened carefully with and without anti-skate on my metal 10.5 arm, on the 3D with and without the 2nd pivot and in all cases, the sound to my ears is better with a/s removed completely. I've listened a number of times but once I heard the difference, it was clear, I did not want a/s on my arm. |
Dear @stringreen : Yes, for years I had the same kind of experiences through several tonearm/cartridge combinations. The important issue here it's that the skate force exist through all the cartridge ridding in a pivoted tonearm. That skating vector is part of all the different kind of " forces " that has influence in the stylus tip groove ridding " job and we just can't say: I like it more with out the antiskate mechanism. Again, I'm talking on what we need to do or better: what the cartridge stylus tip needs and not what we like it because as " usual " we are accustomed to higer distortion levels that what we can think or imagine it. Perhaps a " trouble " with AS mechanisms is that the developed skating force is a variable one all over the LP side and at each groove is changing and for that skating force can't has real influence we need a very preise antiiskating mechanism that can mimic exactly the inverse skate range at each groove and till today I don't know any single tonearm that fulfill that needs. But all those does not means the cartridge ridding does not need it because we are talking that we have to have extremely care for the stylus tip pick-up precise groove information and the AS if not compensated goes against that target. I know, that the AS task is almost imposible to do it in the rigth way. Regards and enjoy the MUSIC NOT DISTORTIONS, R. |
"The important issue here it's that the skate force exist through all the cartridge ridding in a pivoted tonearm...we just can't say: I like it more with out the antiskate mechanism." For goodness sake Raul yes yes yes we an say that we prefer to use a pivoted tonearm without anitskate because everyone has their own opinion and in fact quite a number of experts who actually manufacture key components to our Music Reproduction Systems say that very thing I am talking bout experts such as Harry Weisfield and Peter Ledermann at Soundsmith these are people who have actually developed products for use in analog-based Music Reproduction Systems and are not simply theorizing from the comfort of a couch in there parents basement! Of course in your world Raul it is all about theory and you rely on developing theories based on others theories but in the real world where actual facts matter things are not so simple so please stop telling people here what to think and instead tells us what you think and maybe WHY you think what you think based on actual experience instead of your idle theories thank you! |
"take the best quasi-unipivot design and the best fixed one and through an electronic microscope in slow motion see what is happening at the stylus tip/groove on playback becaause at micrtoscopic levels you, me or any one can't see if exist that wobble in those unipivot designs. At those microscopic levels we can see that the stylus tip is literally " jumping " in the grooves when ridding and between other things that's why is so important to achieve always a " safe " resonance frequency number between the cartridge/tonearm." This is so funny again Raul you crack me up when you say "we" who are your speaking for please name these people. After you do that please post a link to a video that shows what you theorize here that is part of your many theories of analog reproduction that exist only in theories and only in your mind and never are backed up with any "facts" other than some funny quote you lift from another website. Raul I do not mind that you share your theories they are very funny actually but your problem with them is you confuse theories with fact and you pretend to speak for other "experts" who you do not name but you never hesitate to demand proof from others about what they sau or you dismiss their opinions because they lack the first hand experience you claim to have but never provide proof of. |
Stringreen Stick to posting about hearing aids! Something you know about! https://forum.audiogon.com/discussions/hearing-aid?highlight=Hearing%2Baids |
Hi Raul, I agree with your earlier statement that there will always be trade-offs.
