What Does It Take To Surpass A SME V?

@rauliruegas Thanks for the welcome.  I've been distracted from audio by other projects for the past few years, and now have more time to participate.  The better of my two 3012R arms was worked over by

 

Dear @dgarretson ​@peterayer : Thank’s for the link.

Now, even that’s not exactly the same the today SME M2-12R is theSME 3012R response where mainly they fixed the main " trouble " in the vintage tonearm because in the M2 there is no knife bearing any more along that SME improved the internal damping and internal wire.

 

Other than the good look 12" tonearms really can’t gives us a true advantages even its lower tracking error. This example speaks by it self.

Löfgren A IEC standard. Tracking distortion in between/around null points for a 12" against what for me could be the best EL compromise 10.5" and against 9" too:

 

12 "....... 0.420%

10.5"... 0.485%

9"........ 0.58%

 

Who in this thread can detect: 0.065% or 0.16% against the 9" difference?

I know I can’t do it. We have to take in count too that at each single mm. the tracking distortion is changing all over the LP recorded grooves:

 

same premises but 1mm. after:

12"....0.419% vs 0.420% 1mm. before, difference of 0.001% tracking distortion that even a bat can’t be aware of it.

Those measurements are when the cartridge/tonearm alignment has 100% of accuraccy ! !

 

So where is the 12" big deal? along that this is what the SAT designer says about in favor of shorter arms vs 12"+ ones:

 

 

Makes sense the 12" EL tonearm design other that its look?, certainly not for me.

 

and we have to think in the higher inertia moment in the 12" and its effect in the cartridge stylus tip/cantilever by that added dynamic mass that needs to handle along all the LP imperfections.

 

 

THAT GOD BLESS YOU ALL AND YOUR DEAREST FAMILY IN THIS NEW    

2 0 2 3   YEAR   !  !  !

 

Sincerely,

 

R.

 

 

 

There are measurements and there is listening.  People choose what sounds right to them.  

@peterayer , You choose what sounds right based on, design considerations and measurements especially when it comes to tonearms.

@neonknight , I also have a Cosmos. The TriPlanar is a great arm but it will not fit on a Cosmos. That dropped rear end runs into the plinth. The SME 5 is a great arm. Origin Live arms will fit but I prefer the 4Point 9 and the Schroder CB. I have a Schroder CB and the only bad thing I can say about it is it does not come with a tonearm rest. Mr Schroder thinks they resonate and will not put one directly on the arm. I made a locking one and mounted it on the Sota's plinth. You can see it on my system page. I have both walnut and cherry in stock if you would like one. Otherwise the CB is as good as a pivoted tonearm gets. It is neutral balance, is adjustable for different cartridge compliances and has a wonderful frictionless, magnetic anti skate mechanism. It's geometry is also right on the money and it lines up Lofgren B perfectly. The 4 Point nine is less expensive. The wire leads out over the plinth instead of under and usually has at least one additional connection. The Schroder is one wire clips to RCAs or XLRs. Otherwise the Kuzma is an excellent arm.

Dear @peterayer  :  " There are measurements and there is listening.  People choose what sounds right to them.  "

 

I posted several times that when an audiophile says: " that's what I like it " then the dialogue is just ended because what we like is untouchable subjectivity and useless argue against it.

I gave you some 3012R characteristics that goes against the sounds reproduction og the LP recorded grooves not matters what.

Well, certainly for you it does not matters and difference with me is that those characteristics that goes against the quality reproduction levels tells me is not a good choice to achieve my MUSIOC/SOUND target that's stay truer/nearer to the recording. My common sense is what analizing subjectivity/objectivity takes the rigth choose according my end target.

You can't prove with subjectivity alonethat you are rigth even f  you are rigth that you are notttttttsing the 3012R.

That's what you like and is clear for me but   issue is not that.

 

In the other side your room/system speaks for your subjectivity or maybe the " objectivity "/$ of the ones that just  made with your system a change of 180°  when you pass from SS to tubes electronics, from dynamic/moving coil speakers to vintage horns, from SME TT to that way heavy weigth metal TT and so on. Nothing wrong with that because ws and is your choice privilege as for any one of us.

I think that a mix of subjectivity/obejectivity is a very good path for any audiophile, certainly not for you and its fine with me.

 

Anyway, continue your MUSIC enjoyment as I and other audiophiles like to do because the name of the game is " MUSIC enjoyment no matters what.

 

R.

 

 

@peterayer  . I think that could be a good idea to make a test in your room/system and this test is to listen the Rega RP-10 ( truly inexpensive for you at around 5.5K. ) with your today cartridges and find out which kind of differences you beeen aware vs your analog rig in use.

 

After the test you can put on sale and will goes fast or maybe you decide to keep it. A the end is just a subjective test as you like.

 

R.

Raul, I have arrived at the music listening experience I want.   Thank you for your advice.   I was simply suggesting that the original poster try the vintage SME tonearm. They are easily available on the used market at about half the cost of an SME V.   I happen to prefer the vintage arm and he might also.   

@pindac Are your standalone tonearm pods from Acoustand? I have a couple on order and should have them, finally, in a couple of weeks.

