+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 9 of 9

Thread: Sub-weight ideas.

  1. #1
    Join Date: Aug 2010

    Location: Highlands, Scotland, UK

    Posts: 68

    Default Sub-weight ideas.

    Hi all,

    I have an AT LH18 headshell which I've been planning on fitting to my 1210 for a while now. I've only just realised that it's too heavy for the arm to balance, even with the technics sub-weight. Has anyone had this problem and found a more elegant solution than blu-tak and a coin? It could do with a fair bit of beefing up. One deck is fitted with a sumiko headshell and nagaoko mp110. These come in together at 18gms. The AT headshell weighs that alone, so with the 2m red I want to use (7gms), I guess I need another 7gms on the back.
    Would appreciate any thoughts.

    Cheers
    Stewart.

  2. #2
    Join Date: Nov 2012

    Location: Mechelen, Belgium

    Posts: 164
    I'm Karl.

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by magoorty View Post
    The AT headshell weighs that alone, so with the 2m red I want to use (7gms), I guess I need another 7gms on the back.
    Would appreciate any thoughts.
    That much effective weight and a 2M red?!

    I glued a strip of bitumen around the counterweight. Looks pretty good and is enough for the LH-18.
    Technics SL-1200 Mk2 recapped / MN bearing / Funk Firm Platter / Denon 103R / Lundahl LL1933
    Thorens TD 126 MkIII / SME Series III / Ortofon SME 30H // AT-OC9ML/II / Lundahl LL1681
    Thorens TD 160 / TP16 / Stanton 681SE

  3. #3
    Join Date: May 2008

    Location: A Strangely Isolated Place in Suffolk with Far Away Trains Passing By...

    Posts: 14,535
    I'm David.

    Default

    Watch the bass reproduction with the heavy headshell and 2M Red and also get yourself a decent stylus balance, since altering the mass of the counterweight will screw up the accuracy of its scale.
    Tear down these walls; Cut the ties that held me
    Crying out at the top of my voice; Tell me now if you can hear me

  4. #4
    Join Date: Aug 2010

    Location: Highlands, Scotland, UK

    Posts: 68

    Default

    So would I be best just putting the 2m red on a lighter headshell, or just the technics one? I assumed I'd be better with the AT but if it'll lead to too much bass, I won't bother. What's the reasoning if it's tracking at the correct weight?
    Is that what 'compliance' is all about? As you can tell, I don't have a scooby.

    Cheers
    Stewart.

  5. #5
    Join Date: Nov 2012

    Location: Mechelen, Belgium

    Posts: 164
    I'm Karl.

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by magoorty View Post
    So would I be best just putting the 2m red on a lighter headshell, or just the technics one?
    The Technics one is fine, but if you like, a headshell weighting up to 10-12g will also be fine.

    The theory behind resonance frequency, total effective mass and compliance is explained here:
    http://www.ortofon.com/support/cartr...ance-frequency

    My personal experience with medium-high compliance cartridges is that they don't respond well to higher effective mass.
    My AT-OC9ML/II doesn't even sound good with the stock headshell in the Technics.
    Don't know the exact reason, but I suppose the suspension is not only softer, but also less strong.
    So with higher effective weight, the cantilever will wobble all over the place, making accurate tracking impossible.
    Technics SL-1200 Mk2 recapped / MN bearing / Funk Firm Platter / Denon 103R / Lundahl LL1933
    Thorens TD 126 MkIII / SME Series III / Ortofon SME 30H // AT-OC9ML/II / Lundahl LL1681
    Thorens TD 160 / TP16 / Stanton 681SE

  6. #6
    Join Date: Aug 2010

    Location: Highlands, Scotland, UK

    Posts: 68

    Default

    Thanks for that. That's very helpful. I guess I'd be best to put the 2m on my Sumiko headshell then.
    What about the Nagaoka mp110? Would that suit the AT shell? Or am I best to forget about using the AT on the technics at all?

    Cheers
    Stewart.

  7. #7
    Join Date: Nov 2012

    Location: Mechelen, Belgium

    Posts: 164
    I'm Karl.

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by magoorty View Post
    Or am I best to forget about using the AT on the technics at all?
    It's a perfect match for a low compliance cart like the Denon 103.
    But too heavy voor most (if not all) MM cartridges.
    Technics SL-1200 Mk2 recapped / MN bearing / Funk Firm Platter / Denon 103R / Lundahl LL1933
    Thorens TD 126 MkIII / SME Series III / Ortofon SME 30H // AT-OC9ML/II / Lundahl LL1681
    Thorens TD 160 / TP16 / Stanton 681SE

  8. #8
    Join Date: May 2008

    Location: A Strangely Isolated Place in Suffolk with Far Away Trains Passing By...

    Posts: 14,535
    I'm David.

    Default

    The 2M Red should be fine in the stock light-weight (but pretty rigid) Techie headshell. You could put some posh headshell wires on though to jazz it up a bit and you may find a subtle audio improvement too

    Funk Firm's Arthur has something to say about effective mass of tonearms, since his current take on arm-pipe material is for a very low mass, BUT non-resonant material and construction. The techie arm may not be best for Denon 103's or SPU's etc, but for fixed coil cartridges of recent years should be absolutely fine I think. You'll have a far bigger improvement methinks with a replacement exit cable to the amp than farting around with headshells at present. Save the AT shell for summat really serious
    Tear down these walls; Cut the ties that held me
    Crying out at the top of my voice; Tell me now if you can hear me

  9. #9
    Join Date: May 2010

    Location: Weymouth

    Posts: 3,463
    I'm John.

    Default

    Yes Dave is right re the stock Technics HS with the Ortofon 2M. Carefully cleaning of cartridge pins should also give a small improvement. Use caig deoxit or kontak, even isopropyl alcohol. Use sparingly.

    John

+ Reply to Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •