Halcro, see my comments below :
Look at the unipivot design with a stabilising pivot on a sapphire jewelled swash plate to maintain stability
Comment - I would argue this is not a unipivot as the bearing has multiple contact points and the arm does not have a single path to ground.
Look at the total lack of headshell?
Comment - Alphason - one piece titanium arm/cartridge mounting, ET2 - one piece tube/headshell, Syrinx PU2 - no headshell.
Look at the cam-weighted anti-skate designed to increase as the arm moves inwards.
I'll give you this but there have been other solutions to provide increasing antiskate force using magnets, elastomer threads ( Helius ), etc
Look at the jewel-encapsulated unipivot.
Comment - Naim Aro, Immedia Centroid
Look at the tonearm wiring exiting from the top of the arm and how it's supported on a stainless steel hoop frame to avoid any pressure on the arm movement.
My ET2
Look at the azimuth adjustment utilising the actual swash-plate?
Not a unipivot then, the Vector also uses a stabiliser system.
Look at the ability (with the Copperhead) to have additional armwands which can be substituted complete with their fixed cartridges?
Naim Aro, VPI - both complete with counterweight etc.
Look at the counterweight system design with its placement so far below the level of the turntable platter?
Odyssey RPG from 20 yrs ago, Naim Aro, Kuzma unipivot, Blue Note Unipivot, countless others.
Modern arms that have interesting facets - by the way this does not guarantee performance - Naim Aro for 1/2 the reasons you gave for the Contimuum, Roksan Artemiz - pyramidal bearing and intelligent counterweight, Eminent Technology - 1st air bearing tangential that worked, Air Tangent air bearing, Helius - single point allignment of vertical and horizontal bearings that they claim ensures energy hits both vertical and horizontal bearings in phase to reduce smearing, then you get into the likes of the Breuer, Da Vinci where craftsmenship are clearly evident.
You missed the unique counterweight and pivot point at the same height as the record surface.
Answer - Immedia RPM & Centroid.
I'm sure there are many others. I have no doubt the Continuum arms are excellent, and they would be on my short list if I were to upgrade from the Aro, along with the Immedia Centroid. However to suggest they are beautiful and push the frontiers of tonearm science is an overstatement in my view. |
Hey Halcro - thought you might like to read up on the original Vector by AJ Conti -
The Vector 1 tonearm utilizes a hybrid bearing featuring a point contact, .020 radius polished male pivot fabricated from hardened tool steel. The female cup is ground and polished from sapphire and is precisely radiused to achieve self-centering with the pivot. The entire weight of the tonearm is concentrated on the primary pivot, with an innovative stabilization bearing controlling azimuth as well as guaranteeing stability of the vertical rotational plane of the stylus. This new, advanced bearing system solves the problems with all previous fixed bearing arms (bearing chatter, lack of azimuth correction) as well as the problems with unipivot bearings (azimuth rocking reaction reducing bass and dynamics, loose hand operation, unstable azimuth reaction to vertical record warps). The result is a tonearm of unprecedented sonic performance and superior tracking, guaranteeing reduced record wear.
The Vector tonearm is designed with a center of gravity offset from the main pivot, generating a couple (torque) about the axis of the armtube. This torque creates a secondary force resulting in a constant side-load against the stabilizing bearing, which consists of an azimuth guide arm riding against an ABEC 7 precision ball bearing. The guide arm is ground and polished to a .060 radius, creating a point contact against the .125 radius bearing. The secondary bearing is loaded in a purely radial, uni-directional fashion, eliminating all free play as well as any requirement for the bearing to support axial loads. With a radial runout of .0001 or less, the secondary bearing guarantees azimuth stability to within .01070. The secondary bearing is submerged in an extremely temperature independent damping fluid, guaranteeing no possibility of bearing chatter. The azimuth guide arm is angled at the exact angle of the headshell, forcing the tonearm to maintain azimuth while traversing record warps and at all VTA settings. The above arrangement yields a silent bearing that is supremely stable, resulting in effortless sound and pinpoint, stable imaging.
