2. analog
  3. 161137-245

TONEARM DAMPING : DAMPED OR NOT ? ? USELESS ? ? WELCOMED ? ?

Dear friends: This tonearm critical subject sometimes can be controversial for say the least. Some audiophiles swear for non damped tonearms as the FR designs or SAEC or even the SME 3012 that is not very well damped in stock original status.

Some other audiophiles likes good damped tonearms.


In other thread a gentleman posted:


"  If a cartridge is properly matched to the tonearm damping is not required. " and even explained all what we know about the ideal resonance frequency range between tonearm and cartridge ( 8hz to 12hz. ). He refered to this when said: " properly matched to the tonearm ".


In that same thread that a Triplanar tonearm owner posted:


" This is the one thing about the Triplanar that I don't like. I never use the damping trough...... I imagine someone might have a use for it; I removed the troughs on my Triplanars; its nice to imagine that it sounds better for doing so. "


At the other side here it's a very well damped tonearm:


https://audiotraveler.wordpress.com/tag/townshend/


Now, after the LP is in the spining TT platter ( everything the same, including well matched cartridge/tonearm.  ) the must critical issue is what happens once the cartridge stylus tip hits/track the LP grooves modulations.

The ideal is that those groove modulations can pass to the cartridge motor with out any additional kind of developed resonances/vibrations and that the transducer makes its job mantaining the delicated and sensible signal integrity that comes in those recorded groove modulations.

 That is the ideal and could be utopic because all over the process/trip of the cartridge signal between the stylus tip ride and the output at the tonearm cable the signal suffers degradation (  resonances/vibrations/feedback ) mainly developed through all that " long trip " .


So, DAMPING IS NEED IT AT THE TONEARM/HEADSHELL SIDE OR NOT?


I'm trying to find out the " true " about and not looking if what we like it or not like it is rigth or not but what should be about and why of that " should be ".


I invite all of you analog lovers audiophiles to share your points of view in this critical analog audio subject. WHAT DO YOU THINK ABOUT?


Thank's in advance.



Regards and enjoy the MUSIC NOT DISTORTIONS,
R.






Ag insider logo xs@2xrauliruegas
Ag insider logo xs@2x
rauliruegas OP
12,832 posts
 

Dear @dogberry  : " Does it sound more dynamic without the damping trough? I can’t say I can tell the difference. "

During LP play we can't avoid the jitter cartridge tracking " phenomenon " that's a kind of " mistracking " because suddenly the stylus tip lost contact with the LP groove. This sudden contact lost develops a kind of " high frequency distortion " that we all are already accustom to and that we all are not really aware when it's happening, so it's not easy say is a mistracking but it's.

Now, the V and IV have different quality level bearings: ABEC 9 in the V against ABEC 7 in the IV. It's weird that you can't detect those two " characteristics ": different bearing and damping.

Now, remember in the V the cSt silicon viscosity? 10K, 100K, etc etc. ?

 

Thank's in advance,

R.

mijostyn's avatar
mijostyn
8,223 posts
 

@rauliruegas That guy has a serious problem with record hygiene. I can't see the jitter through the dirt. I do not use the term jitter. I call it miss tracking. 

Do you have a problem with mistracking? I certainly do not. The last time I heard one of my cartridges mistrack it was because the stylus wound up pointed in the wrong direction. It was a warranty repair.

As I stated before, if good cartridges are set up properly in the right mass tonearm, damping is not necessary and would even do more damage than good. You use damping to control resonance that can not be controlled any other way. Air bearing linear tonearms benefit from damping. The Saphir might benefit from damping. I know some audiophiles that would definitely benefit from some damping.    

dogberry
571 posts
 

It was the SME 60k Cs silicon.

Ag insider logo xs@2x
rauliruegas OP
12,832 posts
 

Dear @mijostyn : " I certainly do not. " wrong, every cartridge with perfect match to any tonearm lost contact with the LP groove during play ride. Name it mistracking or jitter it does not matters the issue is that you can’t avoid it and if you can’t detect it that’s is your room/system/ears problem not mine.

Many times like in this thread you read but do not in true " read " just read and that’s all.

Anyway, that jitter/mistracking needs tobe disappears and that’s the question fo you: how other than damp the cartridge ( not the tonearm ) stylus/cantilever? and again you are ( for me ) in serious trouble if you can’t detect that phenomenon, really serious even if you don’t care.

Btw, you are very good to critic something as the dust in tha video but even that you are not very good to offer solutions about ( not to clean that dust. That video was an example just to shows what you can't detect yet. )

R.

 

 

Ag insider logo xs@2x
rauliruegas OP
12,832 posts
 

@mijostyn  : In this thread and through the Townshend white papers/tesis exist the scientific/measures facts that tells your theory of not silicon damping is wrong and Townshend proved with his design.

I think that you are not aware of that jitter distortion because you never listened/tested the same tonearm/cartridge with and with out that tray.

 

You need to do it and remember that the you don't need to immerse totally the rod in the silicon tray because you always can put at diffeent immerse distance an additional to that we can make the test with different silicon viscosity values. 

If you decide do not do it then you can't make any critic inside this very specific subject.  You like science and there are those white papers and your own first hand experiences that can or not corroborate your hypothesis showed till today.

Have a good trip if any.

 

R.

 

R.

More to discover