My main reservations about gimballed bearings are “brinneling” & stiction. 40 years ago when I was making my earliest forays into “serious” hifi, “Flat-Earthers” would talk of how low output, low compliance cartridges (such as those popularly from Linn) could “wreck” the bearings of lesser tonearms i.e. those with poor(er) quality, loose bearings such as the old Rega “S” shape. For this reason one could never use such an MC in such an “inadequate” arm. And so the era of the so-called “Super Arms” began (Zeta, Ittok, PU2, etc). I owned several of them. I am no longer a “Flat Earther” but brinneling hasn’t died, more “ignored”(optimistically) these days, especially when buying a S/H example 30 yrs old... The Linn arms in particular tended to be run “dry” i.e. no bearing lubricant. This probably wouldn’t help very much, so, if poor reaction to warps is the (simple)Unipivot’s Achilles Heel, then brinneling could be defined as the gimballed tonearm’s Achilles Heel #1. Achilles Heel #2 is probably, amongst other things, the result of the engineered solution to brinneling : forms of increased friction.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brinelling
To me, Stiction sounds like an invented word rather than a real one but gimballed arms often have it. There can be moments when an arms ability to travel in either axis is hindered by a reluctance to move under light impulse. It was one of the reasons I switched to unipivots, because I could actually see it for myself in bearing tests. This can be attributable to long term bearing damage, deformation of the housing, contamination, drying out of lubricant (if applicable)etc. When you have a situation where the LP is drilled off centre, the tonearm is suddenly presented with the problem of tracing/weaving from side-to-side in addition to handling the warp. Given the possible presence of stiction and the enormous forces mentioned in your article this will be compounded by inertia and, in some cases, fluid damping. The end result will be that, often, the arm doesn’t respond fast enough and the pressure on the groove lining is ramped up, multiplied to even higher levels as the locus of the arm switches from pressurising one groove wall to the other? Surprisingly, our ears seem to be fairly immune to such effects, just as they can be with the forementioned bearing wobble. In fact, purists may pick up more on pitch errors due to non-concentricity than they might SQ differences resulting from variable pressure? Forgot to mention what may be categorised as Achilles Heel #3. When a warp occurs it usually emanates as a (lateral) angular undulation orientated from the LP centre to the outer rim which diminishes as we reach the inner groove. During this time a gimballed doesn't even operate in the same plane/angle as the warp, so it has lost its precise relationship and alignment with the groove. It's stable(!) but that's it! (Note : this behaviour would include the arm that I currently use despite it being a unipivot)
In conclusion, Unipivots can offer more “certainty”, even if some of them do have an “Achilles heel”. I’m always acutely aware of the need to avoid damaging gimballed arm bearings so wouldn’t even tighten a cartridge screw without stripping the arm completely from the T/T first (and if it possesses a captive cable, that too!) :^( Despite doing it countless times in pursuit of perfection, whenever removing a gimballed tonearm I still resemble a munitions man defusing a bomb! :^D Others may find it less nerve jangling but I don’t (not when I “paid an arm & a leg” for those bearings! ;^)
There is no question that many unipivots are much more facilitating and user-friendly in this respect. (Of course if one has interchangeable headshells then easier swapping but small prices to be paid on resonance & rigidity). Finally I stress that I LIKE certain gimballed arms, I like certain gimballed arms with interchangeable headshells and I like certain unipivots. I also like some hybrid arms that don’t fall into these exact categories. I guess the upshot of all this is that there are no easy answers, just compromises, as you said. Best regards & happy listening. Bill. |
Bill / Moon Very interesting post. I remember owning a Helius arm...very high priced, but a miserable design.. It went back to England 4 or 5 times before I sold it.... it was gimballed and was supposed to be the second coming. I had trouble with my ESL, Zeta, Rega, (gimbal) but never had any trouble with a Grado Labs or 3 different VPI's... (unipivot). |
Dear @moonglum : Achilees heel in fixed/gimball tonearm bearing designs? Well, as in any tonearm design all depends on the design it self and the quality excecution level of that design. In the fixed tonearm bearing design there is no inherent achilees heel as in all true unipivots. Gimball type tonearm bearing designs can comes with " mistakes "/bad design in that regards but what is happening down there and that you explain in wide way ( brinelling. ) is not inherent to those kind of design. You can take for an example a vintage tonearm design as Technics where the designers decided to use four bearing points and use at each bearing points 5 ruby balls ( 20 in total. ) with a roundness tolerance of 0.5u that permits a bearing friction number ( in all directions. ) of less than 5mg. and it´s not only that but all the care Technics took for its production. A superlative product that even today is the " envy " for any tonearm manufacturer. Brinelling there is almost non-existent. Of course that there are truly bad designs as the FR tonearms that in that regards is one of the worst examples you can find out but even this those stylus tip/groove huge forces makes that the tonearm moves!. In the other side, the very tigth tolerances on today gimballed designs makes that you don’t have to worry about. In the past almost no one use ABEC 9 balls and today is a must and almost every one use it at the tonearm bearings. Everything the same unipivots are in total disadvantage against giball/fixed bearing tonearms. Regards and enjoy the MUSIC NOT DISTORTIONS, R. |