Look familiar.
This has been around for years. Better add the Vector to the list of true advances in tonearm science. AJ Conti has also been championing a balance centre of mass approach to unipivots as well, ie dont hang the balls too low, because if you do when the arm hits a warp, the low riding weight acts as a pendulum and tracking force increases as the arm has to lift the balls through a wider arc.
So what's new about the Continuum - did they invent the ABEC 9 bearing ?? |
Dover,
That's right....the Cobra and Copperhead arms are dual pivots. Not too many of them around?
All the tonearms you define without headshells actually have very well defined headshells. The Syrinx PU2 even has a solid bar fixed across its armtube to which the cartridge is screwed. The other arms have a flattened out shaped metal headshellsl welded to the armtubes. Because you can't see the welds doesn't make the headshell invisible?
All the counterweights you cite are well above that of the Continuums but more importantly, change their Moments of Inertia about the pivot with each addition or subtraction of a counterweight.
Because the Continuum's counterweights face downwards, the Moment of Inertia about the pivot remains constant.
The ET2 wiring exits from the top and lies loosely across the arm putting lateral force into the arm tracking. There is no vertical support hoop as in the Continuums?
But the most important and revolutionary impact of the Continuums is the shape and material (not carbon fibre) of the tonearm and the way this shape and construction were calculated with the aid of aerospace computers.
A pivoted tonearm is a very complex structural diagram to plot.
It is not a full cantilever because it is semi-propped by the stylus.
It is also a counterweighted cantilever which gives a totally different vector forces diagram than a pure cantilever.
Almost every tonearm in history has tended to ignore this structural complexity and make the armtube constant shape from pivot to cartridge whilst others have tapered the tube in a classic cantilever response to stresses.
Neither one is structurally correct and when lateral movement is added to the equation, these two basic solutions are unsophisticated.
For the first time in history, the same computer power that designs the structure and air effects of Formula 1 cars is utilised for tonearms.
As for the fit and finish of the DaVinci qualifying it for 'advancing' the state of the art.....you surely jest?
I have the DaVinci, the FR-66S and the Copperhead head to toe on the Raven AC 3 and the 35 year old FR-66S looks newer than the 4 year old Grandezza. The Copperhead is perhaps a fraction below the fit and finish of the DaVinci...but not far at all. The SAEC WE308 is a notch higher than the Grandezza whilst the SAEC 407/23 is another notch further up and the Mixro Seiki MA505S is a clear 3 notches higher.
You obviously don't wish to see the facts behind these revolutionary arms but there are better judges than you or I who have already written their verdicts :^) |
Dear all,
As no one is following my advice to look underneath the Cobra arm and the ignorance level is rising (like that word, picked it up in another thread - sorry) may I add:
which tonearm provides a magnetical supported armboard allowing adjustment (hard, soft)?
and to my knowledge it is the most expensive tonearm - but this is an innovation of a different kind.
best @ fun only |
Well Dover,
You play with your Vector.......uh....do you even have one?
And I'll listen to my Copperhead.
One of us will keep smiling :^) |
Dear Thuchan,
We are talking tonearms only.
When you take the Cobra or Copperhead off the Caliburn or Criterion and put them on a normal TT......you don't have a magnetically supported armboard. Pity ;^) |
Dear Halcro: Tonearm design is not a rocket science and till today as you and Dover knew almost all is already " writed " about. Still there is land for improvements and that's the good subject in thw whole tonearm subject: that we could see new " things " on tonearm design in the future these could means that our cartridges will perform better that with the today tonearms ( any )?: who knows but I hope the new tonearms to come could do it and elevate the quality performance level on what the/our cartridges are showing us today.
Regards and enjoy the music,
R. |
Dear Thuchan,
excuse me, but do you mean that the armboard is floating?
