@neonknight The following is the statement made in my post on Page 1, after having given a description of how I have come to perceive Tonearms, Owned, Encountered and having Experienced in use, that share in using Rega Design and Geometry.
"When the IV and Series V have been compared to the Tonearm I am using now. The most noticeable difference is how constrained the IV and Series Five are perceived to be influenced, there seems to be too much imparted from the design as a control, which has come to be identified with as not for the better".
Your most recent statement suggests something of this nature is being perceived through pairing the V with Cart' only.
There is a lot of perceived unconstrained musical replays available, it will require a change of Tonearm Completely.
I am all for a Wire Change, I have recently discovered substantial benefits from being demo'd a Wire I am a advocate of used in a Wand.
The change of a Bearing is not going to offer too much, as I have been quite familiar with V/12 in use and this presents with the same perception of constrained, the V/12 has the ABEC 7.
The ABEC 7 was the bearing I was to have put into the IV with a exchange Wand Wire, prior to it being superseded as a Tonearm.
The owner of the SME 20/12 is now using the SCHUE with a OL Illustrious>Sumiko Pearwood and OL Motor Upgrades, and is extremely impressed, and is certain in their assessment of the Sonics, it is a TT on Parity with or Better that the SME used for many years.
The SCHUE is imminently to be Trailed A/B against a New Belt Drive Model arrived to be demo'd within the HiFi Group.
|
Hi @neonknight , so you are very experienced in vinyl playback!
Some background, I am a relatively early adopter of the SME V, got mine at around 1986 / 87, and paired it with the then current version of the Sota Sapphire with vacuum, a popular combo at the time.
I am not sure about the vintage of your SME V, but I remember sending mine back to SME at around 2003 / 04 to upgrade the bearing, to ABEC 7 I believe. Not sure if they have done further upgrade to the bearing since then! So if your arm hasn’t got the upgrade, you may want to consider the option.
Personally, the SME V doesn’t fit with my preference, and if I have to choose a 9” arm, the Kuzma 4Point9, as mentioned by others, would be my top choice at the moment. However, if it is possible to fit the 4Point11 onto the Sota, I would pick that over the 9” !
Hope this help. Have a Happy New Year
|
Perhaps this is a good moment to share a bit of history of how I got here. Back in the late 1990s I decided to do vinyl again, and had good results with an unsuspended high mass table, an early Teres Audio with Eminent Technology II arm. I drifted away from vinyl a number of years and when I came back Teres was no longer available, so I obtained a Galibier Audio Serac and put a 12" Riggle arm on it.
After awhile I had the ability to explore different tables, and I kept the Galibier. I obtained and refreshed a Thorens TD 124 and put another ET II on it, very nice table. I also bought a restored Garrard 401 and put a 12" Project Evolution arm on it.
I sold the idlers to pay for some higher quality speakers, and bought my JBL 4365 with the proceeds. I explored direct drives a bit but was disappointed until I obtained a Technics SP10 MK II. Excellent table. I then bought a Denon D(75 in a VPI plinth with Acos arm. Finally I had a Brinkman Bardo that I put an Audiomods 6 arm on. I also obtained a Well Tempered Reference.
Eventually these tables got sold off. I wanted a reference level table, and when I was a young man the big 4 were Oracle, Linn, VPI, and SOTA. I started to research the SOTA and came to the conclusion that a Cosmos Eclipse was for me. I then sourced a SME V as that was considered one of the finest arms of that time, and I always had a hankering to own one.
I scratched a few other vintage itches there, such as the Koetsu Urushi, the Ortofon MC2000, and MC 3000 II & MC5000, Dynavector, Ikeda 9 Kawami, Shinon Red, and so on.
So this is how I came to owning a SOTA and SME V. I have affirmed that I love the Cosmos, and the MC2000, but the V I am unsure of. I eventually bought a second table. A Scheu Analog Das Laufwerk No 2, which is the company that the original Teres project was inspired by. I enjoy the table and use a pair of Dynavector DV505 arms on it.
So that is the story, and where the SOTA and SME pairing continues or is dissolved remains to be seen. Seems like the 9" Kuzma is a consideration. The Vivid arm is so unusual I am not sure it can be used on this table. Perhaps the V should remain, but I wonder about rewiring it as it is supposed to have a silver sourced wire already. But with the Transfiguration it does sound a bit constrained. Perhaps the Ortofon Verizmo would be different. I even gave consideration to putting the MC2000 on it, but original reviews done by JH reported that this pairing was tried with very unfavorable results. I wonder what makes Origin Live arms a viable consideration, exactly what have they done to raise themselves above the competition, as some of their arms are quite spendy.
Just a combination of my thoughts.
