Why are modern arms so ugly?


OK.......you're going to say it's subjective and you really looove the look of modern tonearms?
But the great tonearms of the Golden Age are genuinely beautiful in the way that most Ferraris are generally agreed to be beautiful.
Look at the Fidelity Research FR-64s and FR-66s? Look at the SAEC 308 series and the SAEC 407/23? Look at the Micro Seiki MA-505? Even the still audacious Dynavector DV-505/507?
But as an architect who's lifetime has revolved around aesthetics.......I am genuinely offended by the design of most modern arms. And don't give me the old chestnut....'Form follows Function' as a rational for ugliness. These current 'monsters' will never become 'Classics' no matter how many 'rave reviews' they might temporarily assemble.
halcro

Showing 1 response by john_gordon


Doug,
I don't disagree that it looks naff, but what is your point?
You said
Who cares? Do we play records with an armtube? Adjust what matters. Ignore the rest.
We play records with a stylus, so as you noted the ideal method for visually estimating SRA is to set the stylus with a magnifier. That's quite the bother however and as fine tuning must follow by ear I agree it's rarely worth the fuss.

So, what do you do?
Whack the arm on any old how? Then start fussing?
The point is to get a basis for adjustment. What's wrong with that? What exactly do you use as a basis for adjustment with other arms? Maybe the edges of arms with parallel tubes? What's the difference?

I have no axe to grind but I detect that you dislike SME for some reason, which, as I am curious, is a reason for my intrusion.