Damping of the tonearm - suggestion thread (some serious some not so, do they work?)

[Gmanuk101]

I've been doing that thinking thing again..this time regarding my Techy tone arm and Damping.

I know of such products like the fluid etc.. but would any of the following actually work in practice do you think?

Military grade condoms - these are typically very thick rubber, of course washed before application (and yes I know they wouldn't look very nice)

Sorbathane sheath - ive got a bit of this under my speakers, amp and my deck (feet) and they do work, but a sleeve?

Stuffing the tonearm with cotton wool
Injecting viscous fluid into the tone arm? (no, not hot jam or anything as silly, and no fluids expelled after a funk session)
Heat shrink tubing?

Weight considerations must be applied to the counterbalance, but like all good theories they are always open to be proven or disproven.

[Frankyc2003]

My rewired techie arm has got heat shrink applied.
It does reduce it's tendency to ring in factory form...

[Gmanuk101]

ive been reading a thread over at audioKarma on this very topic, which had got my interest up... obviously if you hit a hollow tube is resonates and if hit the same tube with something in it , it doesn't. I am just wishing to hear from people who have done something similar.. homebrew style of course.

[RichB]

Never heard the condom one before...

Is this basically stuffing the tube with blobs or wrapping them around the tonearm? Can't really picture it.

Heard of people using those valve dampening rings/clips on the tonearm though.

[walpurgis]

Heat shrink is effective, but easier to get right on straight tubes.

A good filling for arms are the expanded soft plastic 'mini beans' used in those neck cushions that the supermarkets stock, these are ideal as they are small, light, pack closely together and have a soft resilence which produces good damping characteristics. They are also easy to remove, just shake them back out and remove any last clingy ones with an air duster aerosol.

[Oldpinkman]

Remember, as you sort of pointed out, that damping adds mass. This not only affects the need to balance it out with possibly a heavier counterweight, but also affects the effective mass which will be relevant to the system resonance depending on the cartridge compliance. (There must be an easier way to say that):scratch: Aside from that caution it can do no harm to experiment, although the effects of damping on tonearms can be unpredictable (often the sound goes muffled and dead). It also doesn't address rigidity (bending modes).

But providing its removeable, and doesn't increase effective mass to the point it takes the compliance/mass resonance out of the safe bands, it can't hurt to experiment :)

[walpurgis]

It also doesn't address rigidity (bending modes).


Or torsional effects! ;)

[FunkArt]

Or torsional effects! ;)

Torsion and bending modes...

Think of an arm as a fishing rod with a weight on the end.
Try twisting the tube. it won't give. A tube is the strongest construction we have against twisting forces.
Additionally, the moments generated by the stylus don't apply much torsional forces against tube, so this not a significant route to follow.
Now flick your rod (!). It'll go up and down like CRAZY. That's because a tube has no longitudinal support structure, which is really bad because that IS the direction that energy from the cartridge travels along and so it excites all the longitudinal modes.

Now put as many condoms as you want on your rod :eyebrows: - it wasn't my idea, honest! - and see what happens to that bending motion. Effectively nothing at all. In fact, due to the added mass, as Richard pointed out, it could start bending at a lower frequency and so we are getting less rigidity and hence not reading the groove as accurately.
"But what of the ringing? Doesn't that matter?" I hear you ask. Those are the circular bell modes of the tube. They are small and easily damped out - hence why something as simple as a condom could be seen as effective. As such these do not intrude as much as one might have thought.

The fishing rod analogy is actually quite accurate and differs from arms only in scale and hence frequency. With an arm it all happens at about 1kHz. With a rod the action takes place where the eye can see.

I hope you have started to understand the mechanics of arm tube behaviour.
My stance is pretty transparent. The basic tube is the wrong way to make an arm - that's why they sound so awful.
The solutions is...perhaps other might care to fill in the blanks?

Arthur

[walpurgis]

the moments generated by the stylus don't apply much torsional forces against tube, so this not a significant route to follow.

Not so. I may have made my comment rather as a joke and it may be that the effects of torsion from the stylus on the arm tube are small, but it only takes minute amounts of energy here to colour the signal. Also, there are other parts of the arm more susceptible, such as the headshell and collar or its interface and the point where the arm (depending on design) meets the pivots and bearings and at the interface with the counterweight. So there!!! :eyebrows:

[Oldpinkman]

Without wishing to raise the tone, i'm still not clear what you do with thease military grade condoms ( no contribution from you required AK). Do you stuff them up the arm tube, or wrap them round it? I have visions of peewee in "Porkeys". At least the record won't get pregnant :stalks:

[MartinT]

The basic tube is the wrong way to make an arm - that's why they sound so awful.
The solutions is...perhaps other might care to fill in the blanks?

Interesting. My Dynavector arm is more like a girder than any other shape. I would have imagined that SME's thin-walled conical tube would be near-perfect. I wonder why in practice the SME sounds somewhat lifeless and lacking in dynamics. I don't think it's the lack of resonances making me think that either.

[walpurgis]

i'm still not clear what you do with thease military grade condoms

They are dual purpose. When not used as prophylactics, they are used to slip over gun barrels to stop rain and dirt ingress! :)

[Beobloke]

The solutions is...perhaps other might care to fill in the blanks?

Arthur

A nice tapered tube, like on one of those lovely SMEs....

Hi Arthur! :o

[Sonic Incisions]

KAB have little dampers that screw in the back ov the tonearm, where the aux weight goes...I recently put a small ball ov mortite rope caulk in the end...and it damped the minor ringing when flicked...its neutral...so shouldnt add any character to the sound.... I got it cheap including shipping to New Zealand from Amazon.com...approx 15 quid delivered for 90 feet package...great for damping amps cd players etc.

[FunkArt]

A nice tapered tube, like on one of those lovely SMEs....

Hi Arthur! :o

Hi Adam!! (About time we caught-up?)

On the face of it, the idea of a tapered tube to distribute resonances is indeed very appealing. The idea is that as the tube diameter changes resonance will be spread at each change in diameter. Being a continuous cone, we should see an even low level value and lose the nasty main peak (which at about 30db! is found no where else in the audio chain. Huge, nasty resonance artifacts. Yuk).

Now measure. Sadly the anticipated noticeable reduction coupled to a gentle spreading out of the resonances modes is not seen.
That's when you realise that the degree of taper is no-where near great enough and it is the length of a tube that dominates - hence the familiar main flexing mode again; so this construct seems to confer no advantage in the claimed area. (That it remains an object of beauty and wonderful to fondle is never in dispute).
In leaving it to members to comment and comment they indeed do, what I find interesting is that the comments do seem to carry a certain consensus and not always flattering.

Clearly the cartridge carrying implement is a complex animal indeed. It has so many problem areas as pointed out:


... but it only takes minute amounts of energy here to colour the signal. Also, there are other parts of the arm more susceptible, such as the headshell and collar or its interface and the point where the arm (depending on design) meets the pivots and bearings and at the interface with the counterweight. So there!!!

It would seem logical and beneficial to take on the worst offenders first; areas where measurements scream out "there really is a problem". To me it is the bending mode issue. Yes, I accept as a designer / manufacturer that is easy for me to say but no more so than, say B&W with their matrix cabinet construction to tackle cabinet bending mode resonance.

Regarding the filing of the arm tube with balls, I again want to refer back to our fishing rod but this really is going to get too much:
"Take your rod, and your balls and stuff it into the condom and see what you get" I mean...C'mon!:lol:
(On a serious note, thinking, just what diameter tube or conversely, how big (small) is the condom? I can't see it working.)

Anyway, having accepted a tube wrapped with rubber and stuffed with balls. What changes? Nothing (much). The tube is still free to flex like crazy; there's still absolutely nothing stopping the mass at the front from waggling up and down (and of course left and right, just to be rigorous).

Resonance dampers at the rear? They are really good. They are also a sod to design!! Get it wrong and matters are made worse :scratch:
Also, they deal (only) with the system resonance, which is not a first order listening problem. I.e. Lower stylus into groove and this is not the first thing you'll hear causing a problem.
The effect is very real but it is more subtle and plays part in reduced tracking and premature stylus wear, over time.

My interest lies in what we hear straight away and deal with that first.
Then what's the next thing you can hear? Deal with that...and so on.
Why in that order? Because that's what made me uncomfortable in the first place whilst I was listening. The "there's something not right here" effect. And of course once that sets in, the listening session is over!
That itch HAS to be scratched.

So started Funk's new, unexpected (and at the time unwelcome - very time-consuming) R&D program. This involved listening to the usual suspects of arms, of course. Additionally, from following posts, detachable headshell arms are significantly in demand and so a lot of time was also devoted to using 1200's arm as well and various iterative solutions explored there as well.
Of course I now see things differently for the results have justified the (at times frustrating) efforts.
The result was of course, the cross-member inside the tube.

At this point, I suppose one could rightly claim that I have now gone completely off topic as this particular solution is un-ashamedly not damping...

:eek:

The point of the above post? I have tried but in the end I can't see how "damping" per se, will deal with 9" of flapping rod!

(Scuttles into corner to await backlash)

Arthur

[Oldpinkman]

A nice tapered tube, like on one of those lovely SMEs....

Hi Arthur! :o

Or like a typical beachcaster fishing rod :)

[walpurgis]

The requirements of arm design conflict.

It has to be perfectly rigid, but rigid things 'ring' easily and nothing is truly rigid. It has to be perfectly damped, an impossibilty. It has to be of no higher mass than the cartridge demands, but cartridges vary in weight and compliance greatly, so this is always a compromise.