Hi Raul, Thanks for your thoughts on the widespread use of ABEC9. Of great interest is the fact that that there are buyers who wish to supersede the Technics tonearm (excellent quality) on the new SL1200 with {insert as applicable} tonearm? Vandalism! :) Sometimes, with gimballed, it came down to bearing quality and alignment. (Remember the Breuer arm?) http://www.adventuresinhifiaudio.com/03/12/2013/the-breuer-dynamic-type-5a-pickup-arm/ Moving on, it’s very common to see Forum questions such as, “Is Product A Better Than Product B?”. On this thread I’ve argued both merits and demerits of both sets of products/methods. Examples of the above question could include “Is MM Better Than MC?” or “Is Direct Drive Better Than Belt Drive?” or “Should MCs Be Damped or Undamped?”. In each case there is no outright winner or global resolution, much though everyone would appreciate that to be the case. Life would be simple if it were. I can understand that those engaged in the above topics sometimes misguidedly expect a “winner”, as indeed they might do in this thread, but as you have seen in the past it is not happening. The result is what we politely and affectionately refer to as “debate”. ;^)
Gimballed tonearms have been in manufacture a long time to the extent that they might be seen as the truer “soft option”. To me, folk suggesting unipivot design/manufacture is “easier” than gimballed is rather like saying that designing a pushbike is harder than designing a gimballed tonearm because the pushbike has both gimballed bearings and gears(!) ;^) It’s meaningless because those concerned are trying to find their own unique solution to a set of design problems. In fact, many manufacturers will sub-contract the bearing design and manufacture to an agency (Japanese companies are historically good at this, as you indicated) after which it becomes an item on an assembly “tick list”. Who needs to pre-load and align bearings when you can get someone better at it to do it for you? (to balance things up, Unipivot bearing manufacturers can also get help if they need it.)
Being a Devil’s Advocate is hard work. ;^) Best regards, Bill |
The 2nd pivot can be used on the metal arms, but may have a problem with some earlier vintage metal arms. Check with VPI and send them a picture and approx. purchase date so they can confirm the proper fit. Note that the 3D arm sounds very much better, and therefore the 2nd pivot will have an even greater advantage. |
| Post removed |
I tried to follow this thread and went cross eyed. Maybe it is my limited intellect. All I know is that Springreen's original post is correct. What follows includes a lot of opinion based on limited or no experience with the product under discussion. I also cannot understand the broken English of Raul, which is unfortunate. Perhaps someone can offer a synopsis of his main arguments that would help to elucidate me? I own one VPI metal arm with dual pivot, one VPI 3D arm with dual pivot, one SME Series III arm, and one SL1200GAE with gimbal arm. Properly set up they all sound quite good when mated to compatible cartridges and amplified with high quality electronics. |
..just a suggestion for those setting up the 2nd pivot. Attach the gizmo to the arm, but don’t let the 2nd pivot touch....just unscrew the adjustment until it doesn’t make contact. Use the Fozgometer, and then adjust the meter by very slowly screwing down the adjustment screw. When you get the ideal - only a bit off.... use very little adjustment to perfect the result. |
Hi All- The VPI Prime is on my short list for purchase and hence my interest in this thread. Not sure how well I can steer my way through what is “fake news” here & what isn’t. In regard to the topic of the 3D arm/ cart stability issues I will throw out some of my questions related to solutions in that matter. I don’t have much of a background here but I have no shortage of questions after all I’ve read to date. First, I’m interested in thoughts on the effect of adding the Townshend (silicone) fluid filled damping trough to the Prime 3D single pivot or dual pivot arm on the issue of cart/arm stability. Could this be a solution? See these articles: http://www.positive-feedback.com/Issue62/townshend.htm & http://www.theabsolutesound.com/articles/townshend-audio-rock-7-turntable-tas-209/ Here are some highlights/claims taken from the articles. * The damping trough can be added to any arm tonearm you want to stop from vibrating * The outrigger assembly insures intimate contact between the paddle and the cartridge, and damps the undesirable perturbations right at the headshell, while allowing the