Thanks for your comments!
30 responses Add your response
I believe the Dyna arm is also to heavy for your SOTA. i have a 505 and have found it lovely sounding on a DP-75 custom constrained layer plinth. Ive used the following MC cartridge on it FR-MK2, Dynavector 17 D3, Lyra Delos, Koetsu Urishi Black, and a Kuzma CAR-40. For MM both a Signet TK-9 and Grace / Soundsmith Ruby OCL. As Lew mentioned headshell selection important. I use the stock Dyna HS but replaced leads. I also have the latest version of Triplaner and find it superior, by a fair bit in both resolution and PRaT ( don’t read the thread on that ). My observation based on idential TT, isolation, armboard but with wiring and setup differences between the two arms Surface mount arms certainly reduce variable. I also have a 12” Ortofon, which so far has eluded me in clearly besting the Dynavector. I can also attest to USA Dynavector distributior as providing FANTASTIC support. |
In what plane is the compliance data you quoted? Since, as you say, this true mono cartridge only responds to horizontal motion of the cantilever, its vertical compliance is not so relevant, if that figure is for vertical compliance. Anyway, the horizontal compliance is probably also low. The Dynavector tonearms are high in horizontal effective mass but low in vertical effective mass. |
I am looking for an arm with hight effective mass for a Miyajima mono cartridge. Supposedly those cartridges are not finicky about VTA but horizontal travel of the needle is everything, and I wonder if this arm with high horizontal stability would be an excellent choice for such a cartridge. The good Miyajima cartridges have compliance of only 8 um/Dyne. Any thoughts? Also, I need to mount the arm on a SOTA turntable which apparently has the armboard sunk somewhat lower than your average depth. Can anyone comment on whether the arm might have a problem getting high enough off the armplate to play properly? |
Dear @hifiguys : I think you don't need that Dyna tonearm when the Grado is a superb one, but is up to you.
Perhaps what your Grado could needs is an internal re-wiring and that's it.
Regards and enjoy the MUSIC NOT DISTORTIONS, R. |
Ditto. I’m still happy with the DV505 on my Lenco. I also own a 501, inherited in NOS condition from the estate of a friend, but I’ve not used it. The original choice of the 505 for my Lenco was partly governed by the need for a surface mount tonearm . My Lenco is in a slate plinth that does not have a separate mount board. So I cannot use a tonearm with a vertical shaft that must penetrates the mount area surface. |
I'm strongly considering this arm on a recently acquired Micro Seiki RX-5000 left to me by a friend (RIP, Beill). It currently has a Grado Signature Laboratory Standard arm. Cartridge is my long time favorite, a DV Te Kaitora Rua. Obviously cartridge matching wouldn't be an issue and, although matching arm to table is less critical, the owner of Dynavector uses an RX-5000 with this arm. I think he has a nicer cartridge than me :-) My friend was the original owner and it hadn't been used in close to 20 years. |
For what it is worth, I have had a dv 507 mounted on my VPI mk 11 (upgraded) for many many years. While it may not work with other suspended tables it has and does work extremely well on the VPI the equivalent of which is now the Classic (they now also make many non-suspended) VPI themselves both recommended and then drilled the armboard and set the arm collar when I upgraded the mounting board and platter. It has worked well and sounded great with every cartridge I've had -- grado, audioquest, monster, and koetsu |
I have had the 507mk2 along with Graham Phantoms, Reed, Centroid, Davinci Grandezza, TW caustics 10.5 and others. It is one of my favorite. The arm dissipate cartridge resonance extremely well and it is very dynamic in the bass (probably low vertical moving mass). The larger variation in VTA did not seem to rear its ugly head as long as records are fairly flat or record ring is used. Easy to adjust antiskate and VTA another draw for me. THe black version has a much better finish as I also owned a silver one at some point. |
Mordante, Speaking for myself, it's the speakers that finally gave me the feeling that I was essentially "finished" with my audio odyssey. Once I got "there" with speakers, then messing about with the upstream chain becomes merely fun and not something that is motivated by a sense that there is something missing. Lucky for me, I have two such systems. One is my Sound Lab 845PX with a very highly modified input stage (what SL acolytes refer to as the "backplates", where the crossover and audio step-up transformers are mounted). The other is a pair of Beveridge 2SWs that I bought and fussed with until they work very nicely. |
Mordante, It is really hard to answer your question, because I use my DV505 on a Lenco with MM cartridges, and I use my Reed and Triplanar with MC cartridges on other tables. The Reed is very nice sounding on my Technics, I must say. As you note, the DV tonearm gives excellent bass and solidity and good "air" and delicacy as well, but I could not say that there is not some other tonearm which if mated to the same cartridge in the same system would not be even better. At some point, I accept "very good" as "good enough". |
@LEWN How does the 505 compare to the other arms you have? I have never heard the TriPlaner arm. I have heard the reed arms on Dr.Feickert turntables. But I find it hard to compare arms because of cartridge/turntable differences. But as far as I can tell the Reed arm are a tad more analytical compared to the 507 but the 507 gives more fundamentals more body to the music. Chances are likely that I'll buy the 507mkII together with the SAC Girati Grande and a Dynavector Te Katora Rua. |
