Why are modern arms so ugly?

@halcro 

which arms are ugly???

theo, It interested me that you think the Triplanar is designed and built with a "watchmaker's" precision, because Herb Papier, the designer and for a few decades the builder of the Triplanar was in real life, a watchmaker and watch repairer.  Perhaps you knew that, and it stimulated your metaphor.  I had the pleasure of knowing Herb during his later life, and by chance I was at Herb's house one day during the time when Tri was visiting Herb in order to learn how to build the tonearm.  Herb did it all in his basement back then, with precision machinery of course.  Some small parts were evidently farmed out toward the end or production.

And I agree with Chakster, the Triplanar is now an almost vintage design in terms of years since its introduction.  What makes us think of it as "modern" is the fact that Herb incorporated many new ideas that have become standard fare for modern tonearms and differentiate "vintage" designs from modern ones.  The side mounted tower for VTA adjustment is one.  The placement of the counter-weight in the plane of the LP, so that warps have less effect on VTF is another.  The decoupling of the counter-weight is yet another, although some of the Japanese arms had already done that. And there is the damping trough and the capacity to adjust azimuth.

LOL good one Schubert.  
My vector 4 is like art. 

Because the modern world is .

I have been following this forum for a long time, although I have only just signed up. I don’t intend to post a lot here, but I can’t help mentioning the Glanz tonearm as an example of a design that combines excepcional beauty and high performance.

http://www.glanztonearms.co.uk/

Beauty is function!

I disagree with chakster about the tri-planar arm, I think that they are beautifully designed arms that deliver world-class sound.

@theo1124 

It was a quote from the OP's first post, not my own opinion about Tri-Planar.  

Tri-Planar is definitely not the ugliest arm in my opinion and actually it's not a modern arm, it's a vintage tonearm with some improvements. 

   

*Darth

Kuzma 4P looks Dart Vaderish - I kinda like the way it looks.  

I disagree with chackster about the tri-planar arm, I think that they are beautifully designed arms that deliver world-class sound.  but that is my opinion. They are designed and built with a watchmaker's precision. Each piece of each arm is made by hand by Tri Mai who is a meticulous craftsman.

the arm on the new technics 1200G looks very much vintage and its a fantastic arm.

And then there's the Triplanar.......something the Soviets would launch against some Balkan uprising.
And this fashionable separation of VTA tower and arm is responsible for a whole brood of monsters.

Hahaha :)

Remember........classics are always beautiful.

True. 

But most of the modern turntables aesthetically are perfect match for those ugly modern tonearms, maybe this is the reason why tonearms are so ugly ?  

10.5 is a future classic. Gorgeous in person. It has a very precise look and feel to it.

I had a FR-66 and thought it was okay. I guess I'm just taken by the close tolerance machining of the Ikeda and, of course, the sound.

Tbg........the Ikeda IT-407CR1.
Are you saying this is a 'beautiful' modern arm or are you using it as an example of my Thread?
It's not the ugliest arm IMO that's for sure......but compared to the original FR-66s by the same designer over 30 years ago......I know which one I prefer visually :-)

Halcro, the Ikeda Sound Labs IT-407CR1 Long Tonearm.

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

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.

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?

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,

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!

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'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]

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 ; )

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.

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.

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

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".

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?

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'. ;-)

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,

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,

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 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.

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 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,

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 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

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 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 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 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 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, 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.

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.

Well Nandric, .....allways with a good word in your mouth!
I have visitors now, but ... I'll be back!

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.

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?

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,

Speak for yourself.