There can be no perfect pickup arm. As with all other Hi-Fi (and anything else really), it's a compromise.

[Oldpinkman]

Arms are indeed a compromise. Length and tracking error v mass and rigidity too, or friction and parallel trackers. However the tapered tube doesn't deal with the resonance issue. The sme 5 still has a serious spike (15db) on its resonance plot although it is well controlled at other frequencies. It was my joint favourite along with the helius orion (nostalgia), but whilst the build and finish are superb, I have a new favourite for sound. (I was, as you know, very keen on the mission 774, which from memory had a pretty good resonance plot too, but I can't find my old hifi choice. Does anyone have the plot?) :)

[Mr Kipling]

10960

The graph for the 774. As you can see it's resonance behaviour is pretty good.

[walpurgis]

Yes, it's a fine sounding arm in standard form and it can be improved even further. I still use a 774 and won't change as I like the versatility. It works with any cartridge that I choose.

[Oldpinkman]

10960

The graph for the 774. As you can see it's resonance behaviour is pretty good.

Thanks stephen. I wish I could find my book. Tbh I thought I remembered better. I think the key to its great sound is the relatively smooth shape. No violent spikes like the sme5. But a 20db+ range is clearly affecting the sound. I guess that explains why the funk fx2 with its flat (+-3db) range sounds so much more transparent:)

[Oldpinkman]

Interesting. My Dynavector arm is more like a girder than any other shape. I would have imagined that SME's thin-walled conical tube would be near-perfect. I wonder why in practice the SME sounds somewhat lifeless and lacking in dynamics. I don't think it's the lack of resonances making me think that either.

No question that is an interesting arm which takes a radical approach to some of those compromises geoff refers to. Apart from never having heard one (doesn't look a comfortable fit on a PT) , I've never seen a resonance plot for one. Nor can I find effective mass quoted. Horizontal effective mass looks chunky. Do you have any data or plots martin?

(My guess would be the somewhat lifeless aspect of the sme you refer to might be due to tube damping)

[FunkArt]

No question that is an interesting arm which takes a radical approach to some of those compromises geoff refers to. Apart from never having heard one (doesn't look a comfortable fit on a PT) , I've never seen a resonance plot for one. Nor can I find effective mass quoted. Horizontal effective mass looks chunky. Do you have any data or plots martin?

(My guess would be the somewhat lifeless aspect of the sme you refer to might be due to tube damping)

(My guess would be the somewhat lifeless aspect of the sme you refer to might be due to tube damping)

The old adage the "apply damping and the energy has to come out somewhere, which it does so later on" comes to mind, so very astute, young grasshopper.
At the end of the day, that aspect is subjective. On the face of it, damping is an easy route to follow but from my experiments with damping I can't say that they left me any too excited.
Looking across the market, I'm guessing here, but it is probably why designers / manufacturers in general don't use it either.



Dynawhotsit: We used to have a 505. I'll try and dig out plots from somewhere - probably fail miserably as they could be anywhere.

arthur

[MartinT]

I've never seen a resonance plot for one. Nor can I find effective mass quoted. Horizontal effective mass looks chunky. Do you have any data or plots martin?

I'll see if I can find some data on the DV507-II. Horizontal effective mass might be measured in kilograms! It's eddy current damped, too. Probably explains the incredible bass performance.

[Marco]

(My guess would be the somewhat lifeless aspect of the sme you refer to might be due to tube damping)

The old adage the "apply damping and the energy has to come out somewhere, which it does so later on" comes to mind, so very astute, young grasshopper.


Indeed... I've been saying that for years, based on what I've always heard every time I listen to a T/T, fitted with a current production SME tonearm (M2-9R and M2-12R excluded, as they use the [no doubt, more resonant], but IMO ultimately more musical sounding, thin-walled stainless steel arm-tubes of old). I put it down to the use of magnesium, on most of SME's current models, which has excellent damping properties [measureable, too], but which unfortunately also 'dampen' the life out of the music!! :rolleyes:

However, experience proves (you've no idea how much detachable 'headshell rolling' I've done, lol...) that magnesium is an excellent material from which to make a headshell (the point at which damping is most required and effective - think here of the philosophy behind the damping trough on Max Townshend's Rock) - but just on a headshell, not a whole fooking tonearm! :nono:

That's why, in my opinion (and I've tested this with a variety of cartridges), an SME M2-9R, fitted with a high-quality magnesium headshell (such as the AT MG-10, shown here (click on the pics): http://www.hifi-phono-house.com/product_info.php?language=en&products_id=11485 ) outperforms the more expensive 309, and why an M2-12R, fitted with the same headshell, does a similar thing to a 312-S (especially when low-compliance cartridges are used)! :trust:

There is no doubt, to my ears, that the old SME stainless steel arm-tubes have more 'life' (not all forms of resonance are bad - much depends on the frequency where said resonance occurs), than their magnesium-based counterparts, and that this is heard in the reproduction of music.