@dogberry , stand alone tonearm pods are a disaster in progress. The relationship of the tonearm to the platter has to be infinitely stiff and non resonant. Stand alone tonearm pods do not meet that requirement or even come reasonably close. 

The stand alone POD for the Kuzma XL table is something like 60 pounds, I’ve tried to move one once and like almost impossible! Very inert and resonance free I would imagine.

@dogberry The Standalone Tonearm Pod I designed after looking at a multitude of Designs was to have an approx'  4 Inch (100mm) OD, Hollow Phosphor Bronze Billet with a Spiked Base mechanically attached. At the time I recollect the Billet could be acquired with perfectly flat Top and Base as an additional cost to the purchase for approx' £80. From the same Machine shop a matching OD Base Plate of approx' 20mm thickness was between £10-£20 depending on Aluminium, Brass or Gunmetal.    

A proportion of the Base of the Billet was to be filled with Lead Shot. up to the level where the Billet Wall was bored to allow the Tonearm Signal Wire or Cable to exit the Void. 

The Top Plate was to be a Multi-material approach to create different damping and dissipation interfaces. At this time Delrin was an early material to be tried, as Acetal was respected as a Platter Material.

If I were to adopt this method today, I would work much closer to Densified Wood as the Bulk of the Structure.

The Tonearm Pod I regularly witness in use has been Bespoke Produced by the same Machining Company that produced the SP10 R's Aluminium Plinth.

The Design is close to mine, but has a Aluminium Hollow Billet and Thick Brass Base and Spiked Feet, Lead Shot in the Void. There are options to use a alternative Top Plate Material, but Aluminium is used at present.

The owner of the TT>Tonearm, is already starting to express a curiosity toward Densified Wood, and I suspect this may start with the Tonearm Pod, as my owned 75mm Thick Board has been discussed within the HiFi Group as to what could be done with a Off-Cut.

I am sure I have offered a Off-Cut of this same material on this forum to another member for the use as a Tonearm Pod.

If you develop the curiosity yourself let me know and I will see how I can assist with your request.         

The ones I have coming are lead-filled brass, and have adjustable spikes. I am fairly confident they will not be a disaster, as much as that might disappoint some.

@dogberry It is no secret I attend a HiFi Group, there is within this Group, approx' 200 years of combined experience with HiFi.

The Group is made up of long term enthusiasts, a retired dealer in Hi End HiFi,    an active Dealer, who has a range of Hi End HiFi, an EE who designs and builds.

Most members also have Educational Upbringing that belongs to the upper echelons in a society, (quite different from my own). They are experienced in Live Orchestra, Live Choir, Live Opera and the Group in general are regularly at a Live Acoustic Performance or for a few seeing a Band.

The main venue for a meet due to the accommodating size of the listening room, and the familiarity with the system by all, is the home where the Standalone Arm Pod is in use. This TT set Up has been the source to demo' numerous devices to be added into a signal path over the past few years as well as be used for Platter Mat comparisons, Puck Comparisons, RCA Cable Comparisons.

Not at any time has it been suggested there is something amiss in the SQ as a result of the Standalone Arm Pod in use, there is only satisfaction and attraction to the performance of the TT>Arm>Cart' in use. Certainly no disappointment, 'what's that'.

Do you mean on the Analog Section of Audiogon, there might be a few who a long-time honed in their collusive activities, where there is the need to project an authority. Where this unfortunately results in the discoveries of endlessly contradictory statements, where the sands are always shifting in relation to their assumptions/presumptions that something is insufficient if they say it is.

@dogberry These Pods are going to be just fine as the minimum, in truth, they are most likely going to give you a experience that is totally satisfying.

The Base the Pod and TT share is a important consideration, it is best if it has a very stable property. There are numerous materials that are stable today.

The next consideration is how the Base managers energy transferred, either ambient or from the TT Operation. The road leads the Densified Wood once more for this a material that damps and dissipates energy to the desirable effect.

The link is one I posted very recently, it has a valuable demonstration, and shows where the Densified Wood reaches beyond earlier go to choices used by many.

As said once the impression is made if you want to experiment a little. If the use of a Densified Wood becomes a interest contact me.   

 

I was not referring to you, pindac.

Since you will have 2 really nice cartridges, an S tonearm with removable head-shells would be convenient. With SOTA, you have to be very careful that an arm will fit within the arm board, won't bump into the dust cover, and won't be over-weight for proper balancing of the suspension. My Fidelity Research FR64fx (S with removeable head shells) weighs ~ 2.2 lbs, and comes in just under that weight limit. It's a very nice match with SOTA Nova :) 

Of course when swapping head shells, VTA adjustment is a concern and most arms with on-the-fly VTA will be a difficult fit for SOTA. But in practice, the only cartridge I've yet encountered with a wildly different height than others is Van den Hul Colibri (much taller).

@dogberry I know 😎, the bait is laid.

I am totally adhered to the Rigid Coupling Methodology, I was offered a option to have a Armboard Machined, which I declined for the One Plinth Material only philosophy.