Contrary to what has been stated, I have found the Dynavector arm (a 501, in my case), to be quite versatile. It works well with such disparate cartridges as Dynavector XX2MKII, Zu Denon 103R (with ESCCO cantilever/Paratrace stylus modification), an Acutex LPM 415, and Acutex M320 STR LPM. All track very well, and sound very good to my ears. Assumptions about performance without actually using the item in discussion is, in my opinion, misguided. Although there are differences between the older 501, and the newest version, the 507 MK II, they are mainly, as previously noted, in the anti-skate and VTF adjustment methods. I do believe they would perform, and sound, similarly. I have been more than pleased with every aspect of this arm's performance, and firmly believe in order to obtain a better performing tonearm, I would have to pay multiples of what the 501 arm cost. A 507 MKII for $4000, in good condition, may not be a bad deal, but I can't say with any certainty. Regards, Dan |
Verybig and Carl, Your comments are useless to anyone contemplating a purchase. I think it would be fair to say that the DV tonearms are fundamentally different in design and execution from standard pivoted tonearms. The differences afford certain advantages and disadvantages as compared to the standard type. That does not make them "faulty". Would you say the same about unipivots vs captured bearing types? Which of those two types is "faulty"? Consttraveler, Yes, warps will affect VTA on the DV507 more so than with a conventional pivoted tonearm. However, who among us that can afford a $5000+ tonearm will tolerate a warped LP? On the other hand, the skating force is never constant at any point across the surface of any LP with music on it. Therefore, what is the advantage of applying constant anti-skate (which I am not sure is constant, since the magnetic AS will change based on any change in distance between two magnets)? "Correct" AS is a crapshoot at best. I use a DV505, the older model, on my Lenco. Essentially the DV505 is a DV507 with string and weight AS instead of magnetic AS. I also own a Triplanar and a Reed and a FR66S, that I use on other TTs. The DV505 sounds superb with either of two of my favorite MM cartridges, the Grace Ruby and the Acutex LPM320. Choice of headshell should be made with a view to matching the cartridge, since the vertically pivoting part of the arm is so short and light. Headshell becomes more important. Bass response and "detail" are indeed superb, but so is "air". |
First my apology for necromancing this thread. But I am a bit surprised how negative people react to the DV-507 mkII. Some one I know who is an audio distributor recommends me to buy a (secondhand) DV-507 mk). He has no financial interest in the arm but he does sell other brand like Kuzma, Reed and Ikeda. So how good/bad is this arm? Personally I like Kuzma arms, but I have limited experience, audio for me is hobby. So I have not heard many arms. I do not like SME except the 309. The rest IV, and V seem to be over dampened. From what I heard Reed sounds very lively Kuzma very neutral and Ikeda a bit on the warm/laid back side of the spectrum. I have not heard the Dynavector DV-507 mkII yet. But the distributor who knows my set a little and my musical tastes says I will love the 507 with my Te Katora Rua. I am looking for a second hand arm and probably even a second hand 507 is too expensive. But I am curious none the less. |
Dave, the very short arm that does the vertical travel creates some vertical tracking issues, and some effective vertical mass/resonance issues. Dut to the ultra short geometry of the smaller arm, it creates wide swings in VTA as even small warps pass under the stylus. Second, vertical mass/resonance is affected by the very low mass of this small arm, making careful cartridge choice mandatory. Third, having strong magnetic flux fields in the damping mechanism near the pivot, where the wires exit the tonearm, may cause some interaction with the signal wires. And fourth, the very high weight of the overall tonearm package can make it troublesome on some suspended subchassis TTs. However, it does do a great job of solving the need to greatly increase the horizontal mass of the tonearm system, to better stabilize the arm with respect to the lateral deflections normally imparted by the stylus. It is built like a tank, has very nice fit, finish, and appearance, and is quality all the way. It may even qualify as a "status symbol" type of tonearm. Sonically, I find it did some things very well, like bass response and detail, but it was lacking in some other areas. I feel that a Graham will be alot more liquid, an SME will have better detail, and an OL will do everything better. But the DV arm is not a bad one and you could do alot worse. If you like very "industrial looking" arms, take a look at the Tri-planar Ultimate. That is a very high-tech arm, and sounds better than the DV, in my opinion. |
Zaikesman: The looks are what attracted me, but I have been working as an engineer for over 20 years and immediately saw some structural and dampening advantages to a jointed arm. The anti-skate is also interesting. Using a magnetic device "should" apply even pressure for the width of an LP, while the hanging weight found on most high-end arms is, at best, applying a smoothly changing ammount of pressure across the LP. TWL: What problems are created? I am considering this arm for use on a (future purchase) Teres with a wood plinth. Dave |