The problem with SME is that, whilst I have a great deal of respect for the company and their heritage, their thinking and design methodology is very much built on old-fashioned solid engineering principles. Now, on one hand, that approach has significant and very obvious advantages, but the disadvantage, IMO, is that said engineering principles are based fairly rigidly on measurements.

Therefore, if a magnesium designed arm-tube measures better on their accelerometer, in terms of resonance/vibration control, you can bet your boots that SME will automatically consider it as being 'superior' to an arm-tube which measures worse, in that respect, most likely without bothering to listen and see if what has been measured correlates with what is heard in practice, when reproducing music...... Quite simply, as has been mentioned before, measurements don't always tell the full story!

That is why I admire designers, such as your good self who, whilst acknowledging that adhering to basic engineering principles is crucial, when designing heavily mechanical beasts, such as T/Ts and tonearms, looking 'outside of the box', and applying some lateral thinking, can often provide dividends, due to discovering and paying suitable attention to (perhaps) previously unconsidered, yet highly influential phenomena... ;)

Marco.

[Oldpinkman]

(not all forms of resonance are bad - much depends on the frequency where said resonance occurs),

Marco.

Might as well ride my luck, having had one pat on the back from the Grand Master (those white eyeballs are scary though Arthur). First, we are talking about a couple of resonances I believe with tonearms. The one we're not talking about here is the system resonance that is a function of the cartridge compliance and arm effective mass, which is the one which damping troughs like the mission 774 address.

The one we are talking about here - which is the one the graphs show, is the tube itself resonating (sometimes affected by things like the counterweight influencing that resonance). Now, I think what matters here (as most other times) is that the resonances should be fairly similar at all frequencies. It's not so much the absolute level of the resonance that is the problem (although based on Arthurs experiments with damping I am braced for him challenging that), as how different it is at one frequency from another. Because if it is "very" different - chances are there is something to hear, and you hear it.

Of course - subjectively - you are entitled to prefer that sound. And maybe that sound balances another fault in another part of your system. But coming back to that definition of HiFi we agreed when I first joined, a big resonance changing how the music sounds is not close fidelity to the music it is not supposed to be changing. (I think that works :scratch:)

Also - a pet theory which may well be another Shrodigers cat - is that one of the "clues" to "hi fidelity" is imaging and detail. Whats there at the start can only be lost later. If the imaging is good, it is because less has been lost. You can't "colour in" imaging (or any other aspect of detail). So the reason good arms are revealing is because their colouration is small - in this context - their resonance plots are fairly flat - at least in the frequencies where the detail is being noticed by the listener. (which agrees, in a qualified way, with your point)

The issue, I have long believed, is that a cartridge makes an electrical signal when the stylus (cantilever strictly) moves relative to the cartridge body. It doesn't matter if the body is still and the cantilever moving, or the cantilever still and the body moving - either produce an electrical signal. If the cartridge body is in an arm / headshell which is vibrating, that will cause an electrical signal. That signal will add to the signal we want from the record. If it is pretty much the same level at all frequencies it has no effect (we can't hear it).

So how different is "very" different? 3db is a generally accepted threshold. So less than 3db would be good. Although, whilst that might apply to a speaker, or the frequency response of a cartridge itself, it may be that in the context of the "ghost" effect of an arm resonance, you could get away with more. And equally, there are those who appear to hear the tiniest of tiny differences. But +-3db is the normal definition of "flat".

Of course there's more to the sound of an arm than its main resonance chart shows - but that is what I think those charts are about. Which means it would be interesting to see an F5 chart. (none published yet that I am aware of) :cool:

[FunkArt]

The one we are talking about here - which is the one the graphs show, is the tube itself resonating (sometimes affected by things like the counterweight influencing that resonance). Now, I think what matters here (as most other times) is that the resonances should be fairly similar at all frequencies. It's not so much the absolute level of the resonance that is the problem (although based on Arthurs experiments with damping I am braced for him challenging that), as how different it is at one frequency from another. Because if it is "very" different - chances are there is something to hear, and you hear it.

Of course - subjectively - you are entitled to prefer that sound. And maybe that sound balances another fault in another part of your system. But coming back to that definition of HiFi we agreed when I first joined, a big resonance changing how the music sounds is not close fidelity to the music it is not supposed to be changing. (I think that works :scratch:)

Also - a pet theory which may well be another Shrodigers cat - is that one of the "clues" to "hi fidelity" is imaging and detail. Whats there at the start can only be lost later. If the imaging is good, it is because less has been lost. You can't "colour in" imaging (or any other aspect of detail). So the reason good arms are revealing is because their colouration is small - in this context - their resonance plots are fairly flat - at least in the frequencies where the detail is being noticed by the listener. (which agrees, in a qualified way, with your point)

The issue, I have long believed, is that a cartridge makes an electrical signal when the stylus (cantilever strictly) moves relative to the cartridge body. It doesn't matter if the body is still and the cantilever moving, or the cantilever still and the body moving - either produce an electrical signal. If the cartridge body is in an arm / headshell which is vibrating, that will cause an electrical signal. That signal will add to the signal we want from the record. If it is pretty much the same level at all frequencies it has no effect (we can't hear it).