The individual offering me the option has chose the Machined Armboard Option to mount Two Tonearms up to 12". This is to be used with a TT>Tonearm Identical to my own go to TT Set Up, as well as a selection of other immediately available Tonearms.

Where the two above Plinths now separate further, is that the producers second owned TT of the same model, is now in a condition that is to be used with a P'holz Chassis, that will also mount Two Tonearms up to 12" 

Another TT owner, with the same family of TT, has as already made known, chosen a Standalone Tonearm Pod.

I get to be demo'd all methodologies and that is great for me and others who choose to be present when the demo's take place, no reason why one of the pair of owned Identical Tonearms don't end up on the Standalone Tonearm Pod, as two near usage identical Cart's are ready for this Trial, and will be used on all Tonearms being compared.

All philosophies for mounting a Tonearm are pretty much exposed to be subjectively assessed.

I am to be open minded, but as a initial thought on the upcoming trial, I really don't see much to be discovered if the TT Plinth, Chassis and Standalone Tonearm Pod are mounted with a same Tonearm>Cart on a Densified Wood Sub Plinth.

'Standalone Tonearm Pod' is looking such a lovely morsel to be picked at on the set Traps Plate.

Lets see which are those, whom choose to tell another how to mount their own Tonearms in conjunction with their own TT/TT's in their own Home.

Dear @neonknight  : Do you took a decision about?

 

R.

I’m hoping that the SME VA tonearm will become available for sale without the new SME 60 turntable, and that it’s within my budget.  A definite improvement over the SME V.

I haven’t really made any choices. I had an unexpected opportunity come my way at the end of December. A person bought a new Ortofon Verismo and at the twenty hour mark decided to dust the table and ended up removing the diamond from the cantilever. The cartridge is fine otherwise and is at VAS getting ready to receive a new diamond. Once it gets back it will go on the SOTA for an evaluation, and then we will proceed from there.

 

I find it interesting that arms get suggested that have dimensions that make it impossible to fit on the SOTA. To be honest, a good portion of the thread is not very applicable.

 

I have not decided on an arm, I am seriously considering doing it this year. But really do not have a short list of candidates. For the time being the V will stay in place. I spent a lot of money the second half of the year by buying a pair of Classe Omega monoblocks, Trinov Amethyst preamp, and found a nice Ortofon T2000 SUT.

 

As a curiosity though. Who is refreshing V’s?

I totally agree with Mijostyn about the advice that the tonearm should be tightly coupled to the turntable bearing assembly.  The two should move in unison and never in relation to one another.  However, many persons have built these very heavy, very sturdy outboard arm pods, which when mounted on the same platform/shelf/support structure as the TT itself, apparently can work quite well.  I suspect this works in proportion to the degree to which both turntable and pod are subject to the exact same environmental disturbances and react similarly to such disturbances.  This is not a question of plotting or skullduggery on anyone's part.  It's just good engineering.  Take a look at any well built turntable designed with its own plinth and tonearm; you will find that the designers arranged for the sort of tight coupling to which I refer.  The Rega P10 is light as a feather, figuratively, yet it incorporates a heavy metal girder that links the platter bearing support to the tonearm pivot.

The idea of Rigid Coupling is a Philosophy for the Mechanical Structure.

I refer to this design as a Hard Coupling, if the Material used to create the coupling has a Stable Property. 

There are other philosophies used as Well, that run parallel with he above.

Looking at how TT designs are produced today, there is certainly a deviation from certain philosophies and these are evolving into a Hybrid of the Science used to produce the coupling. A Hard and Soft Coupling are being introduced.

In relation to a Standalone Tonearm Pod, is this not just a Step further from have a Tonearm Mounted on a Sub Chassis and a Bearing Mounted on a Upper Chassis, as seen in TT Designs. 

In relation to a Standalone Tonearm Pod, it is not too much different from a Cantilever Armboard used on many modern TT designs.

It does look like there is a major shift to how modern design interprets some of these Philosophies of yesteryear, even though remaining a useful guide for adopting for use today. I follow the Rigid Coupling it suits me, to suggest it is the only method pretty much questions many TT's seen in use, that are proving to be exceptional for their impression that can be made.

Very soon my own Investigation will have been carried out, it is a interest only, not a witch hunt to prove/disprove which is better. 'If' something is discovered that is standout and attractive, then this is most likely the structure to be aspired to. 

Dear @neonknight  : " A person bought a new Ortofon Verismo and at the twenty hour mark decided to dust the table and ended up removing the diamond from the cantilever. "

My experiences about and from other audiophiles tells me that's almost imposibel to the stylus tip " been removed " from the cantilever with out any damage to the cantilever.

When  the MC2000 started t been in the market some owners claimed to Ortofon because after " 20 hours " the stylus tip just disappeared " and Ortofon took care about and obviously made the change for a new cartridge with no charge to the owners, this happened with the MC5000 but when the Anna came in the market same situation happened and as always Ortooooofon took care about. There are other similar experiences with the Bronze and I experienced other than Ortofon with VDH and one cartridge that came for a re-tipper ( A.Kim. ).

Rigth now to late but the original owner could has the Verissimo changed by Ortofon with the original Replicat 100. Yes some re-tippers say they have it but I know that are Replicant 100 and Ortofon REPLICANT 100.

