Hello Meister D.
"Musing and watching"...
Some bionic rig!
Über motor, über platter, über bearing, über alles...
Add some, über drive belt/string, über cables, über phono-stage,
.
Removed yourself 10/10 from the rest of the analogue world out here it seems. "N'oublie pas que tu vas mourir" :-)
This of course might just explain also some of these divergent findings on arm resonances.
High mass platters and floating bearings have their way with resonances, we know.
In fact, it puts your 'comparative' findings and arguments way out yonder.
Not easy to make much sense of it then, with the rest of most all 'commercial' audio and some bit of 'boutique-audio' components.
"Musing and watching" Hm... |
Can you tell me a little bit more about the air-cushion?
So I guess your final assault will be something similar along the lines of heavy platter belt drive with very elaborate damping system? |
The "final assault" is a combination of magnetic isolation and air cushion - fine tuned and stabilized at 0.5 Hz horizontal and vertical.
The platter isn't heavy - its much more than that.
The bearing is a horizontal force free string drive indeed.
This TT does adress about 6 individual issues no other TT has so far.
And all these are solved.
But its about 500 lbs net weight - not suitable for any rack.......
As you already see from these few figures - not a commercial product at all.
For a very good - no money - air cushion, you may go to the next special bike store and get fluid-filled small size (3 - 5") tires. These do give excellent isolation with very low tuning frequency and work better with all but the most heavy TT's than most of the lower priced professional isolation platforms (the higher priced ones start at US$4000....). |
Hello Axel, .... its not my problem if it does not make sense to you or some other people.
You entirely misstake me with someone caring about that ......
I give info as good as I can when honestly asked - whether it finds open minds or not is without my reach.
Whether you can value it or not - whether you or others can "compare" my "findings" and take some input out of them or not - I certainly don't care.
I have no questions - at least not in Audio.
Cheers,
D. |
Dear Perrew: +++++ " do you think the Reed can compete with the dynamically balanced tonearms ... " +++++
in theory the dynamically balanced tonearms are a little better ( some advantages. ) that a static balanced one, I agree with Dertonarm in this subject.
But things are not so easy ( theory ) but how good is the design on that precise tonearm mechanism and its execution, IMHO tonearms like: FR, SME, Lustre, Sumiko, Micro Seiki, Dynavector, etc, all but the Micro Seiki MAX add resonances for the topology that use for the dynamically balanced mechanism ( using some kind of spring. ), the Micro Seiki use a different mechanism where the resonances are no-audible but in all the other tonearms those additional tonearm resonances are audible and that's why in the real world ( not theory ) all those tonearms are more neutral running in static way that in dinamically way.
I agree too that if you can't hear the differenes between static/dynamically then there are/is some other trouble in the audio chain that preclude to hear those bad resonances.
Perrew, nothing is perfect in our beloved audio world and what you have on " paper " in a tonearm design not always is achieved in the right way when the tonearm is build and running in our audio systems.
The implementation of a design is what make a difference between different quality performance level in tonearms.
The geometry and all the heory aplicated in a tonearm design is as good as the execution is and as good as the tonearm build materials choosed.
A tonearm design is a complex " task " where exist multiple factors to achieve top quality performance level, the static vs dynamically is only one of those multiple factors and not one that in the today/vintage tonearms makes " the difference " due to that " wrong " implementation.
IMHO we can have very good performance in either design if we know what to do on the design and execution tonearm design.
Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul. |
Dear Nandric, the point with all this disagreement about the FR-64s/FR-66s is a matter of timing .....
I am firm in my impression, that anyone who does not like the sound of the FR-64/66 or think it is colored (... this is the ONE single most neutral sounding tonearm-design on this planet - period.) or that he hears the "resonating spring" ( if you really open up a FR-60 tonearm and examine the "spring" you will soon realize, - with some deeper thoughts - that this explanation is totally nonsense - but if you look on the pictures floating on teh net you only see opened FR-housings which are NOT (no longer...) greased as designed. Too many sorcerer's apprentices around..... ) has made errors in set-up ( which is VERY easy, as the FR-60 series requires special geometry set-up and alignment and furthermore most audiophile do not care for nor do know about groove-compliant VTA ), hears missmatch or the flaws of the rest of the system.
He does certainly not hear the FR-tonearm.