So how different is "very" different? 3db is a generally accepted threshold. So less than 3db would be good. Although, whilst that might apply to a speaker, or the frequency response of a cartridge itself, it may be that in the context of the "ghost" effect of an arm resonance, you could get away with more. And equally, there are those who appear to hear the tiniest of tiny differences. But +-3db is the normal definition of "flat".

Of course there's more to the sound of an arm than its main resonance chart shows - but that is what I think those charts are about. Which means it would be interesting to see an F5 chart. (none published yet that I am aware of) :cool:

Oh my, oh my. Deep water...both you and Marco. "(not all forms of resonance are bad - much depends on the frequency where said resonance occurs),

Marco."

Look guys, play fair, day job.

Hmmm. "Not all forms of resonance are bad". In some ways I have to agree but it does depend on what you are after?

AAA (another anecdote alert):
Developing Pip II. We completed development and evaluation commenced. We hauled in the finest pre-amps available - Conrad Js, ARs, Krells etc and then set to work, as ever, blind A-Bing. None of us knew what was what. It's a darned stiff test and pretty scary - "What if I choose the "wrong" one?!" and all that.
And to our amazement, there it was on this track, trumpets sounding like trumpets never before. Absolutely Glorious. Then we changed music but kept the same pair of pre-amps...and there it was again, only this time, there were no trumpets...but the signature was still there on "B" (but not on "A").
Yes at times "B", with its resonance was truly beguiling but (to our ears) listening to a range of music it certainly was not preferable.
We chose "A" as it just kept sounding simply sweet. (Yes, "A" was indeed Pip).

Richard: Re "as how different it is at one frequency from another": Well there's a psychological trap here because you have just defined an "unmeasurable", namely you have altered the pitch.
(Pitch altering is "perceived" when a frequency alters with respect to another in either amplitude or frequency).
How one would go about measuring this dynamically I have no idea, but when it happens all musical subjective hell can break loose.

So, yes of course I agree and I try and keep the response flat and even but even there, dangers lurk around the corner:

Consider a Bending mode loudspeaker - NXT to you and me. By definition, they bend and breakup and so generate a response. This response is rarely even and so you will measure distortion of the original input signal.
But try this: What if we manage to get the panel to generate 100% distortion? What will the response be then?
The 100% distortion speaker will have a truly flat response!

Isn't our hobby fun?

Finally, Noel did measure F5 in the LSD review. For now, it would be immodest of me to say any more about it.

Arthur

[Oldpinkman]

Stop being a big girl Arthur. Blimey - its worse than "I don't know where Owen is these days" ...
Just email me the review, and/or post the bloody graph on your web site.
And however little time you have tomorrow, its still your round :cool:

[hifi_dave]

HFW were impressed with the LSD/F5.

[Oldpinkman]

Found the review. Found the graph. Why the bloody vertical scale??????? Will get a translation tomorrow.

[loo]

Funny how time changes opinions, I remember when I bought my anni in 91 and wanted it fitted with a Zeta all the dealers I spoke to said that
the Pt guys thought the only arm worthy enough for the Anni was an Sme V , I don't know if this was true but I do know lots of Anniversaries were sold with Sme V arms fitted , remember the pink link.
Arthur didn't make his own arms then though;)
Paul

[Marco]

Hmmm. "Not all forms of resonance are bad". In some ways I have to agree but it does depend on what you are after?


What I mean is that some resonances in tonearms, depending on where they exist in the audio band, are sympathetic to ensuring that music reproduced has 'life', and thus sounds lifelike, rather than having the guts strangled out of it because of some misplaced quest for achieving 'perfect damping characteristics'. Do you see what I mean? :)

It's because of the latter, IMO, that magnesium-based SME tonearms (from the 309 upwards) sound rather 'flat and lifeless', although the effect can be ameliorated somewhat by the use of a 'toppy' sounding cartridge, such as an OC-9 or Lyra.

For evidence of this, try strapping one of those cartridges onto, say, an SME 309 (on your usual T/T), and play a familiar piece of music, then swap the arm (keeping all other variables the same) for, say, an SME Series M2, which uses a stainless steel armtube, instead of a magnesium one (although, critically, the headshell is made of magnesium), and you'll hear *exactly* what I mean!

Marco.