Good that for a while you will follow with the V tonearm.

 

R.

@pindac ​​@rsf507 , Just like mass loaded turntables, mass loaded arm pods do not work. Low frequency sound is misleadingly powerful. A cement mixing truck traveling down the street will shake your foundation. Earthquakes are low frequency waves traveling through the earth. As long as everything is shaking in unison you are OK but, if there is any differential the cartridge will pick it up. As the turntable and tonearm pods have different masses and centers of gravity  environmental rumble is going to create that differential. Mass loaded anything is layperson intuition. The best defense against any environmental sound pollution is a tonearm rigidly mounted to the platter's chassis that is suspended with a resonance frequency of 1-3 Hz.  

A tonearm that has a "sound" is defective. The best equipment always sounds "damped" at first as people are use to listening to the euphonic distortions created by all but the very best equipment. Tonality or amplitude response is a moving target and people will prefer frequency response curves based on what they are use to listening to and the vast majority of audiophiles have no idea what they are listening to because they have never measured it. I can tell you exactly what my own preferences are because I have measured it and have the ability to adjust it in 1 Hz increments. But tonality is only one aspect of reproduction. The ability of a system to image is a much more fragile characteristic and is not so easily adjusted. It requires all aspects of reproduction to be correct. The pile up of euphonic distortions and phase aberrations destroy a system's ability to cast a convincing image. When is comes to vinyl playback there are so many ways the illusion can be ruined, extraneous vibration getting to the stylus, pitch aberration coming from speed deviation mostly from warped records, unchecked resonance traveling back and forth in the tonearm (old SMEs are a great example of this). The Kuzma 4 point is not over damped. The SME is underdamped! 

@rauliruegas , I'm not sure what you have against the TriPlanar. On paper it is a fine design if a bit overly complicated. I have played with one and it is well constructed. I have never listed to one in a reference system. There are too many very experienced people that really like it for it to be a bad arm. 

@atmasphere , You and Raul both love music and I hate to see the contentiousness between you. Raul can be very difficult to translate at times and he has a knack for saying things in what seems to us an adversarial way which he truly does not mean. We all have our opinions and can be in this "hobby" if you will for a variety of reasons which can frequently clash. It is why Howard Johnson's made 28 flavors. 

Raul can be very difficult to translate at times and he has a knack for saying things in what seems to us an adversarial way which he truly does not mean.

@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.

Raul does not need an apologist.  He is what he is. By all accounts of those who have met him in person, he is indeed a charming and amiable person.  Not always does he behave that way on line. I feel it's OK to call him out on his behavior at those moments.

Mijostyn, For a person who seems to reside in rural New Hampshire (and what part of New Hampshire is NOT "rural"), you sure have a lot of cement trucks and earthquakes with which to contend. Portsmouth is the only city I know of that may not be categorized as rural in NH. I live in Bethesda, MD, which is suburban but not rural, and we never have a problem with heavy trucks or certainly not earthquakes in my neighborhood.  (Yes, I know seismic disturbances travel great distances, but they also lose energy along the way until barely perceptible and brief in duration.) You could move down to more bucolic New York City to avoid those problems.  Just as you accord some respect to the Triplanar based on the testimony of many others, so too I accord some respect to an arm pod done right, although I personally would never go that route, because so many others seem happy with theirs.  I cannot always discern what Pindac is doing, but it appears he is cognizant of the necessity to build his arm pods to be rock stable.

My experiences about and from other audiophiles tells me that's almost imposibel to the stylus tip " been removed " from the cantilever with out any damage to the cantilever.

In my own experience, this is quite common for MC carts with boron cantilevers. It's happened to a local friend, with his Ortofon Jubilee MC getting snagged on a fuzzy sweater sleeve. It's happened to my Koetsu Onyx, when a girlfriend sent it jetting hard down and across the record surface. In both cases, the boron cantilever and suspension appeared completely undamaged; the stylus had simply released its bond. 

If it was an aluminum pipe cantilever, it's more likely that would have crumpled first. But boron rod is strong and stiff. Also, most modern MC cartridges have very robust suspensions & dampers. By comparison Ortofon 2M with its tiny little rubber ring suspension will give way long before a stylus is yanked out. 

With boron MC's, apparently the stylus glue bond is often the weak point. 

@mijostyn  I have experience of Mass Plinths (multiple years) and in conjunction with this, have had encounters with numerous TT owners who have adopted the Mass Method as their choice for a Plinth.

I have met lesser who have adopted the Standalone Tonearm Pod as a means to mount a Tonearm and even less who have adapted a TT to have a Swing Out Cantilever Armboard as a mounting design for a Tonearm.

If I were to spend a little time, using Web Searches to discover where the usage of the above methods are to be found and to gauge popularity.

I don't expect to find many utilising a Swing Out Cantilever Arm Mount unless a part belonging to a Brands TT Design, not many Plinths Only are seen produced to mount a Tonearm using this methodology.

Similar Time spent searching will certainly show where there is a popularity to adopt the Standalone Tonearm Pod, I know this as not too many years past I used a selection of witnessed designs to design a Tonearm Pod for a period of trialling I was getting to the point of putting into place.