BTW I thought that the most expensive tonearm was the Pluto 9A Prestige gold. |
10-11-11: Halcro
OK Johnnyb,
As the Moderator here.....'modern' arms which do not advance the art and science of the design....are not of interest. And why are you so sure that the DPS arm does not "advance the art and science of the design"? |
Dear Geoch,
yes, the armboard is floating but in a very stable way. Four magnets on the rear side of the armboard (two each) are facing four magnets mounted on two special side rests. You may adjust the distance between the magnets for getting a harder or softer "footprint" of the arm.
It is working like in the DaVinci Gabriel II which runs with two big magnetical platters, only moving here.
best @ fun only |
Dear Halcro,
in general you are right. But the cobra tonearm is designed for usage with a floating armboard. It is part of the system. But you may use it without, of course.
best @ fun only |
Halcro -
My original post was correct then, the major advance is the arm tube. As you have articulated there are many other aspects to this arm, many of which have been used before. If you really want to debate the no headshell then look at the Ediswan Arm of 1955 - this is a monocoque structure with cartridge AND phono built into the arm, even had a volume control on the arm.
Seriously though mounting an armboard on magnets and dialing up the softness sounds like a tone control to me. I'm firmly in the camp of having a rigid closed loop between cartridge and groove. No I dont use the Vector as my own personal preference for tonearms is
1. Tangential tracking air bearing
2. True unipivot
I'm happy to acknowledge the likes of Continuum pushing the envelope and challenging current thinking on arm tube design and performance, but one must also acknowledge the designers gone before who have designed, developed & articulated many of the ideas used in the rest of the arm. |
Dover,
I was a little rash in defining 'Modern Arms' as advancing the art and science?
We all agree that...as Raul says....tonearms are not 'Rocket Science'.....unless you want it to be?
What I really meant by 'Modern Arms' as opposed to the classic arms of the 70s and 80s is the struggle for slight advances with new technologies whilst treating very seriously the important requirement for 'on the fly' adjustments.
Such arms are typified by the Phantom II with Magnaglide and Micropoise, the Triplanar, the Reed, the Durands and the Kuzma 4Point as well as the Continuums.
Having said that......the Micro Seiki MA-505 came with VTF, VTA and anti-skate ALL 'on-the-fly' 30 years ago. As well as having Azimuth adjustment and hydraulic elevating as well as descending arm mechanism.
With this amount of 'on-the-fly adjustment, it made extracting the finest performance from any cartridge particularly easy and thus compared, in sonic ability, to many superior arms of its time and even those of today. |
Halcro,
I dont think we are that far apart. One of the debates I have been having with myself for 20 yrs in terms of tonearms is the adjustability and ease of setting up accurately vs the added complexity in the arm with the subsequent tradeoffs in rigidity and energy dispersion. The Triplanar is a good talking point - does the gain in accurate setup outweigh the disadvantages of added complexity. Back in the old days the more you removed from the arm the better they sounded eg tonearm lifts etc. For VTA adjustments we made metal blocks with set screws such that we knew 1/4 turn = 1/1000th inch.
We would slip these under the arm lift or whatever was available hanging off the pillar - gave us repeatable, measurable VTA adjustment, and you just remove the block when done.
If I were to redesign the ARO I would either thread the arm pillar and mounting board and eliminate the silly alan nut that holds the pillar ( weak point of many arms I believe ) or put a VTA threaded needle under the arm pillar with a teflon tip so there is minimal additional points of contact, or you can disengage the VTA adjustment contact points when done. |
Does anybody regard the Breuer or Brinkmann or Raven as beautifully designed tonearms? They look very simple (lookings only of course), a bit Bauhaus design like.
best @ fun only |
Well the Breuer and Brinkmann are not modern arms....but I don't find them particularly elegant.
The Raven pushes no boundaries and is rather pedestrian looking.
I much prefer the looks of the Shroeder arms in terms of their proportions and clarity of purpose.
Of the modern arms, some of the 12" upper Reed models are not so bad.
