Fidelity Research FR-64fx

[sjs]

Does anybody have any experience of Fidelity Research FR-64fx tonearm they could pass on?

Ideally, on a Voyd with an IO - long shot :), compared to an Act 2, SME V or an AN Arm 3 - v long shot :)

Many thx

[hifi_dave]

All Fidelity Research arms are truly excellent and sought after. If you haven't bought the FX, I would suggest the 64S is the better option, especially with mc cartridges. If you have the FX, then don't consider 'options'.

[sjs]

It's an offer on an FX not an S, so I won't consider options ;) thx for the feedback.

All the FR arms seem to have a really strong reputation so I am rather tempted to go for it.

[hifi_dave]

If it's in good condition and the price is right for you, I would suggest you go for it.

A modern equivalent would be at least a couple of £K.

[MikeMusic]

I have one

I like it a lot

Ortofon SPU in it

Sitting on one of Speedy Steve's ebony armboards and a Technics

The Jelco was good. The FR is noticeably better

[Mika K]

I actually have one and am very pleased for it's performance with the Zu DL-103 cartridge. I also have have SME V with modern expensive MC cartridge at my other TT, which is far superior in resolution, dynamics etc but still do consider the systems to be more or less at the same level, just with very different pros and cons. Also the Zu DL-103 sings at that FR arm much better than it has ever done at the SME, so it's all about synergy.. :)

[Ammonite Audio]

I actually have one and am very pleased for it's performance with the Zu DL-103 cartridge. I also have have SME V with modern expensive MC cartridge at my other TT, which is far superior in resolution, dynamics etc but still do consider the systems to be more or less at the same level, just with very different pros and cons. Also the Zu DL-103 sings at that FR arm much better than it has ever done at the SME, so it's all about synergy.. :)

and mass!

[Mika K]

Yes, mass is one part of the equation :)

[sjs]

Thanks for the replies, arm is currently on its way ☺

[Mike Adams]

I have an FR64s which I am considering selling.....

[hifi_dave]

Now, that is a truly excellent arm and the best FR, in my opinion.

Advertise it here and it should be gone quickly.

[stevied]

Now, that is a truly excellent arm and the best FR, in my opinion.

Advertise it here and it should be gone quickly.


Why is it the best Dave?

Is it the mass!

[hifi_dave]

Just the sound and it's suitability for use with the most energetic MC cartridges. That's what it was designed for whereas the FR 64FX was introduced to appease the higher compliance, lower tracking weight MMs of the time.

[stevied]

Cheers
Thats answered a few questions!

[take5]

Just the sound and it's suitability for use with the most energetic MC cartridges. That's what it was designed for whereas the FR 64FX was introduced to appease the higher compliance, lower tracking weight MMs of the time.

Interesting, but not my understanding of the reasons for their introduction.

I have a copy of a review of this arm by David Price in Hi Fi world September 2008.

Here is the part dealing with the "why"

"Even the FR64S was far too heavy for most applications - its effective mass making it suitable for cartridges with a compliance of around 5-10cu, of which there were very few.................

With this in mind, the FR64fx was introduced in 1981 as a "real world" high mass pickup, with a dynamically balanced design similar to the S but with a much lower 20g effective mass. In designing the 64fx, Ikeda took the opportunity to tweak it for the (then) new generation of high performance moving coil cartridges........................."

In fact the article talks about arms of the time which were designed to cater for high compliance MM cartridges. It mentions the SME series 3, which had an effective mass of 5.0 g.

The FR was not designed to be in that ultra low mass market, which never really caught on in Japan. It had an effective mass of 20g, and was aimed at the demand for "beefy" tonearms.

It is no lightweight in physical weight or performance. It is just that it is lighter than the 64s arm, which comes in at 35g.

The reviewer says " Sonically the FR64fx is still one of the best pivoting tonearms around............"

This arm was Fidelity Research's most popular product.

[hifi_dave]

I was the first in the UK to get hold of the FR range of arms and reviewed them in a couple of mags at the time - early 80's I would guess. The 64S was a real eye/ear opener when using MCs such as Koetsu, EMT, Denon, Puresonic and FR's own models, against other arms on the market. As a stockist, we sold loads of the FR 64S, usually on the original Oracle turntable and what a combination that was.

A year or so later, FR contacted me via the UK distributor for my views on introducing another arm which was better suited to higher compliance cartridges, tracking at a lower weight. That was definitely a good idea as not everyone could afford or owned a Koetsu or FR cartridge, to which the 64S was better suited. Note, that I mentioned 'higher compliance' and not 'high' compliance.

We always had the FR 64S and FX on demonstration and regularly sold the S version up against the FX. Our customers preferred the S.

I still have my mini FR 64S and it's destined to be installed on a turntable to be decided for my 'final' turntable.

[Marco]

And yet, Dave, the 'cognoscenti' say that detachable headshell arms are rubbish! :lol:

;)

My response? Bullshite!

Marco.