As for a similar time searching for Mass Plinths in use, it won't be long before the idea of Bookmarking Pages will be abandoned as the quantity to be found is substantial.

A said in previous post over a long period of time,  I am a advocate of rigidly coupled, but also I am an advocate of allowing those with an interest, curiosity, want, to pursue it and have their experience. The methodology adopted is able to replay recorded music just fine.

When these individuals following their curiosity, want, interest, settle down with drink in hand and commence with enjoying the fruits of their work. I don't really see a concern for a Earthquake making a visit being too much of a Concern, maybe just a snippet of a concern for a overly noisy dead wax or invasive tick or pop. A contamination on a Styli can prove to be quite frustrating, and will ruin any replay, it is surprising how many times it is sat out and persevered to the point it has to be dealt with. 

There is only a untruth being told if a user of Vinyl claims there Styli is pristine clean for every replay put on by themselves.

In general 'most users' of vinyl enjoy the required rituals to get the better from it, but they are Human, they are not fanatics, and each will have their own level of expressed zeal.   

There are items you have raised that will come into a discussion now and again, they are discussed as they are present, and in most cases met to varying degrees of being present, each can have its own influence on the function of the parts required to produce the replay.. 

The influence is maybe unwanted, but it is a reality, it is present and it is lived with.

The Influence is not removed but some will go to lengths to manage the condition.

Reality is that the success of the management within a Home are pretty much assessed subjectively, so individuals choose their poison and the level of toxicity they are willing to persevere.   

Most who are knowing of the influences being present are thoroughly enjoying the musical experience being created, however flawed it is in relation to the ideal but  unobtanium perfect equipment / environment.

What's more is the individuals with such flaws equipment and methodology used  to manage the condition, are happy to introduce other's to experience the flawed equipment in use, in the flawed environment.  

As stated a few post back.

" Lets see which are those, whom choose to tell another how to mount their own Tonearms in conjunction with their own TT/TT's in their own Home ".

@lewm You have stated about myself,

"but it appears he is cognizant of the necessity to build his arm pods to be rock stable ".

I have never built a Standalone Tonearm Pod, I have produced a design for one, which if produced as Batch of Three, was once seen as a simplistic method to enable a variety of Tonearms of various lengths to be used in conjunction with a TT Trial Period, that was to have a TT used with Multiple Designs for a Platter Bearing.

Bearing Exchanges were to be carried out as a Comparison Trial.

I had managed to be offered from across the Globe a selection of Bearing Designs produced for one TT.

The Swap out of the Bearing was relatively easy without too much downtime due to exchanges.

From the producers of the Bearings, a Couple expressed an interest to see how different Tonearms were deemed to function when encountering the design for their Bearing.

I offered a way to accommodate this, by the means of suggesting a Standalone Tonearm Pod, strange how these engineer minded individuals did not refute that as a proposal, or the design when made known, when all bearing suppliers got wind of it still no challenges.  

The TT to be used for the Trials was with its own Mass Plinth and only able to accommodate a Tonearm with a Rega Geometry. Again strange how these engineer minded individuals were not challenging the Mass Plinth TT in use, it was agreed the TT was to be the one used.

As made known I no longer choose the Mass Plinth or the TT mounted on it as my first choice, the Mass Plinth and TT are reserved for demonstration and loans only. 

 

Whew!

Dear @mulveling  : The Verissimo comes with diamond cantilever and the MC2000 with aluminum and my re-tipped cartridge has a ruby cantilever.

I don't doubt what you say . Yes, my VDH experience had boron cantilever and in an audiophile place that happened with his Titan i.

 

R.

@rauliruegas 

 

Well I have images of a cantilever with epoxy only on the tip and pictured of a clean cantilever devoid of epoxy. Cantilever is not fractured. The cantilever is confirmed as synthetic diamond. There is plenty of data to confirm the cartridge is all OEM and missing a diamond. Condition and health of the cartridge is confirmed by inspection. Steve is in the process of installing the diamond at this time. 

@lewm , I live in a bathroom community glued to the side of the greater metropolitan Boston area. I also have an excavation company in my back yard. Can't see them but I can hear them all day long if I walk outside. I hear and see them running inside if I but a a few blocks of wood under the Sota and turn off my rumble filter. Put the tonearm down on a stationary record, put the dust cover down so you are not subjecting the tonearm to any drafts and watch the subwoofers go. Sometimes I can even see the cantilever squiggle a little as something comes in around it's resonance frequency. We do have seismic activity up here but it is always minor by the time it gets to us. I have felt it on several occasions, very spooky. A tonearm needs to be rigidly connected to the platter and both need to be isolated. People will do what they will but, you will never catch me with an outboard arm pod or an unsuspended turntable. Yes, "whew" is more than appropriate.

@pindac , two tectorial plates moving at two inches a year cashed into each other and created the Himalayas, a rock pile 25,000 feet high. So much for mass. 