I have heard over 160 high-end systems all over the western hemisphere (even in Mexico City...) - the most expensive (and there were several in this line up) far exceeding 2 million US$ retail price value. Anything from super-top-class market components of the very highest caliber and price tag to carefully set-up ultra-fidelity multi horn driver systems of extreme complexity and with "home-brewed" super-smart SET-amplifiers.
I was in Sea Cliff twice and listened to the set-ups there in a very nice private session.
I haven't seen nor heard all, but among these 150+ set-ups there weren't but one hand full of systems which were able to show all the potential of the FR-64s or FR-66s.
You need a good empty highway to appreciate the full potential of an Audi RS8 or a Ferrari - using the next B-road which wasn't serviced since 20 years might not be the right choice for a true evaluation.
But if you only know your local B-road, your experiences and expactations are different.
Fine.
If we go back 25-30 years we would find an almost universal praise in the international audio press regarding the FR-60 tonearm series.
Even the super "hardcore" - no compromise - audiophile analog frontman Mitchell A. Cotter recommended the FR-66s/FR-7 combo ONLY for his B-1 turntable.
In Germany, the US as well as the Far East the FR-60 steel tonearms were THE tonearms for low compliance cartridges and set the standard for this group of high mass tonearms.
Today the focus is very different.
These high moving mass tonearms have almost vanished from the market.
Today's top-flight moving coils call for ( in terms of matching the cartridges compliance..) medium to low mass tonearms.
Aside from K. Sugano ( who isn't among us anymore....) there is/was no cartridge designer who did favour a tonearm out-of-production for his cartridges nor yet would recommend its use.
Thats logic in all ways.
If I were a cartridge designer I would recommend tonearms ONLY which are current production and are readily available.
What cartridge manufacturer with an even remote sense for business would like to embarass todays tonearm-manufacturers by recommending a vintage design only available second hand as the optimum choice for his product ?
Its about as clever as drilling a hole in your kneecap and nailing a spare-rib there....
If Isamu Ikeda (not likely this will happen...... just a theoretical proposition...) would launch on the upcoming Rocky Mountain Audio Fair his new tonearm - and it would look just like the FR-66s and would come with an improved version of the B-60 vta-on-the-fly base - well, the absolu!e sound, Stereophile and all the other magazines would agree in universal praise again.
Why?
Because then it would be a "new and current product" - no longer a vintage tonearm of oldskool physics.....
Has anyone yet given it a thought, why so many seasoned audiophiles with many other - very expensive too - current tonearms at hand and in possesion still do favour the FR-66s........ ?
Is it likely they do so because of marketing hype or to tease other audiophiles?
Oh well......
Cheers,
D. |
Hi D. :-)
you say:
>>> "- I certainly don't care. I have no questions - at least not in Audio." <<<
Like that sergeant major: "I have no stomach ulcers -- I give them!"
It's good to know, this is how it works.
- Can't hear static vs dynamic VTF? Your system sux :-)
- Can hear FR resonances? Your system sux :-)
- SUT works for you? Your system sux :-)
- Got any audio question? Your system sux :-)
- ...
OK, "What we got here is: failure to communicate..."
A. |
Axel, the "failure to communicate" line is actually from CoolHand Luke. I think you might be looking for... Hartmann: I am Gunnery Sergeant Hartman, your Senior Drill Instructor. From now on, you will speak only when spoken to, and the first and last words out of your filthy sewers will be "Sir!" Do you maggots understand that?
Recruits: [in unison] Sir, yes, sir!
Hartmann: Bulls&!t! I can't hear you. Sound off like you got a pair!
Recruits: [louder] Sir, yes, sir!
Hartmann: If you ladies leave my island, if you survive recruit training... you will be a weapon, you will be a minister of death, praying for war. But until that day you are pukes! You're the lowest form of life on Earth. You are not even human f#@&ing beings! You are nothing but unorganized grabasstic pieces of amphibian s&!t! Because I am hard, you will not like me. But the more you hate me, the more you will learn. I am hard, but I am fair! |
Hi T_bone,
gee, my man. Go got that so right, like you'd been doing this for a living! Sir, yes Sir!
Now this 'Hartmann' (Brakemeier?) dude also addressing them "human f#@&ing beings" from high-up his Olympus mountain - elevated demigod of... FR? (F#@&ing Recrutes)
I think you got the drift.
So long it doesn't get boring around here.