Oh for reference the system is JBL 4365 speakers, a pair of Velodyne HGS 12 subwoofers, Classe Omega monoblock amps, Trinov Amethyst pre-amp, Esoteric E-03 and Grahamm Slee Accession phono stages.
|
@neonknight, don’t be too quick to deem your thread “useless”. Putting aside the responses that you feel have strayed too far from your original question, you have received at least half a dozen opinions on arms that others feel “surpass the SME5”. Others have opined that not only is the SME5 a fine arm (I agree), that it is not easily surpassed. So, not sure why you feel there is no value to you in the responses to your thread. Having said all that, and putting aside my own recommendation, a sure fire way to surpass your SME5 and not take a chance on taking a sonic step backwards, is to heed Raul’s recommendation to have your existing arm rewired with AudioNote silver wire (or similar) in a continuous run to your preamp. The elimination of all those solder joints and dissimilar wire in your phono interconnect will most likely be a revelation. It was for me. Good luck.
|
Thank you, @thekong. I had a client who had a Rockport table and we spent the evening listening to his system. I liked that table a lot. I can't remember the cartridge, it was quite a long time ago. Happy to you too!
|
@whart my experience using the Rockport arm is exactly the same as yours, a bit more complicated to setup, but no problem with lower compliance cartridge once setup ! I also have a set of Airline sitting in the box, which I will setup in the coming months. :)
Have a Happy New Year !
|
Remove the bridge, less restrained, lots of discussions on this 2009.
|
@lewm I have had my fair share of visitors to experience my system throughout the years. This is a great side to having a enthusiasm and sharing it with likeminded individuals.
I am not a EE, I do Structure, but have avoided the EE Side of the enthusiasm, even when offered a one to one training by EE's I revere, I have not chosen to do the learning. The individuals who are EE's and I have a very long relationship with are expert, they do the math, the design and the construction of the working Prototypes and Working Models.
As I do not do EE, I have travelled to meet individuals who do work within this field, either as a highly adept enthusiast, through to HiFi Company Directors who are active in the Mainstream Marketplace.
These individuals are met as part of a Group of enthusiasts getting together and certainly not a Commercial Venture.
As a result of Commercially Organised Events, Forum Organised Events or by being Member of a Local HiFi Group, that is an assembly of various levels of EE expertise, enthusiasm and trade.
All the above adds up to one thing, I am not insular in my Enthusiasm, I am not locked away and limiting my experiences, I am knowledgeable of the works undertaken by others, I have regularly been demonstrated a Speaker, Power Amp, Pre Amp, Phonostage, DAC, TT, Tonearm, Cart', CDT/CDP, Lots of HiFi Foo and more recently streaming devices.
I get the opportunities to receive auditions of devices on systems I have become familiar with costing between £40K - £180Kish.
The Devices Demo'd or Systems being used, do not matter, what matters is that likeminded individuals get together and have Social Interaction, Banter, Food and Enjoyment, along with the Sharing in each others music tastes.
I would never listen to Choristers, Sea Shanty's, Obscure Orchestral Renditions, I do now, and am much the happier for it, there has been a few how have I deprived myself moments.
It is all about the music, the enjoyment of music and nothing else, equipment is a tool and means to an end.
A Blown Out Bass or a Ear Shredding High Frequency are occasionally to be experienced from a New Addition to be demo'd. It does not matter, it is what it is, that's how the Music (which is the highlight was presented) and the next demo' is put to the test to see how it handles presenting another musical encounter.
I really do not obsess over equipment, it is a tool, I keep my ear to the ground, and do like to have a hands on experience of what equipment can do, but if it was not happening around a Cup of Coffee between friends, then it has no appeal to me.
As said on numerous occasions, I do most of listening to music in the home with my wife, and her go to device is Alexia, and indirectly that is where the bulk of my musical encounters are found and thoroughly enjoyed.
Putting on the Purpose Produced HiFi System is only a different tool, produced around a selection of different disciplines, to get the replay from a medium with a recorded information embedded.
I dance to both the Purpose Produced HiFi and Alexia with equal gusto.
|
Still waiting to know if mijostyn has actually spent any time with a properly set up ET2, or any other linear tracker for that matter. Hope you feel better mijo, some nasty bugs out there,
|
I used to hang around local emporia for audio, until I began to feel guilty about taking up space and not buying gear. Stopped going about 20 years ago, but that didn’t prevent most local businesses from failing. Tokyo is just the opposite; they still have wonderful stores and no one seems to care how long you loiter, although I do also buy stuff usually.
|
@lewm- it is an H3000 which I got from a guy in Texas named Porter, when he distributed the line in the States. I only roll the rectifier and my fav for my system voicing is a GEC u-52, another not so easy to find tube these days. (I did get a NIB metal base Philips-Miniwatt from Andy at VTS, it has marvelous bass-but is less airy in my system-in a different system it might be better- it’s now a grail tube). No, no feedback issues at all. (NB- the depth of field in the photo makes it look like that horn is aimed at the TT, but the horns are toed in just past the "plane" of the table and they are pretty directional).