@mulveling , I lost the diamond off a Clearaudio Charisma without a hint of damage to the cantilever. I sent a picture to Musical Surroundings who got a new cartridge and a return packing slip to me in three days. Great service. Then there is the episode with my Double Matrix Pro Sonic but, I will save that for another day.

As stated a few post back.

" Lets see which are those, whom choose to tell another how to mount their own Tonearms in conjunction with their own TT/TT's in their own Home ".

The Link is showing what one design philosophy thinks about Mass and the Standalone Tonearm Pod used in conjunction with a TT.

Mind you for the price asked, I'm sure a bit of the Himalaya's could be a acquisition possibly with a village thrown in as a sweetener.

 

Pindac, no one is telling you what to do. This is a hobby. Messing around is fun. Arguing politely is also fun and sometimes enlightening. Simon Yorke TTs are other exceptions to the rule broken by the Onedof with its outboard arm pod. But I think SY provides a shelf or base in which to seat his TT and arm pod.

There’s a first time for everything. After all these years of reading and appreciating Atmasphere’s excellent and very informative posts it happened: disagreement.

**** 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. ****

The mighty ET2 was left out of that exclusive club. Never owned the Triplanar, but have owned the SME5 and the Graham and still own the ET2. In the ways that matter to me, and with the many cartridges of both the MC and MM variety that I have used, the ET2 comes out on top. Still available and still beats the SME5.

 

@mijostyn "@pindac , two tectorial plates moving at two inches a year cashed into each other and created the Himalayas, a rock pile 25,000 feet high. So much for mass. "

And yet, somehow I expect a turntable bolted to the South Col of Everest would find itself on a fairly solid platform!

@lewm you are correct, actually the most correct I have seen for a long time in your statement "no one is telling me what to do", I will reciprocate it with the passion others express about archaic, halcyon ideas that have certainly moved on in other circles of thought.

I am an individual who likes a first hand 'sit in front of' experience, then I make my assessment. I don't pretend I know what is the best and express a Boorish behaviour toward any ideas from another that challenges experiences and assessments that I am comfortable with.  

As for the Base Board to Mount a TT and Standalone Tone Pod on.

My referencing a Base Board is how I have thought the methodology through and would choose to mount the Two Parts being interfaced.

As stated in a previous post, the board will be best if it has a Stable Property, ( again only my idea for this), it will with today's experiences to draw on also be a for the better if the Board has good damping and dissipation properties combined with being stable. This is not to be a statement to tell another if they do different they are wrong. 

It does offer a alternative to an individual, if they have not thought of this methodology and choose adopt it, to see if a benefit can be attained.

There are many methods adopted today to control a transfer of energy not only one 

As stated before, the TT Designs seen today and the methodologies selected as part of the design, to mount/interface the Tonearm are varied (the designs are way to varied to even be considered they are born from a one methodology only approach). 

Tectonic Plates are what they are, they keep other parties with a passion for this    field of interest extremely stimulated as does Marine Science and Astronomy. 

All Three are natural, and all can have an impact on vibration transmission that can impact on a Man Made Product.

Tectonic Plates being used as means to describe a Set Up of a HiFi Device and Supporting ancillaries is so extreme it is ludicrously off the scale. 

Is the next attempt to prove a point, using off the scale ludicrous as the parameter. Is where it is stated that Igneous Rock used in System, as a Plinth Material and Standalone Tone Pod Material will accelerate the convection and a Mini Mounting Range will form within ones lifetime in front of ones eyes, a ravine might even appear during one Albums replay.   

Comparing the Naturally Created Tectonic Plates convection to a Platter Spindle and Tonearm that are 'not' mechanically fastened to the same material,  hence, 'not'  being mechanically coupled, and as a result, able to create a convection as seen in a Tectonic Plate is utter Cod's Wallop. 

If a TT and Standalone Tonearm Pod had shown a movement toward each other at a dimension of Two Inches in one year in my own home, even if a Jack Hammer Breaking Out, next to the room with the equipment. I would be calling 'Ghostbusters' as a Meddling Poltergeist would be the most feasible explanation for the cause.

  

@pindac @lewm 

You guys are missing the real point - to measure the groove accurately the tonearm must be "anchored" in position relative to the platter, with no differential movement.

As to whether this is achieved via a common chassis linking the arm/platter ( my preferred solution ) or an arm pod is moot - it depends on the design and implementation - there are good an bad in both formats.

On the other hand if you believe in having a rigid loop between platter, arm and cartridge then you need to throw out your TT if it has one of the maglev type bearings that are all the rage at the moment.

And of course there is the classic story of the cleaning lady that lifted the arm pod to dust the shelf underneath, without telling the owner, and he wondered why the TT sounded so bad after all those hours spent on careful set up and most of his favourite records ended up with groove damage from mis-tracking.

@dogberry 

And yet, somehow I expect a turntable bolted to the South Col of Everest would find itself on a fairly solid platform!

Yes but trying to adjust VTA accurately with frozen nuts can be difficult.

**** 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. ****

Thats a pretty myopic view of the world.

There were many others at that time  - Syrinx PU3, Alphason HR100S, Exact, Breuer, Sumiko MSC800, Naim Aro, Air Tangent, Eminent Technology to name a few.

