A Copernican View of the Turntable System

Dear Lew, The math was alas my worst subject at school
but I thougt in terms of 'variables' and 'constants'in this context. I know that the term 'variable' has no sense in the math (thanks to Frege)but we are used, so to speak,
to use those terms. Well if we are free to choose the 'zero points' as we like or depending where we want the the least distortion than this means to me something that is 'variable'. So consequently there must be 'something' which should be constant. So I thought that
this must be the tonearm 'on its own'. I am sorry for my terminology but that is what I thought. From your statements I 'see' or deduce that we have no choice at all in the sense mentioned. Ie the designer of the tonearm in casu predeterminated our 'choice' in advance , so to speak. Ergo we have no 'free choice' at all? What an hobby!

Regards,

Dear Nandric, dear Lewm, I am happy to talk in length about tangential curve and tonearm(s) "on their own", but we should do this in a separate thread.
Because - IMHO - this will soon leave Copernican view and separate arm pods ....
So much for now - no, you can't choose your zero points freely (at least not on a 12" record ...) - not if you want any decent positive results from tracking the signal in the groove.
Cheers,
D.

Dear DT, It's relevant to this thread only in that it points out the critical nature of tonearm alignment for those who wish to use outboard arm pods that are free to move about in relation to the tt spindle. (I will now don my armor plating.)

Lewm: I hope that armor plating doesn't shield you from the truth, because here's some coming at you.

I aligned my cart with a Mint protractor around a week ago. Your post and my previous concerns prompted me to check alignment just now. It's dead on. I used a 10x loupe. I must say I'm slightly surprised by this, but in my mind this is pretty conclusive as to the stability of the Copernican system.

The Dynavector DV-505 (and its later 507 version) has alway enticed me because of its distinctly architectonic appearance?
I have never though, read a really thorough review of its performance vis-a-vis other tonearms?
It would be good to hear your impressions?

Hi Henry – I will be posting tonearm and drive impressions on my system page. BTW - I thought that was a very interesting comparison of the Raven 3 motor BD versus JVC DD you did on your system page.

I did a/b the DV505 with the ET 2.5 on pods already using the sp10 which I believe the dv505 was designed for. The dv505 was not using the same cartridge as the ET which had the empire 4000 diii gold on it. So I will hold off on what I heard. I am waiting for another empire cartridge from a member here but the delivery got botched up so I am still waiting for it. Thought I would have it in time for when I got back from vacation.

So - for the “older thinkers” out there I mounted my second ET the smaller brother version 2.0 on the Lenco along with the Dv505.

Lenco 75 Dv505 Et 2

They will both be using Empire 4000 diii Gold. If it does good against the 2.5’s little brother will try it against the ET 2.5 again. Mechanics, magnets, strings and funny hanging stuff up against a frictionless air bearing linear tracker.

Lew - do you have the Dynavector stylus / spindle alignment gauge?

Cheers Chris