Audio clubs, formal or informal, are great. I was involved in one in NY back in the ’80s-- got to meet a lot of people who in turn shared their systems, swapped records and had fun. That’s one of the reasons--apart from finally meeting Albert in person after many years--that my recent visit to Albert’s was such fun. He has a regular listening group every week. We listened to a lot of different things (his Studer is gorgeous as was his selection of tapes), had some laughs and enjoyed each other’s company. It’s a great way to express and stimulate your interests in music, gear and all the "stuff" we seem to do in this pursuit. DC metro seems to have a fair number of audiophiles.
There are a few people I’m aware of here in Austin that have serious systems, but very little brick and mortar, which used to be another way to meet and hang-- the after hours demos, the friends you make in the hobby, etc.
Obviously, if you ever get to Austin, you are welcome to visit.
|
Hi, Albert. Nice to hear from you, and I hope you are well. Happy New Year.
Whart, that’s a beautiful system. I assume you have no feedback problem with the horns aimed so directly at your TT? Which Allnic phono stage is seen on the shelf below your TT? I’d like to hear that system.
Speaking of which, I noted that there are at least two others besides myself who live in the Washington, DC, area. (I live in Bethesda, MD, which is naught but a suburb of DC.) Pindac seems to derive a lot of benefit from his local audiophile associations, and I think perhaps it would be fun if we also could occasionally get together for chat and auditions. If anyone is interested, we can go from there.
|
@albertporter -Albert, thanks for weighing in. I think this did address the OP’s question directly based on your experience.
@mijostyn - I’m not taking "shots" at you and feel for you if you are suffering from an influenza.
As you might recall, I have both the Kuzma Airline and the 4 Pt 9" arms. The pods for the XL are 30 lbs each and are immovable without considerable effort. My set up is on an HRS platform, which in turn sits on the big Minus K bench top isolator-the BM-1, which has an optional floor stand of welded steel with a phenolic top and indents for the feet. It is tricky to set up, particularly with a table like the XL where there is no single center of mass and that mass is distributed via the HRS platform. It does work well, though. And the trick to adjusting the arm level is to use the arm behavior itself-- using the technique of how it tracks in the run-out groove as well as its behavior along the rail on which the arm travels.
I’ve found that lower compliance cartridges, like the stone Koetsus, behave better in this arm than higher compliance cartridges. There is no "wander" or "hunting and seeking" unless the record itself is out of round. My experience with this set up is that you don’t hear the sound of a record playing--what I call a "halo" which is an artifact you can more easily discern when it is absent.
This is not for everybody- it’s complicated by the need for an air compressor, which is located in another room in a silencer box I had fabricated (by wood workers, I don’t have your skill). I hear no air hiss or high frequency anomalies caused by the air bearing; I’d say the biggest negatives are cost, set up and dealing with air compressors (I got pretty good at servicing them- the Silentaire folks are not far from me, in Houston, and have been great).
PS: the Koetsu also lends a certain gravitas to the sound that the Lyra and Airtights lacked. Interestingly, when at Albert’s we directly compared the Airtight Opus to a Koetsu Blue Lace--you can readily hear the difference on Albert’s system-the Opus was more linear in sound, but I could hear more "wood" on the drum sticks via the Koetsu. Perhaps a coloration, a little of that Koetsu "technicolor" splendor, but it works really well in my system, given the character of the Avantgarde Duos and the rest of the system in my room with the addition of 15" subs and DSP (only on those subs).
I hope you feel better.
Bill
|
@mijostyn In this Thread/Pantomime there are the usual Villains, Hero's and Loveable Types.
As in all Pantomime's, Shouting at the Performers is expected, you certainly are accustomed and seemingly quite comfortable with being a Member of the Performance and Participating as the Audience in this type of Theatre. Especially, when the content is for pure entertainment purposes and no more.
In a Pantomime there is the very enjoyable interaction where the Audience get their chance to thoroughly enjoying the moment of 'Booing of the Stage' the Villain.
@mijostyn You've had plenty of well deserved Boo's from @pindac for one Season.
|
Back to @whart , I've been up all night. Hard to sleep when you can't breath. Pardon my typing if it is worse than usual.