A. |
|
Hi Axel, ..... entertaining........ everything off topic, but still entertaining. |
In its day the FR arms were OK, but they have long been surpassed in terms of State of the Art. These days the better arms will be seen to have their bearings in the same plane as the LP, which helps the arm maintain steady tracking forces when playing through warps and playing bass. The best arms I have seen also have treated arm tubes to eliminate resonance in the arm tube. One of the better examples of this approach is the Triplanar.
So far air bearings in arms and tables have proven to be a failed concept- any play that exists between the platter surface and the cartridge cantilever will be a coloration (often a lack of bass, but can manifest in many other ways as well). This is why the more air pressure you put into an air bearing, the better the system sounds. The problem is you can never have enough air pressure and why an air bearing might be 'good' but never state of the art. |
Dear Atmasphere,
well - steady tracking force while through warps....... if you look real close it is an interaction between the suspension of the cantilever and the vertical moving mass vector of the given tonearm.......
That dynamically balanced mode is simply superior in exactly this quest compared to the static mode is obvious - but if you have a different position - fine with me.
You prefer the Triplanar over the FR-66s - fine with me.
As for your explorations regarding air bearings.............. fine with me too.
I have different positions for good reason.
But my wife just reminds me that I shouldn't waste my time with problems which aren't mine...............
As Douglas Adams put it so nicely: ........ a POOP-field........Problems Of Other People..... |
Dertonarm, I was thinking the same thing, but apparently neither of us could follow her advice. |
>>> I have no questions - at least not in Audio. <<<
Am I reading this correctly? I hope it's not as it sounds. I have tons of questions about audio. The more I learn the more questions I have. That's what makes this so much fun. If you have all of the answers then that's actually quite sad. |
Dear Dertonarm: I respect you first like a human been/person, second I respect your technical knowledge and in a lot less way your audiophile ears.
It is sad ( for say the least ) look at a guy like you with no real arguments trying to convice someone of something: ??? through " cry out " that you are the best, that you are the only one, that you already heard: whatever, that you are the only with the right cards, that you do not have question on audio, that you and that only you exist and not only that but that does not cares what other people things or if anyone disagree.
If all your bla, bla, bla, were reality then you don't have to take your time " crying out " again and again and again.
You say already heard a 2 million dollars system, well I already herad ( more than your 160 systems. ) at leat one millonaire system and so what.
For what you posted and insist in that fully dead ( FR tonearm ) by its " own right " tonearm you really do not learn almost nothing but IMHO ( you don't have to agree and you don't have to care: " fine with me " : ) not only you don't learn but you are almost deaf/unable to hear on sound music quality reproduction perception and even speak of audio items distortions with that so poor ears, nothing wrong with this there are no " perfect ears ".
Newton, Galileo and heard that 2 million dollar system can't help you to improve your ears perception. One thing is to know how much is 2+2 and a totally different thing is to own/have a experienced and discerning ears that you certainly do not have it does not matters what you " cry out " on the subject.
It is a sorrow that you try to " defend " a tonearm that has no defense right by its wrong design, period. Daniel you are Lost about real sound/music reproduction quality performance: those " mediocre " FR tonearms are already dig your audio grave.
With all respect: here and today and in the music/sound quality audio system real reproduction preception you are reference to nothing thank's to your beloved FR's ( and your beloved FR's audio friends maybe ( I can't say it. ) are at the same level than you, no reference here either.).
Your inferiority complex and your insegurity feelings goes against you and are hitting you again and again.
IMHO as you continue " crying out " ,that you and the FR's are the " ones " , in an intense and louder way as your grave goes deepest !!!!!, come on Daniel you are better than that.
Anyway Perrew: do you already have the answer you are looking for when you start this very interesting thread?
Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
|
Echoes of the "old skool" thread are coming out, and that was not the first big analog thread this year which got the magic eraser applied to it. If participants state what they state, disagree with one another, rebut once, rebut twice, then agree to disagree, we might be able to save information for posterity. Diatribes which do nothing but talk about the other person (and I realize that my last post might sound like that but I was simply posting a comment to someone else's comment; I have no particular ax to grind - though I love listening to that monologue) are what get threads deleted. |
"The Lord giveth, and the Lord taketh" :-)
Let's see if he leaves us a bit longer with THAT thread.
Why would ANY participant post here if he has NO question?
Looking for deciples? Wrong venue!
Teres said: ~ the more I learn --- the more questions come about. Thank you for making that quite clear again.