Happy Nandric? :^) |
|
Dear Halcro, Thuchan is already making my life difficult
with even threefold teasing in a single post. You obviously like to join him. Vidmantas , the designer/owner of the Reed, is a good friend of my but this is not, uh,
a sufficient condition to admire his tonearms in aesthetical sense. To be honest my position is that an tonearm needs to satisfy some other conditions first. As I
stated before I never thought about tonearms in aesthetical
context. But the FR-64S awaked in me this 'wondering' which
I called, by lack of the right vocabulary, 'mechanical beauty'. Now the lack of vocabulary in this whole thread is an obvious indication that the most of us are not 'aestheticaly educated'. No wonder than that we use 'old predicates' or expressions to describe the 'new objects of art'. To me this paradox is obvious. Ie 'old'
and 'new' are (pre) supposed to be different. But you obviously enjoy this 'field' of knowledge because you must feel in this domain like a king. You should however not extend this feeling to the domain of turntables and carts. There are boundaries , you know, even for the architects.
Regards, |
I also like the 12" Reed 3Q but I prefer the Centroid's form. Aesthetically it seems more in purpose and less fancy. It can manage to hide some of it's revelations in a seemingly plain design. These days I have the Pluto 9A/Decca REF and SAEC WE-308SX/Condor XCM with the Zonotone Z-SHELL 10 headshell. These two pairs are better integrated in my system than Pluto 9A/Colibri XPP and Reed/Goldfinger in the past. I'm more on the MC side but I can not accept the missing of azimuth adjustability on SAEC. This is a serious issue with vintage arms and one reason that I'm missing the Reed. It's control of azimuth is on a par with Pluto (at the headshell). A really great arm but after living with the Reed I can say it is not my favorite nor in terms of use or at sight, neither on the sound matching with my set-up. I've get over this arm really quick. So far only the Pluto has passed the test of time after 15 years in use. What are you guys doing to overcome the azimuth issue? |
Hi Geoch, I thought you decided to grow 'Porporitas' or something and that your new philosophy of life was the modesty of an Greek farmer. But obviously Onasis is still there in your head. Mentioning explict the Pluto 9A, the Goldfinger, the Condor ,the Colibri, etc. Glad to see such consitency qua behaviour as well that at least some Greek are doing well. |
Well Nandric, .....allways with a good word in your mouth!
I have visitors now, but ... I'll be back! |
Hi Geoch, 'with a good word in your mouth?' Those are as far as I know writen 'words' usualy called 'arguments'.
'I'll be back' reminds me of some Austrian with an terrible
German accent. Only in the USA can such a person make a political carrer. Not to mention the former president.
Do you need my address in Holland? Otherwise you will have
no idea where to come 'back'? I am an Serbian warrior only
equaled by Dertonarms predecessors who defited the Romans.
So stay in Greece, you have problems enough at home.
|
Dear Nandric, it was rather an Austrian with a terrible austrian-styrian accent ... even better in the 1st sequel ...
Peace on earth - and within the ECC...
Cheers,
D. |
Dear Daniel, I am sorry for my 'blunder' but I am only familiar with the Salzburger accent. Spend there two years.
Lucky me you are not questioning my comparison between the Serbian and the German warriors.So Geoch got a double warning.
Kind regards, |
Dear Nandric, as stated before ... peace inside the ECC ...;-) ....- times are rough enough right now ..... especially for Greece.
I enjoyed my holidays on the south coast of Crete for years and have learned to love and respect the people there.
Even if the Cretans see themselves a bit different from the rest of Greece.
After all - this is the birthplace of all what we now call western culture.
Kind regards,
D.
|
Dear Serbian warrior, beware not to rip your tights on your crusade to hi jack every thread with your pusillanimous ego.
I'm not interesting to follow your handicapped personality with your superiority complex. If you have a cultural problem with me, you'll better keep to jack off with your equal warriors. I'm not gonna be a part of this pathetic attitude of yours any time you need a slap to wake up from your jingoist nightmare. If the Pluto, Goldfinger, Colibri, etc were out of your reach, this is not my problem. Step back and let us find a way in our own interest, that is AUDIO! and not the primitive immaturity of your rotten value system. This is the last time that I become involved with your case. |
Dear Daniel, You may be an expert in Austrian accents but
you are obviously not good informed about Serbian-Greek
realtionship. Those are the best and the only friends on the Balkan.