As for high mass turntables. I have nothing against mass as long as it is isolated. Mass alone does not isolate a turntable from the environment. This is easy to demonstrate. You can get an accelerometer app on your phone that will detect seismic activity. Put the phone of your massive turntable and jump up and down. Even if you are on a concrete slab the detector will still register. Put it on a Sota, Basis, SME, Avid, Dohmann, or Michell and There is much less vibration detected. Most people do not notice this environmental rumble as their speakers do not put out much below 40 Hz. Those with powerful subwoofers will notice it. It increases distortion and robs power. It can also make your house shake. I know a person who put his Kuzma Stabi XL DC on a MinusK platform and he swears by it. Michael Fremer has his Continuum on a MinusK platform and is also sold on it. These platforms are very floaty and a PITA to use. You have to be very delicate with them or you get the entire mess bouncing. They must really think they notice and improvement to put up with them, real or not.
Mass can improve the performance of a given turntable. But it is totally unnecessary if a turntable is properly designed and suspended. I think the Rega Rp10 makes that case nicely. For DIYers it is easy to add mass to an older design to improve performance but it is not a panacea.
As an aside, I build my own subwoofers. each enclosure of the last set I built weights 200 lb and they are not that big! They performed better than the previous set but not as good as I would have hoped for. The enclosures still resonate and shake. I am current building the next set. Each one will be a lot lighter, about 75 lb. I am pretty certain they will outperform to old ones. They are harder and much more expensive to build. You only live once.
@pindac , right.
|
@neonknight , Great, we have the same table. The Verismo is a fine cartridge. It will work on the SME but you probably want to add some weight to the head shell and keep the counterbalance as far back as possible. I have the MC Diamond which is a very similar cartridge but even less compliant. I would not put it in the SME but it works in the Schroder fine. I am not familiar with the ZYX. Do not let the high VTFs of the Ortofons bother you. Their stylus has a much higher contact area than most. I think you might also want to look at Lyra and My Sonic Lab cartridges. They are a little more compliant than the Verismo and would probably be a better match with the SME. I am not totally sure you can tune the SME to such a low compliance. If you can then it is not a problem.
I developed a technique for getting warped records to seal. You might know it already but I'll tell you anyway. Load the record. Start the turntable and immediately press the lead in bulge down on opposite sides of the record using only the edge of your fingernails. Let the record spin under your fingernails for two full revolutions and let go. It seems once you are use to perfectly flat and dampened records it is disturbing when you hear a warped one.
|
@whart , go ahead and swing away whart. To start things off I do not have a problem with linear tracking. It would be the ideal way to do it. The problem is many of the designs cause more harm than good. Arms that are essentially pivoted arms that are jockeyed across the record on transports with modern controls could work fine. There is one German arm that does that and some older Japanese designs. It is an expensive stunt to do well as the mechanics have to be extremely precise and quiet. The German arm is some $200,000. The best current designs are the Schroder LT and the Reed 5T. The LT in particular is a brilliant design. Air bearing arms fail because of their extremely high horizonal masses and the rushing air tends to cause high frequency noise. They are extremely sensitive to level and tend to skate in one direction or the other depending on which way they are leaning. They are actually more sensitive leveling devices then the bubbles people use to level them. They are a very unfavorable platform for a cartridge. Yes, they work, but there is a strong tendency for reviewers and turntable engineers to avoid them for a reason. The amount of tracking error in a well designed and set up pivoted arm is inaudible. The cartridge is a very sensitive device. It is also a mechanical device that has to operate within certain limits to perform at it's best.
Your turn.
|
@mijostyn I stand by both the following statements, both relating to the mentioned TT.
The SOTA Cosmos Eclipse is as exposed to the accusation of being a inferior design as all the others 'thrown under the bus'.
What I feel confident in saying is that the design used in your case, with whatever tonearm of a 9" - 10.5" Dimension, will be capable of producing an " endless experience of Successful Replays "
@lewm I don't do 'Angry', I do attempt Fair Play to all. ( I persevere in my supplied content, as I know there are other who read Audiogon, and will never post and maybe never join. I think it's Fair they are seeing content where they are not left feeling ridiculed and shot down for choices that may have been made. The usual Gon in-house Thread Development are what they are, no beef from my side their).
In the case of this thread I have made it known I have experience, (some regular) of TT / Tonearm Interfaces created using a variety of methodologies and using a variety of Materials used for the Structures Produced for mounting the Set Up.
I have made it known I am Wed to the Rigid Coupling Concept and have my own particular disciplines in place towards how I want to see it present. (which is the adoption of minimal parts in the assembly that can be used to create a structure that assists with the Functioning Mechanical Parts, as well as having inherent properties for being efficient at the management of Transferred Energies).
I have made it known that I don't carry a prejudice towards other methods used to create a TT/Tonearm Interface, and from my assessment, all variants encountered of a TT/Tonearm Interfacing that has been experienced in use, each are in my view capable of producing a Successful Replay.