Another wise man said: The more I learn, the more I understand I know NOTHING. (Socrates?)
Mr. Know-it-all is no welcome guest at any gathering, just the way it is.
Inferior we can nicely feel by ourselves, no need for outside help :-(
I think we are posting here, and ask questions to SHARE and not be TOLD, pompously or otherwise.
Greetings,
Axel |
Dear Daniel,
I really like you and your passionate views and find your postings most entertaining.
For all I know, you may be right about the fact that the FR60 series of tonearms are the best that have ever been built, and I don't doubt that in your system (and those of your friends), the FR64 and FR66 beat all the other 'modern' arms in respect to your subjective preferences.
And that is the important point here Daniel, which you somehow ignore (although I suspect a little tongue-in-cheek?).
It is just your subjective opinion which is formulated by biases, preferences, likes and dislikes.
As (almost) everyone here acknowledges, there can never be a universal 'best' product or system.
If you had continued to contribute in all these Forums on the basis of 'your opinion' rather than an unarguable 'fact', you would not stir up such resentment.....but somehow I believe you quite relish this role of yours.
As an example of a similar Forum posting, look at Albert Porter's reviews on his Technics SP10 Mk2 and Mk3 turntables?
He likewise has a few friends who after listening to these turntables, sold their Walker Prosceniums, Basis Debuts, Ravens etc and bought their own Mk2s and Mk3s.
Never once has Albert issued a proclamation that the Technics SP10 Mk3 is the best turntable ever made and has never been bettered. He simply claims that it is the best he has ever heard?
Now I'm sure that you would not agree with his assessment (and that of his friends), and that would not bother him one iota.
But he would never claim that if you didn't hear what he hears, then your system is 'not up to it?'.
A little humility and vision would go a long way towards making your increasingly hysterical claims a little more balanced, and hence your obvious knowledge and experience, of greater benefit to all the readers of your posts?
You must not change your style too much (as that is part of your charm and entertainment value), but perhaps a little?
Tcheuss
Halcro
PS I never receiver that Email you promised me? |
Raul, I did not have the answer I was looking for when I started this thread. The inputs I had then was I was searching for a good arm for the XV1s, you had recommended the AT1503III/IV and someone else the "Grand", theres a pretty big price discrepancy there. Also the other famous arms, the 507II, the 8c, the VIIU, the SQ all seems to be around or below 6k not to mention all the old famous Japanese, 64s/66s, 506, EA-10 etc.
So thanks to all, I think this thread is getting real interesting, different opinions just makes things more interesting, just this is not super serious politics. |
Hi Perrew,
thank you, and back to the subject.
When it comes to new tonearms, affordable ones, it seems there is the RB250, 300, plus some already more pricey mods by 'Origin Life' and then what..... ?
How helpful it could be, to have some value-added notions on any other arms, what about the JELCO range?
A lot of these pricey modern arm are 'jewels' absolutely beautifully made --- and come at a jewellers price too.
Looking for a good, down to earth, value/performance arm I'd like to know about some of these.
In this forum, this far, one can take away the opinion that e.g. an SME V is hardly to be mentioned! ~ $5 000 and below is just too unspeakably gauche. No wonder the question was: "Why are the prices so high...?"
|
Dear Halcro, you are right.
No - I won't spice up this 1st sentence with one of my over-egomanic, sarcastic, ironic, acid (or whatever...) Gunnery-Drill-Sergant (God - T_bone, that was a great one !!) follow-ups.
Even if I rather see me acting for some other people here rather as an unpleasant mirror showing their own demons reflecting back in their face.
In any case - people like you, T_bone, Kirkus, Perrew and a few other fellow Audiogoner did got nothing but clear answers and comments from me in the past 3-4 months on Audiogon in the various analog-related posts - right ?
I NEVER critizsed any other Audiogoner's System set-up featured by pictures and/or description ( certainly not because I thought they were perfect, but because it is their toy and period.), I never said to anybody here in any post that he is deaf or has wrong listening biases.
Only I am getting accused.
Did I ever asked for your listening biases or "qualification".
Nope.
My listening bias ?
A TRUE reproduction of the real thing.
Including a real space with a sense of 3-dimensionality reproduction of individual sound sources.
Uncolored etc. that is not worth further mention.
Accompanied by - and this is a VERY fascinating experience - a convincing sense of real-life physical "weight" in each singular source convincing the listener that something is actually "there".