cartridge to follow the groove modulations accurately. * The front-end damping in effect disconnects the cartridge’s behavior from the arm’s behavior in good part. * The trough-damping gives a solidity to the sound. * The front-end damping reducing, effectively short-circuiting, most of the effect of the arms own resonances. * The trough-damping gives a solidity to the sound. * The bass becomes more solid and the whole more tightly controlled and stable. Second, again in an effort to improve stability & relieve vibration, using the “periphery ring clamp” & “center weight clamps” in addition to or not addition to the silicon Townshend trough. I had a good independent VPI Prime reviewer address the effectiveness of the periphery ring clamp used alone who stated the positive audible improvement to the sound but I can’t find the link, & I sent so much time looking. But, this link maybe referencing the link I’m trying to find: https://www.audiogon.com/listings/tweaks-turntable-outer-ring-for-vpi-clearaudio-basis-kronos-hanss-rega-sota-music-linn-2017-08-04-accessories . Wayne’s makes aftermarket ring clamps which also have a centering devise to align the record. He makes the following statements. * The ring effectively removes record resonance and noise by up to 40%. * This is a huge improvement in dynamics, detail retrieval ,complete low-frequency control, 10 db plus in background noise reduction, up to 50% improvement SRA tracking. These all result in reference level vinyl playback. Third, I understand that VPI does not believe? in the use of anti-skate (A/S) but the Prime is provided with a mechanism to enable A/S. I also see no reference for use of A/S on the “Rock 7” Townshend TT using the damping trough, nor see a way to enable it with this product. My interest here would be A/S use on the 3D Prime arm using the center & ring clamps with the Townshend damping trough using either the single or dual pivot. What effect would this combo of trough & weights have on the VPI Prime, could it alleviate any of the problems which this threat has addressed? And, would A/S be a probable necessary tweak necessary? From my reading of a number of Prime reviews I’ll say this. I’ve seen cartridge manufactures recommend the “dual pivot” for use with there specified carts given to reviewers for their use during Prime reviews. I think the manufacturers suggesting better sound using the dual pivot. I also get the impression that most reviewers and audiophiles don’t necessarily hear a difference in sound quality by switching between single & dual pivot but rather it’s a usage issue. Some people being afraid they will damage the arm when using the single pivot, but feeling more confidence when using the dual pivot. This is just my “impression” of what I remember after reading these reviews. “I know nothing” as Sgt. Shultz would say. |
robes, Hello. You've hit on a few things I thought no one would ever relate to but me. I'm a Townshend Rock 7 owner and a long time VPI owner. I have a long term TT project in play. One of my thoughts was to integrate the Townshend trough into my own design. (Frankly, it should be incorporated into more designs.) As far as integrating it into a Prime (unipivot arm), I would think it could only help. Your "Third" potential preference is a complete unknown. This is what makes this hobby fun! I hope you find a way to make it happen. My current preference with my Rock 7 and using "flat records", I find using no clamp or weight brings me closer to the music. I own and have used VPI delrin clamp, VPI SS center weight, BDR two-piece clamp, Stillpoints LP-1, among others in several situations within my 3 tt combinations. I like a flat record with no clamp. This is in conjunction with my 1mm thick platter mat and the Funk Firm Achromat (used together.) Look forward to your thoughts. |
From my perspective, using the 2nd pivot, while it may be a sonic advantage, takes away the objective of the unipivot design. The addition of a damping trough, as in the Townshend, adds damping at the most critical point without changing the main objective of a single mechanical point. This, to me, is the challenge of the potential project. |
Slaw- Nothing less then thrilled to hear from you. In reference to your reply about the clamps, in keeping this in stride with the OP's discussion (and posting etiquette) , have you (in regard to your VPI) noted any increased stability of arm by using the clamps. Of course, that would have to be in regard to use with a unipivot, if that's what your VPI has. I find it interesting that you prefer no clamps. If I bought a rather warped record today I would return it as I always did years ago (sometimes not buying the album after 3 tries cause the whole lot is bad). My innate feel is that the clamps could sharpen or affect the sound in some way, simply for it's bed rock foundation (& how that would interplay with cart/stylus) - then again, for better or worse dependent on TT setup I presume. I have never used a clamp, so I know not what I say, and I have never heard a clamped record play. As others here I'm reading and not in tune with experience. I've read probably 2 reviews (at least 1) that swore clamping made better sound, specifically with the ring on the Prime with 3D arm (of course that is the link I have searched my history back a month for & can't find- then, it