Even if I am choosing not to use a particular type of Set Up. I am not and will never, be the one, whom will be telling the end user of a TT>Tonearm in their own home, that their methodology for using it is a disaster.
|
@mijostyn
The SOTA is 2 years old, it's the current generation Eclipse with vacuum hold down. Yes the V is lighter in mass than it's visual appearance suggests, believe it's 9.5 grams. As I recall the V used a silver wiring.
I have a ZYX 4D also, perhaps I will give it a trial once it gets back from having a new diamond installed. Not sure if the Ortofon Verismo has a compliant enough suspension.
|
Quick search located the PFO review if anyone has interest.
|
Bill (whart) we all enjoyed your visit, wish you could attend every session. Short answer is yes, I liked the SME V12 very much, it was wired with Purist best and mounted on the same MK3 modified Technics.
I first auditioned the 14” Kuzma 4Point and loved what it did. Not only it’s performance but the ability to adjust everything. I now have two Kuzma 14” 4 point, the original with steel bearing and the new one with synthetic (ruby?).
I did a review for Positive Feedback, should still be out there on the web. I was NOT a dealer at the time but became one after living with the 14" for extended time. I compared the 14” to a number of other arms and it was my favorite, so maybe my listening habits make me more sensitive to tracking error.
I have not read this entire thread but for anyone that does not know, SME tonearms are no longer available for purchase separately, only when buying a complete SME turntable. I for one would not want an SME table, there are others I would put above it .
Anyone wanting to see my turntable set up, it’s part of my virtual system:
|
Fwiw, I visited the always lovely Albert Porter recently. If I recall, he was a fan of the SME V and is currently using a pair of the John Holmes version of the Kuzma 4 Pt. on his SP-10mkIII, installed on the Porter Panzerholz plinth of his design. Albert is pretty meticulous about set up. We got to hear two very different cartridges mounted on identical arms- a Koetsu Blue Lace and an Airtight Opus. It was instructive. But for the purposes of this thread, I think it is safe to say that Albert liked the big daddy Kuzma arm over the SME. Whether that would fit on the table in question is not an answer I can provide. I do have the 9 inch version, which does not afford VTA on the fly- it is well constructed and pretty easy to set up (though I did buy a Mint protractor to do so).
I miss his posts here. Maybe he can weigh in. @albertporter.
I had a great time "visiting" with Albert.
When I have time, I'll address @mijostyn views on linear trackers and high mass turntables. Mijo said he is suffering from flu, so I don't want to burden him with unnecessary stress- which is not good for recovery of flu symptoms.
|
@pindac , wrong again pindac. The Sota has a 1" thick aluminum sub chassis to which the plater and tonearm are firmly bolted. It is as rigid as they come. If you mean the suspension that is a vital part of any turntable that claims to be high performance. It is isolating that rigid sub chassis from the rest of this very noisy world.
@neonknight , The one thing about the Cosmos that makes life a little difficult is the tonearm board is recessed into the plinth which limits your choice of arms. Arms that I know for a fact fit and work well are the Kuzma 4 Point 9, Your SME, The Schroder CB and Reference, Rega Arms and Origin live arms. The SME V is actually a very light arm and is more comfortable with compliant cartridges. The vast majority of high end cartridges are medium compliance and might do better with slightly heavier arms like the Kuzma and Schroder. I opted for the Schroder because it is an elegant design. The simple exterior hides very sophisticated underpinnings. It has adjustable tonearm mass with three different weight cartridge plates and accessory counterweights of various size. It has the best antiskating device I have ever used by a country mile. Lastly, it fits the Sota like a glove. The other advantage is Donna is now very familiar with the arm and knows what mass the tonearm board needs to have to keep the suspension in tune. They showed The Nova with a CB installed I believe. The SME V also fits the Sota beautifully. Will the Schroder outperform it. This probably depends on the cartridge. It would most likely be a sideways move. There is no tonearm made that is significantly better than the V. Is your Cosmos up to date? Vacuum? Eclipse?
@lewm , there does not appear to be anything special about the Korf arm. As you've noticed it has some design deficiencies.
@mulveling , I think that would be a mistake. If you want a less expensive arm that rocks the Kuzma 4 Point 9 would be a great choice. I think like me you are always window shopping.
|
Mulveling, What is there about the Korf tonearm that leads you to believe it might outperform an SME V? What I see is that neither the pivot point nor the counterweight lie in the plane of the LP surface. Nor does the CW appear to be decoupled from the pivot, although it may be. All 3 of those design elements are now fairly well accepted to be optimal for a pivoted tonearm, at least according to theory. Yes, there are many great vintage tonearms that don't meet these design criteria and still manage to sound excellent.
|
One new tonearm that looks VERY interesting, and is actually quite reasonably priced (2,200 Euros preorder), is the Korf TA-SF9R. It has removable headshells and should easily fit a SOTA. If you peruse the Korf blog, the designer has made absolutely HEROIC efforts at a scientific-based approach to tonearm design while maintaining the perspective of a true audiophile and analog lover. I definitely don't need another arm, but have half a mind to try one myself.
|
Bettering a SME V is going to depend on the table, musical choice and the cartridge synergy to the arm..all of which are totally subjective to each listener.