[Oldpinkman]

Funny how time changes opinions, I remember when I bought my anni in 91 and wanted it fitted with a Zeta all the dealers I spoke to said that
the Pt guys thought the only arm worthy enough for the Anni was an Sme V , I don't know if this was true but I do know lots of Anniversaries were sold with Sme V arms fitted , remember the pink link.
Arthur didn't make his own arms then though;)
Paul

Wouldn't outright deny that. I'm not sure anyone said it was the only arm worthy of Anni (although it has a ring of Neal about it) but certainly SME5 became the main reference (I still liked and used Helius Orion) and I think the SME V was a league above most of the main candidates at that time, in which I would have included the Zeta. Arthur has always had lots of arm ideas - but I think the FXR (which I still feel was seen as a Rega mod) was the first to see production and public sale. But I wouldn't deny PT viewed the SME V probably as the reference against which others were judged at the time - and was the arm on the "house" system most of the time.

But things move on, and beautiful engineering with solid construction alone don't guarantee and impregnable position. In the context of this thread, I think it would support my feelings that damping is by no means a one-way ticket to happiness.

[FunkArt]

Funny how time changes opinions, I remember when I bought my anni in 91 and wanted it fitted with a Zeta all the dealers I spoke to said that
the Pt guys thought the only arm worthy enough for the Anni was an Sme V , I don't know if this was true but I do know lots of Anniversaries were sold with Sme V arms fitted , remember the pink link.
Arthur didn't make his own arms then though;)
Paul

Well, what arms were there? HR100S (nice), Orion, (nice but variable), Syrinx, Artemix. Mission had morphed into the Mechanic. Zeta's cable was an absolute pain.
The ATs et others were sort of out in the cold. SME was the safest bet.

As for PT not making an arm, well we were working on one (or two or five - hence all the historical info), only we couldn't get it to work. It was a touch elaborate!
The one planned to be out next year is that self-same arm, somewhat updated.
Ever more elaborate, it is a lot of fun.

Arthur

[Marco]

In the context of this thread, I think it would support my feelings that damping is by no means a one-way ticket to happiness.

Yup, and mine. As ever, obsessing over (or focussing too much emphasis) on one aspect of tonearm design is a sure recipe for 'processing only the negative', at the expense of developing the full picture...

Marco.

[Marco]

Well, what arms were there? HR100S (nice), Orion, (nice but variable), Syrinx, Artemix. Mission had morphed into the Mechanic. Zeta's cable was an absolute pain.
The ATs et others were sort of out in the cold. SME was the safest bet.


That just shows, Arthur, how biased the UK market then was against fantastic quality (beautifully engineered) Japanese arms, such as the FR64S (or the superb DV that martin uses)! :rolleyes:

It's a major bugbear of mine that, in the hi-fi scene in those days, if it didn't have a British badge on it, it was considered crap - worse still, if a tonearm didn't have a fixed headshell, and instead, horror of horrors, a detachable one! :doh:

Has anyone here compared, for example, an (Akos designed) R200 'Rega' tonearm (with detachable headshell), against an original RB250 or 300? If so, and the latter is considered as better sounding, then get your ears tested! ;)

Marco.

[Mr Kipling]

The Dynavector isn't reviewed in the edition of ' Choice that I have although it gets a mention in the short summary reviews at the back. Martin C. indicates that it has a weight of 1.8 K and so quite massy and suffers from friction in the lateral plane and resonance performance is pretty average. It's had me wondering how a box section and triangular one would compare to a tube.

[sq225917]

Funny how time changes opinions, I remember when I bought my anni in 91 and wanted it fitted with a Zeta all the dealers I spoke to said that
the Pt guys thought the only arm worthy enough for the Anni was an Sme V , I don't know if this was true but I do know lots of Anniversaries were sold with Sme V arms fitted , remember the pink link.
Arthur didn't make his own arms then though;)
Paul

Wasn't the Zeta just too damn heavy.

[Marco]

No heavier than an FR64S, I wouldn't have thought? :)

Problem is, the modern UK audio scene has never quite 'tuned into' the (very valid in its appropriate context) high-mass approach with tonearms and turntables....

Marco.

[MartinT]

The Dynavector isn't reviewed in the edition of ' Choice that I have although it gets a mention in the short summary reviews at the back. Martin C. indicates that it has a weight of 1.8 K and so quite massy and suffers from friction in the lateral plane and resonance performance is pretty average. It's had me wondering how a box section and triangular one would compare to a tube.

That's most likely a 501 or 505, thinking about the age of the publication. The 507-II is slightly less industrial massy and has single pillar mounting, matching a few more decks (although not sprung chassis, I fear).

[The Grand Wazoo]

The Zeta cable problem had been resolved by the time the Anniversary was available - it was sold with a choice of two alternatives, neither of which had that horrible blue plug on them!
It weighs 545 grammes, about 250 g less than the FR.