was just a review). So, I hope others chime in on the clamp effect in relation to stability issues on the unipivot arm. I have no electronics background but a year of physics, & it's that which made me think clamping a record no matter if warped or flat will make a different foundation to which sound can be affected. Bring the warped ones back and I'm thinking clamp the flat ones to affect sound production which could be beneficial dependent on the TT setup. But does it make a flat record sound better, if so, then I would assume it has a stabilizing effect on the arm. I have nothing to experiment with, some of you do, I just brought the clamping issue up to see who has noticed any beneficial stabilizing affects it may have on the unipivot. @Slaw; the Rock 7 is on my list but I don't want to hijack this thread with Townshend questions. I don't see a way to direct message you on this forum, is there? I have a pressing question on it. If there is no messaging here I can start a new thread- Robes |
Dear @robes: A clamp normally reduces the resonances/vibrations/feedback existent between the TT platter-mat/LP surface with the stylus tip. and from this point of view always is a benefit to clamp the LP. With clamp or with out it the unipivot tonearm stability will be there, you can't avoid it using any clamp type. The second pivot is not the total cure, it's only something to reduce the stability problems. Best is to look for pivot tonearm with fixed bearing design because the cartridge needs full proof stability: zero tolerance. Unipivots are more easy to design but is not a tool to use for a cartridge ridding LP grooves. Is a mistake to use it that goes against the quality level performance. I know that some audiophiles really likes it but ( even that they don't know. ) it does not means is rigth. We have remember to " see " the stability subject at the microscopic level that is where the cartridge stylus tip has to " negociates " those " rude " LP grooves. Believe me that the cartridge tracking job is a really hard and huge task and not so simple as we can imagine it. Regards and enjoy the MUSIC NOT DISTORTIONS, R. |
With respect to the question concerning clamping, I have a Stillpoints LP1, which I use interchangeably on both my VPI Prime and on my SL1200GAE. It makes a difference sometimes, but not on every record. Generally records that are flat and 180 gram or heavier seem less affected by it. I also have a Periphery Ring for the VPI and it definitely makes a difference on any record that is warped. So much so that the Prime is my go to TT for warped records, regardless of any other consideration. At the same time, for records that are not warped I hear no difference is sound with or without the use of the Periphery Ring. In the interests of complete disclosure, my Prime is controlled by Phoenix Engineering Roadrunner/Eagle so speed accuracy and stability are pretty much the same with the ring or without. With respect to the effect that the 2nd pivot has on the VPI arm it is extremely easy to back the 2nd pivot off and away from the pressure plate once set up to hear and see the difference. It is doubtful that anyone who does this will decide after experimentation that the 2nd pivot does not provide a positive benefit. With respect to Raul's arguments concerning unipivot tonearms, they are not clear to me, again I find it difficult to understand him, this is a language barrier problem for me, so perhaps I am misunderstanding? Anyway, he seems to be arguing that there is some inherent "problem" with unipivots in the area of stability at the cartridge-stylus interface with the record groove. He states this as a fact, but offers no data. I would like to know what exactly the "problem" is with the data to back it up. I am skeptical that there is any real problem. |
Dear @billstevenson : I know that you did not read all my posts here and you don't have to do it but in one of them I posted this link and you can see what happens with any unipivot tonearms ( in this case VPI. ) about that unstability true problem that does not happens with pivot fixed bearing designs. Data?, here is a fact: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iTTLM9gPU9o Regards and enjoy the MUSIC NOT DISTORTIONS, R. |
Well so much for the Rock 7 Townshend TT and/or trough damping system. Check their website they don’t list TT’s as a product they make anymore. I contacted the U.S. distributor, here is his reply: Sorry, no. Not sure why. It was an excellent review. (The reviewer still owns a Rock 7, by the way.) Okay, now I get it. I don’t see the power cord issue as insurmountable. Nevertheless, setting up the Rock did (past tense, as it is no longer made), require expertise having nothing to do with power cords. The VPI is a much simpler proposition. Dan MeinwaldEAR USA P.S. I also contacted the Townshend home website Contact page. They simply didn't acknowledge my inquiry at all, so I guess they are out of the TT business- |
@billstevenson Raul’s point is to look at 12s in where there is a needle drop with an Ortofon cartridge, the arm swings noticeably which Raul maintains shows the inherent instability in Uni-pivot designs (absent a pseudo second pivot like the one under discussion). Funny thing regarding this video is that the ML turntable is actually a gimbal design, the stupid art director for the video dropped in a shot of some other VPI turntable! This was all discussed earlier in the thread (see entries dated 7/26-7/27) |