There are a number of interesting tonearm designs out there today. The new Supratrac Blackbird is an interesting play on a multiple point unipivot for example.
Budget considerations are also in question here, as a Basis Superarm 9 will better a SME V, but at a price!
The old war horse SME 3012 is not a contender IMHO. Unless, of course you like a certain colored and non-resolved sound. ( Many are convinced they do!). The knife edge chatter of its bearing is pretty easy to hear on a high enough resolving system!
The aforementioned Vivid Float is a good option, as are the newer Well Tempered Arms ( Bill Firebaugh knows a thing or two about arm design, IMO).
Lots of options to replace the SME V, all are colored to one extent or another, so you pick your flavor..:0)
|
The original question is what does it take to surpass a SME V? My turntable is a SOTA Cosmos Eclipse. So it's a floating subchassis. I have no need to discuss tonearm and bearing mounting structure because my choice is defined by the 1 inch thick aluminum subchassis.
Sorry OP 😥
Yes, lately analog threads on audiogon have the tendency of running off the rails, far away from OP's original inquiry.
The good news is your Cosmos table is fantastic, as is your SME V arm (which I'd love to try someday). You're in the happy position of trying to improve on existing greatness. The Cosmos's rigid sub-chassis is a key part of that design, which was my objection to the arm pod suggestion (not to mention having to manage P2S distance and dustcover clearance, etc). The SOTA's are simply designed to work well with gimbal arms of around 9" - 9.5", on their integrated arm boards. And the SME V is kind of a "classic" for that form factor. Besides the FR64fx, I've had a Technics EPA-500 on my SOTA Nova; it was also quite nice and kinda wish I'd bought it.
|
@neonknight Your request for info is based around alternative Tonearm Options to the SME V of a Dimension a as stated in the OP " The replacement has to be 9 to 10.5 inches.
"What are you talking about? I wrote nothing about this "theory". You people created it all on your own".
12" Tonearms were brought into the Thread not by @pindac
The follow up to the sharing about a 12" arm being deselected for another, is where the thread fell apart, as the the usual P**ing Match kicked off to prove one opinion is more valid than another's.
Your Thread being hammered with unimportant info' and tolerated by yourself, with no value seen in the content being presented to your own inquiry.
Standalone Tonearm Pods were not brought into the Thread by @pindac .
Making the Statement " stand alone tonearm pods are a disaster in progress " is not produced from the @pindac Keyboard.
The follow up reasoning being bludgeoned into the thread for explaining the disaster of a Standalone Arm Pod is flawed and suggests that TT designs that aren't Rigid Coupled are, and points the finger at numerous TT / Tonearm Interfaces as being inferior in their design, suggesting aesthetic is a contributor to the failure.
The SOTA Cosmos Eclipse is as exposed to the accusation of being a inferior design as all the others 'thrown under the bus'.
@mijostyn is wrong, especially when they are advocates and are actively promoting a TT and Tonearm, the same Brand as your own that is not a Rigidly Coupled Design.
My assessment is that the design has way to many parts to be used for the Structure to even be considered as a Rigid Structure. The Separate Tonearm Pod is an assembly of Laminations of different materials and attached to a separate material to the Platter Spindle.
What I feel confident in saying is that the design used in your case, with whatever tonearm of a 9" - 10.5" Dimension, will be capable of producing an " endless experience of Successful Replays "
2
|
@pindac
What are you talking about? I wrote nothing about this "theory". You people created it all on your own.
The original question is what does it take to surpass a SME V? My turntable is a SOTA Cosmos Eclipse. So it's a floating subchassis. I have no need to discuss tonearm and bearing mounting structure because my choice is defined by the 1 inch thick aluminum subchassis.
What is being written has nothing to do with the original topic.
|
@neonknight It is strange that your evaluation of the development of the Thread into how a Mounting for a TT Platter Bearing and Tonearm should be produced as a structure.
Using the Single Minded 'one method only' approach, that is being so fought for, to prove it as the absolute and only method to be used.
It Clearly is stating the first reference to a comparison between a SME V 12" and an alternative SME 12" Arm have been inadequately carried out.
The statement is also making it known the Methodology incorporated as Part of the design on your Turntable are flawed and a failing, so your use of the SME V are questionable in the individual making the statements assessment and any other that is agreeing with their view.