[Mr Kipling]

Yes it was the 505. It's the only one I've ever seen.

[Marco]

A 'proper' tonearm, beautifully engineered in the Japanese high-end tradition (and as good as anything SME produce):


http://imageshack.us/a/img694/8646/rs212d309db.jpg


http://img19.imageshack.us/img19/6162/juja.jpg


...the 9" version of which graces my beloved 'Techie' :)

Marco.

P.S Second picture above is not of my T/T (it's a TD-124) - just in case there is any confusion!

[pure sound]

Wasn't the Zeta just too damn heavy.
Too heavy for many suspended decks although they were seen on LP12's sometimes. I've been surprised to find out how many FR64s seemed to end up on Systemdek III's. Quite a nice alternative combination for the time I'd have thought. I've still to hear an arm I like more although the Schroeder LT would be a contender. My next diy project will be an arm without offset & therefore without bias. See whether Viv Labs really are onto something.

[Marco]

I've been surprised to find out how many FR64s seemed to end up on Systemdek III's.

Really? Now that's not a combination I'd have considered! I've always rated the Systemdek which, 'back in the day', I feel should've gotten more recognition than it did. Their current high-end stuff is ludicrously priced, but fabulously engineered and rather excellent sounding.

I recently heard the 3D Signature, some £20k worth (fitted with a £2.5k arm and cartridge), in a friend's system, head-to-head against my Techy, using the top Allnic phono stage. It's the only T/T I've heard so far (especially a belt-drive) that in some notable areas has outperformed it. It really was a stunning listen!! :eek:

Here in the UK, in the 'good old days' (70s/80s), we really were brainwashed into believing a load of bullshite, such as 'Jap is crap (everything from sources to speakers)', 'D/D turntables are rubbish - belt drive is the only way', 'S or J-shaped detachable headshell tonearms are automatically inferior to straight, fixed-headshell types', 'What use is an SUT?', etc, etc....

In terms of the latter, I was shocked at how few people had heard of, let alone used one, when AoS was born in 2008 (until I helped spread the word)...!

Thank goodness now that information on the Internet, and informed debate on forums such as this, is now bursting those particular bubbles!!! :exactly:

Marco.

[loo]

Well, what arms were there? HR100S (nice), Orion, (nice but variable), Syrinx, Artemix. Mission had morphed into the Mechanic. Zeta's cable was an absolute pain.
The ATs et others were sort of out in the cold. SME was the safest bet.

As for PT not making an arm, well we were working on one (or two or five - hence all the historical info), only we couldn't get it to work. It was a touch elaborate!
The one planned to be out next year is that self-same arm, somewhat updated.
Ever more elaborate, it is a lot of fun.

Arthur

Sorry I wasn't having a dig I have heard the F.X and it is great and I am all for design moving things on , I just wonder why the SME V gets the bashing it does,
it is approaching 30 years old is the best selling expensive arm by a country mile ,is as well built as anything made by man ,now a lot cheaper than its many of its competetors
is still the arm to beat when any expensive new arm is reviewed, and as you say in the day was the safe bet. Lets give it the iconic respect it deserves, Like a few of your own past creations:)
Paul

[Oldpinkman]

That's most likely a 501 or 505, thinking about the age of the publication. The 507-II is slightly less industrial massy and has single pillar mounting, matching a few more decks (although not sprung chassis, I fear).

Found the 501 and 505 reviews down at arthurs yesterday, in the copies of hifi choice he no longer had when I asked for them a year ago....
Resonance plots not pretty, and concerns about lateral friction as well as cantilever straining horizontal effective mass (estimated at in excess of 50g on the basis of a cartridge resonance lower than 4hz). So no clues to its qualities there. What was interesting was the price, given that I believe the (apparently) very similar 507 retails for more than £4000 today. When a helius orion was £400 and a mission 774 about £200, the dynavector was £199. Some price hike!

[MartinT]

Thanks, Richard. I don't have that copy of Choice.

I think DV had some trouble realising their design ideas into a properly working arm. I certainly remember the 501 as being a big clunky thing in blue hammerite. I never saw a 505 but my 507-II is smaller and more appropriate to fitment to a variety of decks. I have tested the bearings when the arm is balanced and there is no problem with stiction - indeed, the sub-arm is remarkably free floating. Mind you, I'm using low compliance MCs rather than a V15 or any such high compliance cartridge.

As for the price, they are built to order. When I ordered mine, it came directly from Tokyo. It really is a thing of beauty up close, every bit as superbly engineered and purposeful as the SME IV I used to own.

[Oldpinkman]

Thanks, Richard. I don't have that copy of Choice.