Add real life dynamics and colorful tone and you have my bias.
So what do these omnipresent audiophile phrases help ?
Nothing.
Most would claim the same being theirs.
So we are again in "audiophile vacuum" of individual experience and individual levels and biases which none of the other can judge and value - unless sitting on the sweet spot in the room of the other in a 1st world experience.
That is the link between Syntax, Heradot and me.
We can value the comments of the others and we can understand each others point-of-view.
As for the Technics SP-10 Mk2 and Mk3 discussion: I can very well understand Porter's point-of-view and do understand as well their moves.
I know from 1st hand experience the possibilities of the SP-10 (any version) as well as its limitations ( no matter what plinth in use).
These discussions about sound and listening biases via the internet are futile to the extreme - as none (or very few...) are based on real experiences.
So what is happening here?
We are exchanging personal experiences, point-of-views and positions - all these do lack a common ground.
The components can not act as common ground as they do have too strong interaction which the system they are part of.
The listening rooms can't either.
The personal biases - of course not as unknown to teh others except for hollow audio phrases.
If we could agree on 2-3 handful of current production LPs with clear specified groove-angle compliant VTA settings - then we would have a common ground.
Harry Pearson did part of that when he established his favourite picks and used them for almost 4 decades to put his listening biases - and results ! - on a common ground.
It was a great help and it did put the audiophile review on kind of a common basis.
I followed his reviews for 12 years and then finally visited him on May 1st, 1988 in Sea Cliff.
During that 4 hour listening session I learned his biases and room and his personal preferences much better than in dozens of reviews I read in the years before.
Now I had a picture.
Everything before was a vague idea - now, and only now I had a clear picture.
But the records did lead the way.
If we could agree on a package of 20 records which are available for standard price to all audiophiles - that would be a small step for each, but a big step for the audiophile community in terms of a common ground and better understanding each other.
And of course - there can never be a "perfect" or "best" component.
Why ?
Because each and every component - foremost the tonearm ! - can only be seen in interaction with its mated partners.
As we haven't standards for output-/input impedance, sensitivity, cantilever compliance, groove-angle and gain - we are dealing with a system of countless parameters depending on the other.
Dreadful situation.
Unthinkable in Pro-Audio.
In any case - I guess the common ground is worth some discussion.
Let me strongly encourage you and others to work out such a package and try to establish it.
It will be helpful to all.
Being 10, 20 or 30 records - it will be enough to cover all aspects of recorded music and we have enough high quality recordings around (thanks to the great wave of re-issues from golden days past) to have open choice.
I hope some fellow analog-Audiogoners do try to bring this package on state and established.
I won't participate.
Did you notice that I didn't mention the particular tonearm I'm in love with in this whole post............
Cheers,
D. |
Hi Axel, as for decent (below $1000) priced tonearms, I would heartly recommend the bigger Jelcos as well as the venerable (dynamically balanced and most versatile..) old Micro Seiki MA-505 (many versions on the market - try to go for the "x" or "s" - both are silver wired).
All these do change hands for between $400 and $700 and can teach many much higher priced tonearms a thing or two.
Cheers,
D. |
Hi D.
your 20 set LP reference is an interesting suggestion --- though it seems grounded in trying to get some form of 'perfection' where it can not be gotten.
When my audio-friend has often a hard time to find consensus listening to the same record / same system as I, gives me the idea it can only get more difficult, not less.
Next, a good product will not be 'sunk' just by some divergent listening impression. (They still make and sell SME arms and others, despite some hefty criticisms, that I do not have to repeat, yes?)
If 'perfection' was the goal we could close down every forum and junk every specification, as we know that the ear has it's own ways.
I think your quest for perfection, where there is only so much of an approximation possible, gets into your way more than it helps, in fact you know this too well!
But like a Sheepdog you can't help your nature, and keep chasing the 'bus' :-)
Now, if I want to verify some listening impressions in the forum and find mine either completely contradicted or affirmed, I have learned something!
This in turn can be synthesised into either a new or different understanding, and so on.
If you say: "I have no questions..." then you are done, finished. Yet, we are never to old not to learn something new.
In some other thread I ask for listening impressions of two carts, based on how they sound in my system.
If someone else hears them differently I have two option:
1) tell him that he is wrong! Well I have my prove or?