It is also heavily leaning toward the notion that a TT that has a Bearing Mounted on a Chassis, and the Chassis Mounted on a Plinth, along with a Tonearm Mounted on the same Single Material Plinth is Flawed. The Chassis is a different material to the Plinth and an impediment to how the energies are transferred and the mechanical coupling between Bearing and Tonearm are rigidly interfaced.
To have a Tonearm attached to a Sub Plinth and Turntable Bearing on a Separate Plinth, is stated to be wrong, and 50 years of experience from the individual fighting their corner for the 'one method only' approach, has found proof to confirm that your Tonearm in use and any other you might choose to use are totally flawed in use, due to the design for the TT / Tonearm Interface.
I am not seeing any value to this, it is a flawed approach with limitations, as the real science will most likely show most Rigid Coupling Designs are with a compromise and a deviation for the real mechanical requirements.
As Stated Previously in posts, There is a TT Design to be tried imminently that has athe chassis removed and and a Densified Wood is the surrogate Chassis and Plinth to receive Tonearms. This is produced as a result of my interest in developing the Rigid Coupling Theory and an attempt to further remove the usually seen impediments present for the design.
My experiences supply myself with quite different outcomes, in how I percieve how different TT / Tonearm Interfaces Perform. I am 'out there' experiencing what other do. I am not locked up in a Room all insular with a single minded attitude, that is not offering a constructive criticism in any manner. It is a attack on the usage of other methodologies, that are seen in use and endorsed by numerous individuals, who are designers, producers, dealers and enthusiastic end users.
I know there is an endless experience of Successful Replays being experienced as a Musical Encounter, as a result of not having a Turntable and Tonearm rigidly coupled to a Single Material Type on the same plane.
On that note - I'm out of this thread as well, it has become a place to endorse the Poo Pooing all over methods adopted by a Vast Amount of Vinyl users.
|
@senza Yeah the thread is pretty well useless. I don't see much value in it either.
|
The original question has been ignored for 2 pages of useless controversies and sterile debates between 3 people. Tired of it. I quit.
|
@mulveling , That is wrong. When you lighten the counterweight you drop both the horizontal and vertical EFs. You might be able to live with this discrepancy but it will adversely affect performance.
|
@lewm , there are people ready to try anything to make their product stand out. Separating vertical and horizontal resonance by a little avoids there being one large peak, you get two smaller ones but blended together. In the case of the ET2 and other air bearing arms the EFs are so widely separated you can not find a happy medium. If you set the arm up to achieve an RF of 10 in the vertical the EF in the horizontal will be so low that the cartridge winds up leading the arm. You can actually see the cantilever drift as it pulls the arm along. I have actually seen them pogo ( a Clearaudio arm) This assumes that the arm is dead level, another big problem with these arms. This places the cartridge suspension in a very unfavorable position. I have never used a Dynavector arm but there is no way you would ever get me to buy one.
|
You can rest assured that when I behave this way there is no reasonable alternative, just wishful thinking.
|
@atmasphere , sure but it does not change the fact that the horizontal EF far exceeds the vertical EF. You still have to counter balance the cartridge.
@pindac, It is not fantastical thinking pindac. It is rational thinking based on 5 decades of experience. I have made plenty of mistakes along the way. Knowing what performance characteristics are important and evaluating equipment prior to purchase is the most efficient way of going about this. Most of us do not have the money to piss it away indiscriminately.
Regardless of what you think detached arm pods are a terrible idea and I have explained the thinking behind this. I am in no way shape or form the only individual that feels this way.
|
I think you perceive hostility where none is intended.
I guess when you write that you regularly encounter an SP10R that is served by a Glanz tonearm on a pod, you are not referring to your own system, because you also said that you do not use an outboard arm pod. Fine either way. Apart from the possible problem of mechanically dissociating the tonearm from the TT bearing, I would also be concerned about alignment being affected over the long term of use, if occasionally the pod is nudged from its optimal location with respect to the spindle. That is if I were a stickler regarding alignment in the first place.
|
@mulveling Not sure about arm pod idea - perhaps there are some reasonable use cases. But for use with a suspended table (like op’s SOTA) does NOT seem like one of them!
The Standalone Arm Pod has become quite a hot subject follow an earlier Post where a Stand Alone Arm was used with a SME 30/12.
A SME 3012R was not able to be mounted on the TT, so a Arm Pod was used to trial a SME V and 3012R.
I made it known I regularly encounter a SP 10R with a Glanz 12" Arm mounted on a Stand Alone Pod, and have never felt something was amiss.
The high risk of convection occurring, where the Standalone Arm Pod and TT were set to be on a collision course was the counter offensive to the idea, not too further on in the Thread.