Personally I've never rated the Graham - too much dampening in the armtube ( the early versions ) and the bearing is upside down - draining energy in the wrong direction. The Aro smokes it.

The Triplanar lacks resolution - its adjustability is both an advantage ( cartridge set up ) and disadvantge ( too many joints, loop rigidity is compromised ).

The mighty ET2 was left out of that exclusive club. Never owned the Triplanar, but have owned the SME5 and the Graham and still own the ET2. In the ways that matter to me, and with the many cartridges of both the MC and MM variety that I have used, the ET2 comes out on top. Still available and still beats the SME5.

@frogman

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.

@dover "Yes but trying to adjust VTA accurately with frozen nuts can be difficult."

And that's why we can't surpass the SME V - VTA is just a twiddle of the vertical adjustment thumbscrew!

@atmasphere ​​​​   cc @frogman 

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-

Actually you are looking at this the wrong way round. The horizontal effective mass as adjustable and the decoupling of the counterweight in the horizontal plain means that you can tune the arm to the cartridge.

Secondly, if you go to Bruces website and look at his testing results, the split effective mass in the 2 planes reduces the peak of the fundamental resonance significantly, resulting in more accurate bass and better tracking.

As an example I ran a high compliance Shure V15vxmr in the ET2 when I had a hiatus from audio for 10 years. After that time ( still with the original stylus in place and stabiliser brush removed ) the cantilever was dead straight and negligible stylus wear - so much so that someone bought the 10 year old cartridge for what I paid 10 years earlier after much examination with Lupe and micro scope.

 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.

Yes I agree, but the upside is the removal of tracking angle distortion - removing phase and time error caused by tracking angle distortion - and unparalleled reproduction of the soundstage. The removal of phase distortions inherent in pivoted arms also improves timing and coherency. If you bought an ET2.5 and listened to your own records that you cut with the ET2.5 properly set up you would be shocked - particularly in terms of soundstage reproduction and preservation of phase.

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. 

Most ET owners rewire their arms, with no ground. Never had a noise problem, and  balanced configuration is easily attainable. With current wires from Audionote & Kondo you could run 5 wires with less resistance than the original wiring if you need to.

 

 

Atmasphere, thanks for your response.  Dover does a much better job than I could explaining the technical details and reasons why I hear what I hear. What I hear is always the bottom line for me and the ET2 has shown itself to be a fantastic arm. Clearly superior to both the SME and Graham as concerns tonal naturalness, sound staging and bass accuracy, if not power. With the possible exception of a Decca London, never had any issues with cartridge compatibility.

@dover , you are making excuses for a defective design. I will say this much less politely than atmasphere, who is a gentleman and a scholar. The ET2 and all air bearing arms like it are not suitable in any way, shape or fashion for high fidelity audio purposes. They put cartridges in such an unfavorable position as to increase distortion and phase errors. I understand the allure but it is based on the faulty premise that tracking angle error is more significant than other problems associated with tonearm design. It is in all actuality, minor. Trying to keep the cartridge tangent to the groove causes much more harm than good. Having said this there are two designs that need to be mentioned as they avoid the issues that plague most LT designs. These are the Schroder LT and the Reed 5T. 

@pindac , there are many beautiful, cool looking turntables that are poor designs. The Onedof is one of them. Anybody can tack a motor to a plater and spin the affair accurately. Very few designers actually have a bearing on all the seemingly minor issues affecting the performance of a vinyl music reproduction device. It is obvious that you do not have an accurate handle on these issues. There is noise and vibration all around us, with amplitudes our senses can not detect. It is these vibrations that the phonograph cartridge was designed to detect, it is a vibration measuring device. If you are the least bit inquisitive you can see this for yourself if you have subwoofers and maybe even without them. Put your tonearm down on a stationary record and turn the volume up. That motion you see in the woofers is environmental rumble, noise you can't detect but the cartridge can. It does not matter how massive you make anything, that environmental rumble will travel through anything, even if it weights as much as K2. This whole mass thing is lay intuition at it's best. It is totally faulty thinking. A turntable has to be decoupled from the environment with all parts fixed together and moving in unison. Any design that ignores this principle is defective right out of the box. There are other issues that affect vinyl playback performance most notable is making the record perfectly flat and coupled to the platter so that any resonance is absorbed by the platter and not reflected back at the cartridge. Lathes use vacuum clamping for a reason. The eccentricity of records with wayward spindle holes is far more audible (pitch variation) than tracking angle error. 

Fancy machining does not a good turntable make. I want my money spent on performance and sound engineering not bling or massive bling. If you have to have an impressive looking turntable at least get one that is soundly designed like the Basis Inspiration. 

@dover, here you go again with that "decoupling the mass" nonsense. You can not tune that arm to any cartridge. It is physically impossible. Anything that is hung off that arm is mass that has to be accounted for. If you do not want the mass of the counterweight to affect the horizontal mass of the arm just remove it. There is not a cartridge made that can perform at it's best in an ET2 or any other air bearing arm. You can actually see the cartridge having trouble. Anyone who thinks these arms sound good has work to do on their system and needs more experience listening to reference systems. Most people have never experienced such a system because there are so few of them and experience is the best teacher of all. Many systems can sound ok, a few can sound excellent but it is the rare system that can send frisson up your spine. You will not ever see an ET2 in such a system. Your first move should be to ditch it. You would be better off with a VPI unipivot. 