2) thank him, and go back maybe with his good suggestion and see what I now will find, and I have learned something.
It's all about information acquisition and synthesis, and NOT about refutations, at least in a forum.
Looking for spreading your one and only truth?
Get a soap box, stand on it, preach, make disciples :-)
Axel
PS: The FR is truly a beautifully machined/manufactured tonearm, no idea what it sounds like.
Probably very nice in my system, since my system sux, as I can not hear any difference between dynamic an static VTF either :-) |
Dertonarm, nothing but clear answers thanks.
Good suggestion with 10-20 common records!
I read one reviewer that was not very impressed(to say the least) with the Walker to SP10 move?
And with huge danger Im now opening up pandoras box and asking about the combo of FR7/FR66/XF1 is there a better step-up out there? |
Micro Seiki MA-505 ~ between $400 and $700 sound very reasonable, and looks VERY well engineered judged by the pic.
On the other end of the scale -I AM SURE-, what can one say about that 'Reed'?
The question came up before, it is NOT dynamically balanced, yes?
see: http://www.goldenageaudio.com.au/For%20sale/reed%20arm/reed%20tonearm.html
Lastly, and currently (new) available also, the Ortofon RS-309D (12") vs. RS-212D (9")?
That VTA again/still rather primitive, spring in pivot-post and one cap-screw. The dynamic weight adjustment seems rather a pain (no scaling) and very fiddly.
Some noted that the static arm is just as good, in particular the RS-309 (12") and the RS-212 static well I won't say, it might be not too fair.
Now, I'm not planning to one tomorrow but like to get some directions - (synthesised :-)
A. |
Hi Axel, the proposal with the "common ground" - establishing by a package of records agreed upon - is just a suggestion to a better understanding and maybe a kind of test ground for all.
It is neither to further support my already big enough by all standards ego nor my in the very end futile attempt and quest for perfection.
It is just a plain idea for a common ground - giving each and everyone a firm point to set the lever.
Nothing else.
As for the questions I no longer have ...
I do not ask here and I do not ask Audiophiles.
When questions arose which I can't answer myself in decent time and with my - not universal - knowledge, I turn to a few good engineers and scientist at 3 local scientific institutes - none of them is related with audio in any respect - and get facts and results which are backed by graduated and studied men who are all in research and development.
No opinions, no listening experiences - just scientific results from empirical tests.
I am certainly not too old to learn.
Still learning every day - but not in audio.
Question do come up from time to time, but they are getting fewer and fewer the past years.
Once you are no longer occupied by all too many questions you can use the knowledge and form systems which really reflect the gained knowledge.
One strange thing to watch is, that given this universal source of information - the net - I have noticed that a lot of fairly common analog knowledge from the 1980ies and early 1990ies is no longer common knowledge today.
Lost and forgotten for/and by the majority of todays audiophile community.
You too may have noticed that I have never given any comment about the sound of your system - but you accused me to do so?
All I did say that if you (not personally but universally spoken - thus including myself) do not hear a difference doesn't mean it isn't there.
It implies that the component under review may either be ahead of the rest of the system or that the overall resolution isn't good enough to show its virtues.
Nothing else.
I would never turn to a purple language about others, - something I was confronted with by some posters here the past days.
I neither do need a speakers corner like Hyde Park nor do I have any "truth" (which according to some oldskool philosophers is nothing else but a yet undiscovered lie....) to give - at least not to Audiophiles.
The fact that I did kind of defend an old design of a truely great mind constantly against others and (- in my highly subjective and blinded eyes and deaf ears -) unfair downrate doesn't imply that I am preaching a truth.
You may not like my way nor the fact that I am not always polite and forgiving in my comments.
Thats no problem - just ignore me.
There is enough free space left and right my shoulders.
Virtual and in real life.
I get so much attention in my everyday real life that I can certainly handle that.
Cheers,
D. |
Dear perrew, yes, both- the big Jensen as well as the better Lundahls - do outperform the XF-1 in terms of resolution, openess, transients, low level detail and soundstage dimensions to name but a few.
The Cotter is the peer of teh XF-1.
Most important if you do test any old transformer is to make sure the contact are all cleaned and I would always suggest replacing the standard brass RCA plugs with WBT Ag or Eichmann Ag. |
Now, let's maybe try do a little 1-set LP check and see what will come of it?
