Which tonearm should I keep?

Hi Rich. I think that you should first deciid wich
cart you like to keep. Despite the authority of Raul
(I admire the guy immensely) the only cart that is
compatible with the Technics is the Musik Maker.
My personal preference is FR-64 s (to keep) but that
is not an advice. Even despite the fact that all other carts are comp. with FR-64s. BTW there is some kind of luxury in your 'dillema'.

Cheers

Dear Raul,
I owned EPA 100 and knew that Tech.500 (from 1969)
was an 'low mass arm' ,designed for MM carts. But
because I have seen your name I checked the issue
(Googel: Technics tonearms,vintage data). Both of
the Richs armtubes have an eff.mass of 8 gr. and recom.
carts are from 5-7 gr. There is an 'S shaped tube' also
but because Rich intention is to sell and not to bay
tonarms or tubes I deed not checked this tube.
I respect your opinion as I stated but I have my own
preferences. I owned more then 10 and own at the moment:
Triplanar VII,an new 12" from Lithvania,Lustre 801 and
Fr-24/MkII. I have also a long experience with FR-64s
then in comb.with Ortofon MC30. This 'combo' got 90 mi-
crons without 'buzzing' from 'HIFI TEST RECORD'. There
is of course no need for such 'performance' but I got
this result from no ather combination. It seems to me
that this is in any case an indication of the quality
of FR-64 S. I belive that I need no advice about the
tonearms.

Cheers

Audiofeil, are we supposed to resolve the issue or
the 'paradox' of 'identity'? 'For two things to say that
thy are identical is nonsensical and for one thing to say
that it is indentical with itself says nothing' (Wittgenstein). We do not care if Gregory and the other are two or one. Capiche?
Cheers

Dear Raul,I have,I think,some kind of (pre)advantage in
our discussion.Why? Wel I've read all of your contributions
to our forum ;some more then once ather more than 5or6
times.So if one has,say,1000 statements or propositions to
hes disposal and the other none or very few then the chances to discover 'contradictions' are plain.
Why my reading of your contributions? Well I like to learn
despite the fact that I am in our hobby longer then 30
years. I stated elsewhere (Linn LP-12;Mosin) my indebtenis
to you.But because of my respect for you I am trying hard
to find the best (contra) arguments I can. There will be
no discussion possible if Rauls authority became'absolute'.
I am 100% sure that you prefer the arguments.
Your description of 'mating'Dyna XV1 with the best tonearm
possible I've read 6 times. Why? I own the Lustre 801.
What have I learned from this immense effort from You?
Well I knew before that such 'mating' was difficult but it
seems much more difficult then I thoght.
Then Rich came along with hes,my I use the expression(?)
'desparate' set of carts: from M.Maker to FR-1 .I own the
FR-24 that Ikeda made for this cart. I also bought the
Phase-Tech P-3G with an compliance of 8um/mN so I think
I know what this means.
So I was very suprised to read your advice:'Technics
fits them all'.
You even geve me advice to bay one without knowing anything
about my carts and tonearms.But I don't belive in 'omni
potent' tonearms.So I am confused.
You even banter the Test-records but I will advice Rich
to instal FR-1 to hes Technics and try the so-called
'resonance test'. If hes Technics trys to desert or leave
him then,I assume,I am right;if the 'mates' stays in 8-12
Hz region,then Raul is right.
But Rich can,if he will be so kind,resolve the issue if
he keeps the M.Maker. In this case he gets the same advice
from us both.
BTW Rich the 'retiping' is very expensive,the result not
sure and you can bay a better cart;look at Rauls MM story.

Cheers

Audiofeil. Nobody is trying to 'banter and make fool'
of Rich. On the conrary;everyone is trying to help.
Besides if Rich feels offended then he can speak for
himself. Are you some kind of lawyer for both Rich and
Gregory?

Cheers

Dear Rich,you are an honest and sensitive person but
this Bill 'the Audiofiel' is obviously in the wrong
place for 'tanding hes business';he should try advertesing
but elswhere.
Cheers

'IDENTITY'
The other day I was visiting my old mate Pieter with my
son Vladimiir. We where for about 5 sec. inside when my
son declared:'Uncle Pieter has the same!'
The same what?
'Pick-up of course!'
My own son. Uncle Pieter owns an Thorens 160 and hes
father owns an Kuzma Stabi Reference with Triplanar VII.

Cheers

Rich,i tried some jokes about 'identity' and named the
subject 'paradoxical' But your problem is 'legal' and
this 'subject' is very simple. Each 'natural person' has
hes unique identity (even the Siamese twins); the companys
have also their 'legal identity' (those are suposed to be
'unique')
My conjecture: you decided (inconsequentialy) to keep the
Hadcock ,intend some 'upgrad' but not by Gregory.I.e.
only by the other. So you want to be 'legaly secure'.
I am an lawyer and I am sorry for you:there is no such
thing as 'legal certainty'. So keep the Technics and
abandon the dispute.

Cheers

Audiofeil,this dispute is 'nonsensical' for our forum.
But to satisfy your curiosity: I was university teacher
for 30 years in the Netherlans (private law). I am at
present enjoyng my hobby and my pension.
BTW this is my final contribution to your 'contributions'.

Cheers

Audiofeil,I was ,it seems,very optimistic with my hope
about my 'final contribution' to the dispute.
But you get an free (legal) advice. The only thing you
need to do is referring to the 'Chamber of Commerce'.
That is the 'place' for the search about companys identity .

Cheers