I take the idea of a Arm Pod used in conjunction with a TT as a much more plausible method to achieve a Successful Replay, than considering Convection being present is the cause for the ruining of the replay.
The Known Flaws in the entirety of the Set Up to achieve a replay from Vinyl are very well known, it is spilt milk, not worth crying over. Measures are known to be put in place to minimise the impact, but not remove the impact.
Most who are enthusiasts are settled with the impact of the Flaws they are exposed to. There are a lesser in number group who attempt to see how environmental changes can influence the flaws.
Then there are some individuals that are actually unable to separate from the influence of a Flaw on the replay, the effect on the Sonic is a attraction that is to be maintained.
I have one like this myself, I crave my Chicago Blues Albums to be replayed through the system with a Hooked Up, Coloured Cabinet Speaker, with a Noticeable Bass Bloom, these are the antithesis of my ESL's.
Blues through the ESL's has not got the attraction to the music I so much enjoy, I feel so at home when the noticeably coloured sound is filling the air.
Obviously I am Heretic and need to be struck down for being so openly public about embracing a non Hi Fidelity Sound.
|
The clever thing about ET’s counterweights is that using a lighter counterweight should decrease the horizontal moving mass (non-rotational) while increasing the vertical moving mass (moment of inertial). That should nudge the 2 movement dimensions closer towards parity, though I’m not sure by how much. And too long a lever arm (facilitating the lighter weights), will eventually become unwieldy.
I still have an ET2 in the closet, with a broken headshell lead. It’s been many years since I ran it, and it was NOT a good arm for an analog neophyte back then. But I still remember how clean and pure the sound quality was, with Ortofon Kontrapunkt "a" and MC20 cartridges. I’d like to get that up and running again at some point.
Not sure about arm pod idea - perhaps there are some reasonable use cases. But for use with a suspended table (like op’s SOTA) does NOT seem like one of them!
|
@mijostyn your statement " 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 " .
That statement is your obsession, it is your Fantastical Place, it is your Never Never Land.
I am very relaxed about the whole subject, I don't want what is not available, and I don't want to bludgeon anybody with ideas that are unobtanium.
I have a thought process I use, when it comes to how I like to see a TT and Supporting Ancillaries Set Up. There is a design that I like to see in place and Materials used that will compliment the design.
This as the methodology, used in conjunction with all the flaws to be found in using a Vinyl LP as a Source and the Flaws present in the Mechanical Parts and Interfaces, is sufficient for my needs, I achieve a Successful Replay consistently .
It is no different to any other individual, who has a TT and Supporting Ancillaries. They have a thought process in place, which is the parameter of choice to be used, there are no concerns to be made known, the outcome is a Successful Replay.
None of this has to do with aesthetics, it is to do with Interfaces between the Parts required to create a Successful Replay .
I have not got a developed and obsessional prejudice towards any methodology used to create a Successful Replay
My interaction is to encourage others to create their own methodologies, not to poo poo their ideas, or put the idea on the table that a choice made for hard earned monies used to make a purchase, especially one that an individual may have desired to aspire to for a Long Period. The very idea of bluntly suggesting this has been incorrect and not of a value is not my remit.
A Turntable with any method of creating a Interface between Supporting Ancillaries that considers the Critical Geometries and Dimensions between the interfacing parts, is going to Successfully Replay a LP Album.
In all the time I have discussed this variance in ideas for interfacing the Ancillary Parts to the TT. There has never been the suggestion that the different methodologies are going to be the ruination of the Replay.
@mijostyn The statements being made by yourself are not ones I am willing to hold as the only way, I create measures to have a influence on a replay that satisfy myself. There is more than one road to Rome, when it comes to how a Vinyl LP is able to be thoroughly enjoyed as a Replay of a recorded material, I welcome each to share their experience and certainly won't be poo pooing all over it when shared.
|
Pindac, Interestingly, when you are angry, at me or anyone else, I find your posts much more comprehendable. Not that I would deliberately piss you off. So, if you agree that the tonearm pivot and the turntable bearing need to be tightly and rigidly coupled, then why did it make you angry when I said so? I also allowed that an outboard tonearm pod can be done right by a designer who knows what he is doing and why he is doing it. Ergo, we seem to agree much more than we disagree.
Mijostyn, Why do you continue to ignore my argument that it can be beneficial for a tonearm to exhibit a higher effective mass in the horizontal plane than in the vertical plane? You've neither derided it nor acknowledged it. If you hate the idea, I would like to know why. Some noteworthy tonearms are designed to conform to that paradigm, e.g., the Dynavectors, the Moerch (which you hate for being a unipivot), several vintage Japanese types, and all linear trackers, of course.
|
@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.
|
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 , 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:-))
|
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.
|
@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.
|
@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.
|
@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.
|
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.
|
@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.
|