Alison Krauss & Union Station 'so long so wrong'
Who does NOT experience sibilants on side two, last (3rd) cut. And then share your 'hardware', not just your tonearm, or?
This LP is being used on another thread with one contributor trying his truly VERY best, pictures of set-up, audio files, the works, to get it right.
See: http://forum.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/fr.pl?eanlg&1245595534
It could be anything hardware, including resonances / bad arm/cart match?
So before we go to 20 LPs, how about just 1 LP to get an idea?
The album is newly available and very well recorded otherwise.
Axel |
Hi Axel, do you think you would have judged the proposal of a common ground based on a selction of records agreed upon in the very same way you did if it had come from anybody else but me ?
This is of course just a hypothetical question to further illustrate the impression, that whatever I come up with will be judged and valued by some here as coming straight from the source of all evil with every possible bad intend imagineable in mind.
Tell me I am wrong....?
Cheers,
D. |
D. :-)
>>> Tell me I am wrong....? <<< YOU ARE! (Not again!)
Just read my next post, if they finally get it on.
Nothing EVIL, at all.
A. |
Dear Axelwahl, I own,inter alia,the Reed and the Micro
MA-505. The Micro is,for the price mentioned,a bargain.
Period. But on my Kuzma S.R. there is just place for one
tonearm and this place is occupied by the Triplanar VII.
So I needed one tonearm to put next to my TT and the fellows from Lithuania made for me one 12" tonearm with a
base ('turret'). I am very satisfied with the Reed but the
only 'quibble'I had was the absent of 'slots' on the headshell and the absent of the azimuth adjustment.
Meanwhile there is a new version named Reed 2A with both
provisions. I expect to get this new version next week and
hope to inform the 'Goners' about one month later. So keep
looking at www.turntables.lt.
Regards,
Nandric
|
So D. for the final piece of the puzzle what phono stage do you use with the FR-7f? Thanks Pär |
Dear Perrew, I do use an all tube design fully balanced differential phono stage with high gain.
Its my design - not a market product.
Syntax, Heradot, 7 other friends of mine and me we have had all very good experiences with the Lamm LP2 (stock and modified), Klyne, Cotter Phono, Tom Evans and a Kaneda design in various set-ups.
The virtues of the FR-7x/FR-60 steel tonearm combination were apparent in all these set-ups - different, but always clearly audible.
Among these I would favourite the LP2 but with several important modifications (the very first step being replacing the standard tubes with WE 417a - and putting a 1950ies black plate RCA rectifier into the LP2).
Hope this info is of any worth.
Cheers,
D. |
Always worth a lot thanks for taking the time to answer, would you consider building a unit? |
Dear Halcro: The main FR tonearm subject is something not system dependent, geometry dependent, set-up dependent and the like.
The main subject is that resonances/distortions on the steel build material of those tonearms. Those distortions not only exist ( a fact ) but are worst than in other tonearms.
Dertonarm that is a wise guy knows that steel bad resonances/distortions but if anyone read to its posts he not oly does not speaks in a precise manner on the subject but he put and made a lot of noise/dust around ( he put like a smoke curtain. ) " trying " to distract the attention from that main subject and that's why he always is talking ( making noise ) about: Sea Cliff, his beloved friends, Cotter, telling hystories etc, etc.
He preach ( somewhere ) about neutrality like a goal in TT and tonearms but he defend a non-neutral tonearm due to the Mr. Ikeda choosen build material ( undamped steel. ). There is no coherence here and he knows.
Now, he says ( somewhere ) that through his hands already pass something like 60 FR tonearms where the majority were for sale. He is a wise man and IMHO he has a " private " interest in preserve the FR-64/66 myth.
I'm not using anymore those FR tonearms ( I own the FR especial base for the VTA on the fly that match the FR and Ikeda tonearms if any one is interested on it please email me because I don't need it anymore. ) due to its inherent distortions ( I repeat again and again due to that steel build material. ) and this is the main subject that he does not like to speak.
Maybe in reallity your ears are totally equalized to those FR heavy distortions and if is in that way it could be a frustation can't discern other superior and great alternatives to enjoy the music.
Daniel please no more noise/dust on the subject or go a head and take the " bull by its horns ".
Btw, Dertonarm of course that almost any person with the right experiences and knowing how an audio items sounds can has an opinion on an audio system only through the system description, I'm sure you can do it: that you don't want to do it does not means you can't or any one can't do it.
Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul. |
Yes, it is true. Some never get. Not in this life, nor in the next.
Let's go back to the pricing of the new tonearms.
Raul, do you have one?
Or two?
I would like to read something different from you. ewhen possible, something useful on this topic. Enlighten me.
Just a little bit. |
Dear Perrew: I wonder why a person like you that are a non-analog one ( at least I can't see any analog audio tem in your system. ) has an analog product question?
Could you explain it?
Thank you in advance.
Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul. |
Raul,
the reason you dont see any analog items is I dont have a complete rig up and running yet but Im trying to put together something sensible to see if it can compete with my digital. So far I have 1 TT, 1 cart and 2 phono stages. |
Perrew, are you thinking of an all-tube fully-differential phono stage too? |
Atmasphere, its not a necessity but the two I own at the moment are single ended, one tubed one ss. Anything particular in mind? |
Pär, Just in case the posting rules might not allow him to say so, Atmasphere is the manufacturer of a tube-based fully-differential balanced phono stage embedded in his all-tube fully-differential balanced preamps (either the MP-1 or MP-3) found here. I am not aware of a separate phono stage product. |
Perrew, as T_bone has pointed out, we do make exactly that, continuously for the last 20 years.
Its not every day that someone asks about something like that, so I had to ask. Fortunately, operating a cartridge in balanced mode is at least one thing that does not make tone arms more expensive :) |
Wow, I am learning a lot in this thread about the arms and cart behavior. I am still not clear on static and dynamic balanced arm concept. Can anyone explain what are the differences. I am an engineer so I know what static and dynamic is, but in tone arm context what exactly does this mean?
Thanks,
Nil |
Hi Nilthepill
all the below is done with NO anti-skate force applied.
"statically balanced"
1) arm is balanced so the stylus floats above the vinyl (say 150g, re thickness) just without touching it.
2) If scaled/graded counterweight, it is now zeroed, Vertical Tracking Force (VTF) is then applied by counterweight being moved forward according to scale and/or good VTF scale.
"dynamically balanced" =
1) VTF down force loading spring (dial) is set to zero
2) arm is balanced by counter weight as above (static)
3) VTF is applied by down-force spring according to graded scale e.g. SME V, and/or confirmed by VTF measuring scale.
Lastly, not mentioned so far "mixed dynamic and static"
1) halve the VFT is applied with counterweight (static)
2) rest of VTF is added by down-force spring (dynamic)
"Dynamic balanced" is 'supposed' to involve less of the counterweight's inertia. It is 'supposed' to be more accurate when tracking up/down motions of the tone arm i.e. always applying the same force.
"Static balanced" is preferred by some since no spring, which could lead to resonances, is involved. As to the counter weight's inertia: It is actually closer to the arm's pivot = less inertia i.e. smaller lever and for that reason once again preferred by some.
All modern arms using dynamic VTF-loading-springs have them damped thoroughly, usually by lowest viscosity (very thick) silicone fluid (e.g. SME)
Hope this helps,
Axel |
Hi Nil, I am sure that Raul will be glad to explain the technical background in all detail.
Especially the differences between dynamic behaviour and static.
He is deep in the process of designing a pivot tonearm himself.
Cheers,
D. |
Ooops - Axel was fast.....
But so far he did only roughly describe the set-up differences, so there is still "something" from the physical side to add.........
Older tonearms did use a thick coating of extreme low viscosity grease to dampen any spring vibrations in spring loaded VTF.
Cheers,
D. |
Is it the case with dynamic arms that the vertical force is closer to the turret and therefore there will be less sideways/twirling force and this force is parallel with the force on the needle? |
Hi D.
did you actually read my post # 130 on the suggested use of "so long so wrong" ?
(I hope I counted # correctly...)
The spring 'grease'(yeak)/damping "something" I actually mentioned.
In fact the stuff is slightly visible squeezing a bit out behind the VTF dial on the SME-V - it's as thick as it gets, and noticeable by the VERY reluctant turning action of that dial.
Be interesting to see what Raul will have to add to it all.
Any comments?
A. |
Perrew
y.s.:
>>> and therefore there will be less sideways/twirling force and this force is parallel with the force on the needle? <<<
In theory... hm.
But recall, the counter weight is now once more further back by exactly that same amount, mass = force...
The nice thing is, you can use your TT on the moon! And it still works! (using dynamic VTF, it is independent of gravity :-)
A. |