I think DV had some trouble realising their design ideas into a properly working arm. I certainly remember the 501 as being a big clunky thing in blue hammerite. I never saw a 505 but my 507-II is smaller and more appropriate to fitment to a variety of decks. I have tested the bearings when the arm is balanced and there is no problem with stiction - indeed, the sub-arm is remarkably free floating. Mind you, I'm using low compliance MCs rather than a V15 or any such high compliance cartridge.

As for the price, they are built to order. When I ordered mine, it came directly from Tokyo. It really is a thing of beauty up close, every bit as superbly engineered and purposeful as the SME IV I used to own.

In case you think, as I'm sure you don't, that I might take a review in HiFi Choice as a definitive authoritative statement of the quality of a hifi item, I should note that the same issue had a review of the Pink Triangle stating "but the slowing under load noted in previous issues remained a feature noted by several reviewers". you may draw your own conclusions! ;)

[StanleyB]

In case you think, as I'm sure you don't, that I might take a review in HiFi Choice as a definitive authoritative statement of the quality of a hifi item, I should note that the same issue had a review of the Pink Triangle stating "but the slowing under load noted in previous issues remained a feature noted by several reviewers". you may draw your own conclusions! ;)
It's quite possible. On a belt drive TT the speed will slow down if the belt is losing its elasticity, or if the belt and motor combination hasn't got the torque to maintain the speed. Ferrograph made a very good piece of test equipment to detect this problem.

[pure sound]

My interpretation of slowing under load always related to the lateral instability caused by the motor pulling a lightweight suspended mass around against the variable drag applied by the stylus in the groove. Ie not specifically a loss of rotational speed of the platter. The Anniversary seemed to finally address that issue by allowing the platter position to remain fixed with respect to the motor position. It certainly sounded far less muddled on busy passages than the earlier models could.

[Oldpinkman]

It's quite possible. On a belt drive TT the speed will slow down if the belt is losing its elasticity, or if the belt and motor combination hasn't got the torque to maintain the speed. Ferrograph made a very good piece of test equipment to detect this problem.

Hi Stan. You had to be there! This was a little Martin Colloms obsession which he measured by adding a dustbug and then theorised about. It has been fairly comprehensively addressed elsewhere on the forum

http://theartofsound.net/forum/showthread.php?28298-Careless-torque-costs-lives-Getting-the-SL1200-platter-right/page5&highlight=slowing

post 46

:mental:

[Gmanuk101]

well I had my tonearm rewired by a good mate of mine (the Cardas wire from Kabusa) and it's sounding really really nice, i've left the tonearm as it is (stock SL1210mk2 one).. all in all he did a neat and tidy job and only cost me £40 for the priv :)

[CableMaker1]

Kevin at KAB USA is a great person to work with. He really knows his 1200s. He makes sure that you are on the right track if you have any doubts.

[CableMaker1]

Marco -

Didn't you once have an SME V on your Technics? I have the V on mine. I must say, it sounds very lifelike. That may be because I asked for copper wiring versus their standard silver plated copper wiring. I am also using my own turntable cable. Disclaimer: I have not had a great opportunity to hear other turntables since my friends deem this as obsolete. Perhaps I should move to Europe to stop by and visit my AoS Friends with my turntable.

The Turntable in my system is the best sounding component in my system - it sounds rich with lots of texture.

[Wakefield Turntables]

Marco -

Didn't you once have an SME V on your Technics? I have the V on mine. I must say, it sounds very lifelike. That may be because I asked for copper wiring versus their standard silver plated copper wiring. I am also using my own turntable cable. Disclaimer: I have not had a great opportunity to hear other turntables since my friends deem this as obsolete. Perhaps I should move to Europe to stop by and visit my AoS Friends with my turntable.

The Turntable in my system is the best sounding component in my system - it sounds rich with lots of texture.


I dont think Marco has had a V on his techie altough I could be wrong :scratch: I have one on my 1210 and I can also testify that vocals do indeed sound very life like. In fact I'd the V and the 1210 are a very good synergistic match, I do think the 1210 and the V can struggle in some areas such as classical and jazz, here my Garrard 301 sound much better :D

[CableMaker1]

I dont think Marco has had a V on his techie altough I could be wrong :scratch: I have one on my 1210 and I can also testify that vocals do indeed sound very life like. In fact I'd the V and the 1210 are a very good synergistic match, I do think the 1210 and the V can struggle in some areas such as classical and jazz, here my Garrard 301 sound much better :D

Not just the vocals, but also the instrumentation in the mid to high frequencies come to life. Because I am an apartment dweller, I cannot use my subs, so I cannot evaluate these frequencies. But I am quite happy with the sound the V puts out.

I must say though that the Technics looks best with an S arm. I have always been attracted to the Jelco/Ortofon (Marcos arm - I have no experience with this arm) and Standard Technics arms, but the 309 and V have always sound impressive.

CM1

[MartinT]

Perhaps I should move to Europe to stop by and visit my AoS Friends with my turntable.

You'd be most welcome, Mike.