Another resonance/compliance/effective mass question...

[martian sunrise]

i have the day off, so (as one does) i'v been playing around with carts/headshells/test records and have come out of it totally confused.

i have a michell focus, with a linn basik lvv (1g std, although this may not be a std headshell). i also have an at95e, an ortofon vms20e mkii and a denon dl109d. headshells are 6g, 10g, 13g and 16.

i have tried most combinations, with all but the 6/10g headshells needing weight added to the counterbalance. using the hifi news test record, all of them cough up a resonance of between about 6.5hz-8.5hz. now, when i out the numbers into one of the calculators, they just do not match the figures i get from the test record.

how can such massive variances in kit give me such similar results?

does adding mass to the CW (up to 31g) negate the effect of the cw on the effective mass?

i know the answer is to run what sounds best, but i have been tooling around with this al morning and can't work it out. if there is something basic i am missing, please let me know, it is sending me a bit doolally.

[martian sunrise]

I can't print screen, but the denon, for example:

7.5g, 9cu, 1g for screws and a 13g tonearm suggests 11-12hz

[walpurgis]

Why worry about test record results? They won't tell you if your cartridge plays music records properly. I gave up using the HFN test record over thirty years ago.

[RobbieGong]

Have to agree with Geoff.
Set things to the manufacturers recommended parameters then carefully fine tune by vta alongside lugs :D

[martian sunrise]

I'm not too worried. I was just tinkering about and can't work out what is going on.

[walpurgis]

None of my Deccas would track the 'torture' parts of the HFN test disc cleanly, but were fine on records.

[DSJR]

The LVV was from a Japanese parts bin and came with a lowish mass flexible headshell that ADC and I think Ortofon sometimes used. With many MM types, it'd be all you need and in THIS case if not others, I preferred the use of the rubber ring-washer between headshell and socket - you know the one, that all the self important gurus like me in HiFi shops told you to remove...

As a working tonearm, the LVV surprised us all and it was always quite stable in use. If you wanted to use a really massy headshell, then get Speedy-Steve to make a massy sleeve to fit over the existing counterweight. USE AN EXTERNAL BALANCE as the existing calibration ring won't be anywhere near as accurate with the added mass to cater for.

The so-called ideal resonance used to be around 10hz, but in practise, a lower setting can actually sound 'better' in some circumstances. What you DON'T want is the arm wobbling uncontrollably on record ripples and warps. I loved the sound of my Rega R200/Decca Microscanner (not as good as the dedicated NAS tonearms which are sublime with Decca's, but very enjoyable nonetheless), but the lateral 'shimmy' when settling into the groove could be alarming and I feared once again for long-term reliability here.

If you can afford to risk it financially, try a Sumiko Pearl cartridge at around a hundred quid. This model's spiritual predecessors using the same basic body (Rega R100/A&R C-E-P 77, Supex SM100 and others)' always worked a treat in the LVV and sounded really nice in a punchy way, especially on 12" singles I remember.

[martian sunrise]

Great. Thanks

[walpurgis]

the LVV surprised us all and it was always quite stable in use.

Yes. It's the unsung hero of tonearms. I have one tucked away. At their usual asking price of around £100, they are a bargain.

The LV-V is also a nice choice for anybody doing up a Lenco turntable, as it fits straight in with a bit of care.