Cheers, |
Dear Nikola, well I am open to new experiences and am learning ..... ;-) ... one sure get's the impression that you and Geoch do know what button to push at the other to get a reaction ...
Back to topic: I see - as far as optics go - the Reed as a kind of off-spin of the Wheaton-Triplanar. And this is certainly not it's only basic design off-spring.
In this context, I would rather vote for the venerable old Triplanar.
At least this is rough yet charming basic industrial design.
Cheers,
D. |
Dear Geoch,
this was a clear word in the direction of Nandric who seems to have a hard life anyway - he gets teased from so many sides :-) but he also seems to be a stable warrior passing all times...
Regarding Greek, I was able to participate at a conference this week some industry leaders participating, including a major bank representative. Mr Six from the rental chain was talking too and he reported about an ironic advertisment camapaign he did in Greece. Mr Sixt is famous for his ironic marketing efforts.
He advertised: " dear people of Greece at my shop you may pay in Drachmas if you want from now on".
As a result of this he was punished a lot and had to write excuses to many Greek people and institutes. Maybe Nandric should write a letter too...
BTW I don`t agree with Mr Sixt !
best @ fun only |
Can we please stay in tune? I wish to overcome this unpleasant situation as quick and harmless for both of us. Like as it never happened.
Now what about the azimuth adj. How you can manage to live with a tonearm without this? |
Dear Daniel, I have both : the Reed 2A ,12'' and the Triplanar VII. The Reed is on an arm pod because this was the only possibility to use two tonearms with my Kuzma Stabi Reference. I don't look at them as the objects of art
but as instruments for specific task. The task however is
more related to the carts then the tonearms. In the Reed I
have the Phase Tech P-3G an LOMC with low compliance. In
the Triplanar the Benz Ruby 3S. Depending on the music kind
I prefer one above the other and vice versa. No conflicts
at all. BTW thy are not able to contradict me.
Regards,
|
Dear Geoch,
I have two SAECs, the 8000 and the 506/30. I have no problems with the azimuth adjustment cause both arms are precisely levelled. When you are using SME headshells you can also adjust the position a little. I know that many DaVinci users complained about the fixed headshell's position where you could not adjust the Azimuth.
Agree that Azimuth control is important!
best @ fun only |
Dear Nikola, may I suggest that you give the Phase Tech a listen in the Triplanar and vice versa the Benz in the Reed.
As a matter of fact the Triplanar is better suited to low compliance (although I wouldn't really call the Phase Tech P-3G low in compliance ... but it is lower in comparison to the Benz for sure) having a slightly higher effective mass than the Reed.
Aside from this I was only pointing to the similarities in outer shape to return this thread to it's topic.
Cheers,
D. |
Azimuth adjustment shouldn't be necessary - alas, it often is due to lack of precision in way too many cartridges (and sometimes idiotic platter surfaces with ever so slight slope to ensure better contact of record to platter - kind of jumping out of the frying pan and into the fire...).
Cheers,
D. |
Dear Daniel, I got both of your messages. So I derectly
swiched to the thread topic. However your advice regarding
the switch between carts I somehow anticipated a priori
and made the comparison some time ago. To me the Phase Tech
P-3G sounds much better in the Reed 2A.
Regards, |
Dear Thuchan, I was never credulous. So those who pretend
to be able to see in the future are to me fantast.
However this Mr.Six may be a real prophet regarding the Drachmas in Greece.
Cheers, |
I would like to see the SME V without the lines and print on its armtube. It would be more difficult to set up... For shame, Peter! The SME would be easier to set up (properly) without those lines, not more difficult. The lines tempt one to level the armtube when adjusting VTA/SRA instead of focussing on what matters, the cartridge and stylus. I'm sure you would never do that, so I'm just sayin'. ;-) |
Surely you jest Doug,
Who am I to go against the recommendations of the arm manufacturer? I use the lines to get a ball park for level, ie parallel to the LP surface of an average weight LP, then I listen and do some VTA adjustment. It's similar to balancing the arm during set up before you apply the estimated range for VTF on the SME V. Then I listen and adjust VTF and VTA again and then again until it sounds right. I follow the recommendations of the cartridge and arm manufacturers for the initial set up and THEN start the fine tuning by ear. My Air Tight manual also suggests to start with the top of the cartridge level putting the SRA in a range, and then adjust by ear. I, for one, was never "tempted" to set the arm level and then forget it. For those who are, those lines are helpful. You, and I to perhaps a lesser degree, will fine tune everything by ear. And that is how it should be for most of us.