If folkfreak's post above is accurate, it should have been corrected immediately so as to not deceive in any way, future customers! However, it's easy to find videos of the arm swaying side to side until it becomes steady by way of natural causes, which is the entire argument in a nutshell, isn't it? I experience it every time I lower the arm onto a lp. @billstevenson, My posts regarding the different clamps/weights involved comparing them alone and with my mats and the differences I found. The mat/s won out with no weights/clamps easliy. |
Dear @billstevenson : @folkfreak is rigth. The tonearm in that video is a VPI unipivot one. @slaw posted """ it's easy to find videos of the arm swaying side to side until it becomes steady by way of natural causes ...""" as a fact that instability happens in any unipivot tonearm, is inherent in this kind of tonearm bearing design. In that video we can see the instability at macroscopic level but that instability coninue all over recorded area at microscopic levels. As folfreak said all those already were under discussion through this thread. Regards and enjoy the MUSIC NOT DISTORTIONS, R. |
I’m reminded of the Art Dudley video. Anyone watched it? In his wisdom he states that we are all listening to distortions in some form or another. It comes down to which distortions agree more with one’s own perception of their musical truth. Sorry Raul, while I tend to side with you in this particular discussion, your "...enjoy the MUSIC NOT DISTORTIONS" is a valid pursuit, but not a reasonable ultimate reality. I think the best compromise to the "2nd pivot" is @robes initial question regarding the Townshend trough. If available, it would not only address the "swaying" without adding a "2nd pivot" thereby changing the whole arm’s reason for being, but positively affect the cartridge resonances. A more perfect option. @stringreen’s statement earlier that the cartridge’ suspension should take care of the 3D arm sway is I think, asking too much of the cartridge. |
In conclusion?... Is this yet another of VPI' finding a way to make a product that at the time, was (well thought out) and later developed an accessory to make that product better? Probably. But we've been through this before, time and time again. And yet we still fall in line to buy, time and time again. At once it's an on-board motor, then an out-board motor, then a tri-pulley, then a rim drive, then a 300rpm motor then a 600 rpm motor then a mag-drive, the a direct drive. In the end, we're all trying to figure it all out while they are reaping the rewards, time & time again. If you are like me, It's hard to figure out exactly what part I have from which vintage VPI TT? I think looking at their homepage, even they are wrong on the product dates! Shew!..I'm really tired. |
stringreen, it's not VPI's (or anyone else's) attempts to keep improving it's product(s)---making incremental improvements to a model over time---that it's detractors find objectionable, but rather their history of first embracing one design philosophy, then abandoning it for a second of a completely different nature, then a third. And with each new design, claiming it to be the best way to make that component. I myself don't feel that way, thinking that Harry just came to embrace different designs at different points in time honestly, not cynically. One may buy whichever VPI design one prefers. Or none of them! There are more extreme examples that can be cited, particularly the myriad of different models offered simultaneously by some speaker companies. Making different speaker models for different applications, room sizes, maximum SPL and/or bass extension capabilities is a very sensible and justifiable practice. But to make speakers of rather different design for the same application does not speak well of a company's integrity. A few speaker companies not exhibiting this lack of integrity are Vandersteen, Magnepan, Eminent Technology, and Wilson, perhaps one factor leading to their long-term success. |
stringreen, I’ve been somewhat a critic of yours for a while. Mostly because of your willingness to (seemingly) support any product that comes out of Cliffwood. I remember asking you a few years ago about your recommending the ceramic platter. Upon my asking, I found out that you had never owned one but that your recommendation was based on Harry’s recommendation. Yes! A company’s goal should be to improve their product. Most companies take a year or two to roll out an improved product. VPI has condensed this down to what seems like every 1/4. This, to me seems like that at every whim Harry has, for a new product, he has the ability to put it out for the masses with little regard for inherently new/better designs that will stand the test of time, but for the almighty advertising dollar/social media talk that seems to drive VPI’s popularity along with the ongoing Talk on threads such as this. This is not good for the industry as a whole IMO. VPI has hit on a rare point in history where they can seemingly do no wrong in the eyes of most. Will one ever see the interest in a VPI product 20 years down the road that there is now for a Rock 7, that has only been out of production for about 5 years? Highly unlikely! |