@mijostyn You are right I do not have a accurate handle on this issue, but from my perspective your own handle is seemingly short, with questions needing to be asked.

As stated frequently previously in other Threads as well as this one,

" I am totally adhered to the Rigid Coupling Methodology "

In this Thread, I stated,

" The Standalone Tonearm Pod' is looking such a lovely morsel to be picked at on the set Traps Plate".

"Lets see which are those, whom choose to tell another how to mount their own Tonearms in conjunction with their own TT/TT's in their own Home".

There are potentially Millions of Vinyl LP's replayed throughout a Period of a Week.

This is

'Standalone Tonearm Pod' is looking such a lovely morsel to be picked at on the set Traps Plate.

Lets see which are those, whom choose to tell another how to mount their own Tonearms in conjunction with their own TT/TT's in their own Home.

There are in use 1000's of TT's used throughout the week for the periods of replay.

The designs for the TT and Supporting Ancillaries being used, will be classed by all certain areas of HiFi usage, especially, where there is a enthusiasm to Replay Vinyl, that the TT > Tonearm in use are more than capable of replaying the Music to a very High Quality presentation. The TT and Supporting Ancillaries in use are again in certain cases designs that plenty are happy to maintain in use and others will want to aspire to.

What is most likely to be occurring, is that the musical encounters are thoroughly enjoyed, even with a Bearing Noise, Platter Resonance, Mechanically Impeded Tonearm, Warp in a LP Pressing and the impact of Seismic Activity.

The average Enthusiast for a Vinyl Replay, has invested their hard earned into their equipment, acquired a furthering of knowledge and most likely knows much of the talking points,  but these types as myself included, do not lose sleep, or 'dictate' to others, that all concerns for a replay 'must' be addressed to the highest resolve or the musical encounters are to be S**t.

 

You can not tune that arm to any cartridge. It is physically impossible. Anything that is hung off that arm is mass that has to be accounted for. If you do not want the mass of the counterweight to affect the horizontal mass of the arm just remove it.

And there you go again with yet another uninformed comment.

The Eminent Technology ET2 comes standard with multiple counterweights so that users can adjust the effective mass as seen by the cartridge.

I understand this may be difficult for you to understand. but I point it out for other readers who can appreciate the maths and physics behind the design.

@dover , I'm sorry but your take on the situation is wrong. Don't believe me, discuss it with a mechanical engineer.

@pindac , the outright performance of a turntable is not a matter of aesthetics, it is one of sound mechanical engineering understanding the intricacies of life as a vibration measuring device and what it takes to get all the information out of the groove with as little distortion as possible. If you want to add an aesthetic element without hurting performance parameters then it is your money. There are many cool looking turntables because they sell, purchased by people who do not understand these intricacies or are more interested in visually impressing themselves or their friends. Yes, we all enjoy our systems or we would not be doing this. On the other hand there is this endless search for improvement. That is what we are here for, to make our systems better. On the other hand you have the audio business world that desperately wants to sell us things frequently using very shady marketing techniques even outright lying to a public, very few of whom have the education to fully understand what is going on. On top of this we have a very tricky audio processing system tied to out emotions such that our audio preferences have more emotional content then sound engineering content. 

Can turntables with their innards scattered around sound good? Sure, but a properly designed one can sound better. For me the emotion lies in the music, the music system is a science project and to my mind should and can be approached as one. You just have to make it look good enough to get it by your wife:-))

Mijostyn, as far as I can tell, you have not missed one single opportunity to bash the ET2 in the various discussions here; and, by extension, suggest that I (and others) can’t possibly be hearing what we hear. Yet, as far as I can tell, there has not been one single indication from you that you have ever owned one, or even heard one. You seem to base your very strong opinions on theoretical considerations. If I am mistaken about this, please correct me.

I know what I hear and am confident in what I hear. For reasons that I don’t need to get into here, I also have a pretty darn good handle on how close (or not) the sound that I hear gets to the sound of the real thing. My system is not SOTA, but it is more than good enough to let me know that the sound that the ET2 produces is superior to that of the SME5 (and the Graham). That is the basis of the OP’s question. So from that standpoint it’s end of story. Moreover, I have heard both the SME5 and the ET2 in enough other good systems to be able to confirm that what I hear in my own is not the result of, as you suggest:

**** Anyone who thinks these arms sound good has work to do on their system and needs more experience listening to reference systems. ****

I would never suggest that the ET2 is the world’s greatest tonearm. However, there is no question that it is a good sounding arm….at least. Otherwise, neither are the SME, Graham and others that I have owned “good sounding arms”. Really?

You clearly use very lofty standards to judge the quality of sound and that’s great, but those standards seem to me to rely much more on technical and theoretical considerations than anything else. Not my idea of fun (and truth). I suppose that is one of the great things about this hobby. Different approaches with different goals.

Good listening and Happy New Year!

 

 

@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.