I still think it would be more difficult to set up without the lines printed on the armtube. That tapered tube would be tough to set parallel to the record surface. Otherwise, I don't know how one would start the process.
One could try to set VTF without first roughly balancing the arm to neutral but I would not want to risk setting my stylus on a guage to read 6 grams. I want to at least first start in a ballpark. My eyes certainly are not good enough to get a ballpark 92 degree SRA and my fingers are not good enough to estimate what 2 grams feels like.
Either I'm missing something, or you are having some fun with me. This thread needs some humor injected in it.
I still rather strongly think the arm would be more beautiful without the lines, especially the 12" version, but you are the first to even acknowledge that suggestion, though you haven't commented on my point. What say you? |
Looking at my SME V tonight, I noticed for the first time, or at least was conscience of it for the first time, that the printed horizontal lines are only on one side - the outside. That's quite obvious, but I never made a note of this before. The inside of the arm does look better IMO. Now enough of highjacking this thread. The SME V is a thirty year old design. Hardly "modern". |
Peter, I'm having fun but I'm also serious about the futility of that line. It is in fact a distraction that misleads the unwary, as you demonstrated when you wrote, "I still think it would be more difficult to set up without the lines printed on the armtube. That tapered tube would be tough to set parallel to the record surface". 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. The next closest thing to adjusting the stylus is to adjust the cartridge body. This is actually easier than levelling an armtube and arguably more effective. Just make the cartridge level to the record surface (or tail-up/down if that's what a particular cartridge prefers). Where the armtube ends up is irrelevant. Who am I to go against the recommendations of the arm manufacturer? You're Peter, I'm Doug, both thinking audiophiles who trust their own judgement and learn thereby. :) With regard to pertinance, as the SME's line is pointless at best or a distraction at worst it is technically offensive, which makes it aesthetically offensive in a technical device. So I agree with you - the arm would look better without it! Doug |
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. |
John,
Your questions suggest that I failed to communicate my point. Let's begin with an area of agreement, namely, that we're seeking a reasonable basis for VTA/SRA adjustment.
Next, let's ask ourselves exactly what we're adjusting:
- what is VTA? The angle of the cantilever relative to the record surface (stated roughly for simplicity).
- what is SRA? The angle of the stylus contact surfaces to the record surface.
We note that neither definition references or even assumes the existence of an armtube. If an armtube is not required for the existence of a parameter it may not be the most sensible basis for adjusting that parameter.
Proof: VTA/SRA exist and ought to be adjusted even when a cartridge is mounted on a tonearm that has no armtube at all, e. g., the Clearaudio Souther. We always should and in this case we must choose something other than armtube angle as our basis for VTA/SRA adjustment, preferably something more directly related to VTA/SRA.
Similarly, when adjusting zenith angle do we look at the armtube? Do we care if it's tapered or parallel? No. We look at the cartridge and cantilever because that's what we're adjusting. The same principle applies to VTA/SRA adjustment. Our basis for adjustment should be the cartridge/stylus. The angle of the armtube is a consequence of, not a basis for all these adjustments.
Whether I like or dislike SME is irrelevant. I use the same VTA/SRA basis with all tonearms because it's not a tonearm adjustment. It's a cartridge/stylus adjustment.
|
Hi Doug,
That's a very good explanation of our mutual goal. I agree completely with what you wrote, but you left out how you begin the process to get the VTA/SRA approximate before you do the fine tuning by ear. I assume you use a loupe or magnification of some sort and look directly at the stylus/cantilever. Your eyes may be good enough, mine aren't.