[Spectral Morn]

SME in my direct experience isn't a good match with Voyd's so I would avoid that choice. Helius arms were the prefered choice at the time and they can still be got here http://www.heliusdesigns.co.uk/sechome.html.

Audio Note UK arms may also be a good match as Audio Note turntables share a direct lineage with Voyd.

As an out of the box suggestion I heard a Voyd Reference with Graham Phantom mk1 arm at a show (Ensemble were using this) a few years ago, a pairing I didn't think would work, and it did beautifully.




Regards Neil

[hifi_dave]

And yet, Dave, the 'cognoscenti' say that detachable headshell arms are rubbish! :lol:

;)

My response? Bullshite!

Marco.

Yep, we've heard that often.

The FR 64S is still my arm of choice for a combination of sound, build and ease of use with a very wide range of cartridges.

[take5]

Dave, you have MUCH more experience in all things HI Fi than I have, so I am
hesitant to respond. But do so anyway, hopefully not in a negative way.:)

But the way your posts read, I do think that you may be doing the 64fx an injustice, leaving the wrong idea in the minds of future readers.

You initially said:
“whereas the FR 64FX was introduced to appease the higher compliance, lower tracking weight MMs of the time. “

I felt that this painted the wrong picture of FR’s intentions and target market, hence my initial post.

I dont know who David Price is, but I assume he would have researched before writing his article. The article by him that I quote says “ In designing the 64fx, Ikeda took the opportunity to tweak it for the (then) new generation of high performance moving coil cartridges. “

It goes on: “They are robust carriers of high mass moving coils where the likes of the SME 3 would have baulked at the challenge”

In your second post, you say:
“introducing another arm which was better suited to higher compliance cartridges, tracking at a lower weight”

I have read much about the 64fx being more flexible with a wider range of cartridges than the 64s, so yes, I would agree that the 64fx is probably better suited than the 64s with higher compliance cartridges.
But this doesn’t take away from the fact that the 64fx had massy MC cartridges in its sights. Not Shure cartridges, for example.
It was a lighter version of the 64s, not a rival for the SME 3. ( Although I suppose it was a rival to the SME 3 , but it was in a different league altogether in terms of performance, and I assume also in price.)

You continue : “as not everyone could afford or owned a Koetsu or FR cartridge, to which the 64S was better suited”

Im not sure if “better suited “ is the correct words. Both the 64s and the 64fx are perfectly “suited” to these cartridges. They were designed with these in mind.
You (and others whose opinion I respect ) prefer the sound of the 64s, but in my view sound/tone preferences are different to suitability. They are both great, high end tonearms.

I write this simply in the hope that anyone looking for info in the future can read about the 64fx and not just think it may have been designed to work with higher compliance MM cartridges, which is an impression that I feel your posts could leave. It is capable of much more than that.

Interesting to read your comments regarding the Oracle/FR combo. When I bought my 64fx, it was on an Oracle mk2, together with a 7 series FR cartridge. This is an integrated cartridge which is very heavy. The 3 together produced a wonderful sound. Possibly the best I have owned to date.

[hifi_dave]

Both arms are wonderful and far better than the majority of arms on the market now. I wouldn't swop my FR 64S for anything and especially so as I use cartridges from Koetsu, EMT Lyra and Decca, which are all quite lively.

The FX is, of course, suitable for use with robust MC cartridges but in direct comparisons it loses out to the S, especially in bass reproduction. I put this down, principally, to higher mass and the 'better' quality internal wiring, which also imparts a more transparent presentation. Having said, that I do consider the FX to be superior to most arms.

Neither the S or FX are suitable for high compliance cartridges, though you can get excellent results from the majority of MM cartridges from the past and present.

[take5]

Thanks Dave.

This has been an interesting and informative thread.

Can I ask for a little more information.

When I bought this arm it was from the first owner. He told me that he had opted for the upgraded, silver wire version. The box/packaging is marked as such. I assume there was a non silver wired version.

Can you recall if my arm will then have the same wiring as the "better" wiring in the 64s, that you mention.

[hifi_dave]

I'm not sure about that as I never saw an 'upgraded' version but it makes sense that it is the better silver wire from the 64S.

Whatever, it's a great arm and you will enjoy it.

[kcc123]

Thanks Dave.

This has been an interesting and informative thread.

Can I ask for a little more information.

When I bought this arm it was from the first owner. He told me that he had opted for the upgraded, silver wire version. The box/packaging is marked as such. I assume there was a non silver wired version.

Can you recall if my arm will then have the same wiring as the "better" wiring in the 64s, that you mention.
The FR 64FXs are actually fitted with silver wire as the FR 64s.

[sjs]

well, the FR-64fx has arrived. All appears to be in order except for a missing anti-skating thread, but that shouldn't be to tricky to sort out. More interesting will be making an armboard for my Voyd with arm in the correct location :)

[take5]

Simon, nice one. Guy wrote this in a post, elsewhere.

"The mounting distance is supposed to be 230mm but various FR experts recommend 231.5mm spindle to pivot."