What Does It Take To Surpass A SME V?
Thinking about the possibility of searching for a new tonearm. The table is a SOTA Cosmos Eclipse. Cartridge currently in use is a Transfiguration Audio Proteus, and it also looks like I will also have an Ortofon Verismo if a diamond replacement occurs without incident.
The V is an early generation one but in good condition with no issues. Some folks never thought highly of the arm, others thought it quite capable. So it's a bit decisive.
The replacement has to be 9 to 10.5 inches. I have wondered if Origin Live is worth exploring? Perhaps a generation old Triplanar from the pre owned market?
Any thoughts on what are viable choices?
This is true. We ran Kimber cable for years with no problems at all- both on the SME5 and Graham 2.2. But if you're running balanced, if the cable and preamp are properly set up you'll find that the 'sound' from one cable to the next is very similar. |
The Neumann thing is a misnomer. Neumann never had any such thing in their EQ curve. see: https://www.stereophile.com/features/cut_and_thrust_riaa_lp_equalization/index.html Regarding the interconnect cables, when running balanced, one of the reasons for balanced operation is to minimize cable interaction and artifacts. Unless your cables have high capacitance I would not expect any serious differences in their 'sound' unless they are miswired. |
@dover Thanks for your comments! Based on your comments i think its very possible that I've not experienced the arm with the right cartridge. It is true that you only need 2 connections for a balanced line; since this would leave the arm tube ungrounded, you would need a high common mode rejection ratio at the input of the phono section to avoid noise (but any SUT would suffice for that). @mijostyn using multiple weights is a method of adding some adjustability to any arm with respect to effective mass. The Triplanar uses the same idea but any arm could. |
I used to run a Rabco that I modified. I get the allure of straight tracking. I left the ET2 out on several counts. The first being that the lateral tracking mass is a multiple of its vertical tracking mass. This makes selecting a cartridge rather difficult- if you succeed in getting the mechanical resonance correct in the vertical mode, you’ll see the cantilever bending back and forth on occasion. When it does that, due to the short radius of a cartridge cantilever, the tracking angle error is higher than any radial tracking arm. Second, it uses an air bearing. If you want the cartridge to play without coloration, there can be no play between the surface of the platter and the mount of the cartridge. We know that bearing play makes a difference since you can use higher pressure pumps and hear a difference. Finally the arm mass is high enough that a decision was made to run only 4 wires rather than the traditional 5. Cartridges are balanced sources and they don’t make a lot of voltage. When the arm ground is integrated into the left channel signal, it can be noisier. Plus you can’t run it balanced should you wish to do so; something you can do with most arms. One result of this can be RFI, although use of RF beads can sometimes sort this out. So IMO it didn’t rate the top drawer. |
@mijostyn He also has a knack for saying things in an adversarial way that he truly means- he's made that clear enough. I don't take offense though- I've never met him so its hard to take it personal. |
Yes, actually you did. ?? I'm ascribing this to an issue with your understanding how syntax in the English language works. Just so you know, your use of the colon in your quote suggested otherwise. The quote just above seems to confirm that for the same reason. |
This statement is false. I have not mentioned Mike in any way. But now that you brought him up, he has a friend that makes a much more expensive arm ($16,000 last I heard). It copies the Triplanar VTA tower but is otherwise different. I found it didn't play bass as well as the Triplanar and the Triplanar seemed more neutral so I still prefer it. What Mike likes is his business and I don't fault him for it. We have differing opinions but somehow remain cordial on the web and in person because neither of us find reason to level personal attacks at the other! You would do well to emulate his grace. |
@neonknight I ran a Cosmos for quite a while with the SME5. Mine was an early Cosmos (serial number 0, the production prototype which was done entirely in white). The Cosmos had an excellent platter pad at that time, designed by Warren Gehl of Audio Research (before he joined them). This has been the most effective platter pad I've seen. I have one; Warren sold them directly prior to SOTA getting the contract for the product. Some of the recordings I use for reference are ones I've made. So I know what they sound like since I was there. Back in the old days when the SME5 was first made, there were only three top arms; the SME5, the Graham unipivot and the Triplanar. I tried all of them. The Triplanar proved itself the most versatile, being able to track a wider range of cartridges due to its greater adjustability. Since then the Triplanar has been improved and there are 3 models. I've yet to hear anything beat it. Its the only arm that can do what my master tapes do without coloration, showing that the LP was mastered properly. I've never been able to find anything that could make it mistrack. I've had mine about 15 years and I hear there's a new wire that might be a bit better, but I've not had much incentive to update- it works really well. One thing this arm really taught me is its much more important that the arm be able to track the cartridge properly than ultimately what cartridge you actually have. Anyone who does not understand that will be doomed to spending more and changing out cartridges much more frequently.
|
A group of us misfit bikers took the train to the Chicago and got a special showing at the Field Museum. A year or two later I went to see it again in Vegas during CES. Pretty amazing stuff! |