My only point, which I guess was not made clearly enough, is this: I can't use my eyes alone and don't have the proper magnification devices so I get an approximate starting point by leveling my arm tube with a measuring device. My cartridge top is presumably flat and my SME fixed headshell is presumed to be flat (or close enough). This I believe gets me to a good starting point.
Perhaps I will invest in a USB microscope and take my table to my computer to start the cartridge set up in the future.
I understand your point and read no bias against the SME arm in your post, though you may secretly harbor such sentiments. The SME V does not have adjustable azimuth and its VTA screw is awkward and not repeatable, for instance ; ) |
'I'll be back' reminds me of some Austrian with an terrible
German accent. Only in the USA can such a person make a political carrer. Not to mention the former president.
Nandric (Threads | Answers | This Thread) It's funny that you make a joke about him. There are a ton of Slavic people that live in Austria and Germany. A lot of them also call themselves Austrians, or Germans. He looks more Slavic than anything else. He even seems to think he is. He was even in a movie do to this. He might be one of your distant relatives. [http://www.fortunecity.com/bennyhills/leary/490/redheat.htm] |
Peter,
Sorry for spouting theory and forgetting a few straightforward examples.
First I never use a magnifier or loupe for VTA/SRA, at least not any more.
For a ZYX I just make the ridge near the bottom of the cartridge body level. I know from experience that this will get me very close - on any tonearm.
For a Shelter I just make the cartridge body slightly tail down. I know from (less) experience that this will get me close - on any tonearm.
If I'm setting up an Ortofon A90 with Dan and you at Chris's house I waste 45mins trying without success to decipher and follow the instructions about adjusting SRA under magnification. ;) Then I come to my senses, level the cartridge frame by eye (30 seconds) and find that we're so close I can nail the sweet spot by ear on any LP in another 30 seconds. This worked on both the Durand Talea and the Kuzma Airline, easy as pie on both arms.
That last example is how I (should) begin with any unfamiliar cartridge. Fussing with magnifiers to nail SRA certainly works and is technically the most accurate way to start, but since one must fine tune by ear anyway it just isn't worth the time and expense, IME.
It's not that levelling the armtube is bad. It should get you *nearly* as close as levelling the cartridge body. It's just that people with less knowledge and experience than you read these threads and may get the wrong idea about what they're trying to adjust. Whether one's eyes are good enough to see the (obviously smaller) cartridge body vs. the armtube is of course an individual matter.
|
I think the latest arms look great, do you miss those "S" arms of the past? I had a Grado Reference arm, that was vintage and, that was ugly! |
Hi Hifihvn, Yes you are right Schwazenegger is a typical
Slavic name. But regarding the accent you are wrong. All my relatives speak English with the BBC accent, not German accent. And those in Austria and Germany speak hochdeutsch.
Regards, |
The 'S' shaped arms are not a necessary factor for beautiful design.
Look at the DaVinci 12" Ref Grandezza and the Shroeder arms?
I think Dover nailed it with the current fad for 'complexity'.....the perceived 'need' to alter parameters 'on-the-fly'.
The Triplanar and then the VPI JMW Memorial arms initiated the principle of the separate support tower off which the actual bearing and arm could be attached. This principle has largely been adopted by the Reed and Talea and even the Cobra (although strangely enough.....not the Copperhead?)
As Dover questioned.......do these 'user-friendly' functions actually improve the sonic performance of the arms? |
There's little question that such user-friendly functions can improve the sonic performance of an arm in the areas they're designed to address. For example, VTA/SRA on-the-fly makes it possible to optimize those parameters very quickly and the results are clearly audible (at least to me).
Notwithstanding that, there is probably also a sonic penalty from hanging additional bits off the arm. Every piece of material is a potential resonance trap that may color the arm and/or raise its sound floor.
It's a two-edged sword, no simple answers.
|
I have seen nice images of the new DaVinci Masters Reference Virtu tonearm with a flexible SME shell. Not ugly at all !
best @ fun only |
