Eminent Technology ET-2 Tonearm Owners

Dear Chris,
I'm tempted to express a point of view οn this matter with the danger of an oversimplified misunderstanding by your side.

Theoretically,
I can imagine a great DD matched with a great air bearing arm, offering a great effortless precision. But this in an ideal state of mind in which every part of this set-up has designed with some proven research behind it and executed with utmost care in shape, materials in use and precision in assembly and overall construction.

I admit, I've met a critical point of my taste by using the hybrid TD124 with the SAEC WE-308SX and the Zonotone headshell. Two of the most complex designs in conjunction with my Colibri XPP gave me a vivid and lifelike presence, airy and energetic with an organic fullness which can't be found on my other top TT/tonearms. Perhaps a JN's creation of L75/Pluto 9A has all these qualities and more, but until now, the L75 with Reed 3Q or Technics EPA 100mk2 and my Symphonic Line RG6/Pluto 9A was nowhere near it's class.
A series of unfortunate events regarding my decision for turn my back to Tangential arms, includes a vivid memory of an audition of the Clearaudio Statement TT/arm/Goldfinger and a side by side comparison with the Clearaudio Master Reference/Pluto 5A/Goldfinger. It was clear for me my preference for the later as the achromatic character of the first left me uninvolving, unmoving my senses, looking for emotional charging. Τhis was a mechanical tangential arm (not an electronic but neither air bearing) without an armtube, but as straight forward as can be. I know this is a cheap excuse, but I'm very familiar with your previous TNT/ET2 set-up. When I've had the opportunity to buy this combo, I've bought the J4/SL5 instead. I wish that you didn't push me deeper to this. When I've had my DP80/SME V, a friend gave me his own DP80/Clearaudio TQ1 and this was a disaster. One of the most sterile, uncomfortable but also unstable performances when paired with my VDH Black Beauty, Grasshopper IIIM and Symphonic Line RG8 gold. But it was almost very listenable with my Insider. Yes, the ET2 never was set on my armboard, perhaps due to the fact that my DP80/SME V was allways prefered by our group when played beside the TNT/ET2. Probably because of a faulty air pressure or wrong alignment, or even because the DP80 is a hell of a TT while the TNT was a lousy plastic sucker. It is not that I don't have any experience with the tangential tracking arm, it is more that this poor ET2 was deeply buried by the great TNT of the time.
You should know better by now, but as I wanted to move into the parallel tracking arms, I've bought the J4/SL5 and after that, the Goldmund ST4 and even the Studio/T3F later.
Plastic armtubes running in parallel with the aluminium armtube, servos, elastic belts, waiting for the arm to make the mistracking in order to serve their correction, moving the whole construction to the next groove. OK let's get over these early monstrous electromechanical tonearms.

Practically,
As I'm approaching the air bearing clan of suspects, I can not see a clear view of what is possible or what is widely accepted regarding the armtube shape, material or lateral weight. The Kuzma, Simon Yorke, Air Tangent, ET 2.5, Conductor, Decca, Sindre, Terminator all have their own perception of air bearing mechanism and all things about everything. Where is the conical and progressively ascending tube inside a tube made of titanium ? Or the azimuth leveling on headshell ? While I can give my time on experimenting with the air pressure or mounting conditions, I'm not convinced for the maturity of what the industry has to offer on this subject as yet and the clinical environmental conditions of handling them regarding dust or smoking is another disturbing thing to consider.
Again my apologies for my ignorance, but I'm not a pivoted devotee only by coincidence, but more so by need.

Hi Geoch – You are always candid, honest and passionate based on your personal experiences/observations. I can appreciate that. We are all big boys here.

But let me be candid and honest too. My personal detailed TT impressions are on my page however just briefly. The VPI TNT was originally designed for the ET2. There are many out there. I owned one for many years and can say that when you say:

Probably because of a faulty air pressure or wrong alignment, or even because the DP80 is a hell of a TT while the TNT was a lousy plastic sucker.

I would put my money personally on a faulty pump and the wrong alignment part. You now have me wondering if Nikola considers his big Kuzma to be a big plastic sucker?

My old TNT modified with thread, became a new TT far surpassing the belt version in my own setup. The TNT/ET2 you heard if it was an early TNT version with a basic ET2/pump and the POS PLC controller as mine was originally – well I rate it “2 out of 10” compared to the threaded TNT/SDS version with ET2 HP arm and pump mods later. In thread form it surpassed my SP10 mkII set up and forced me to look for the next version. But it became a little higher maintenance in this form. Just like that special girlfriend. I remember our discussion on what material I should use to fill the leg cavities as I was resting them on the excellent AT 616 pneumatic footers instead of the sprung feet.

http://cgim.audiogon.com/i/vs/i/f/1325532980.jpg

Your reply back to me was to used beeswax and leadshot in the cavity. Ingenious I thought at the time but it would be really messy. I ended up filling all four of them with blue tac at one point. But it produced a sound like it was coming from the dead. Unlike death itself this was easily reversible. So we have our personal experiences. The Verdier btw took this little tonearm to unimaginable heights for me personally. The JN Lenco however I am keeping safe for when I have more time to explore it properly.

“I'm not convinced for the maturity of what the industry has to offer on this subject as yet and the clinical environmental conditions of handling them regarding dust or smoking is another disturbing thing to consider.”

You are absolutely right. IMO - The demand for these tonearms has come from what I can tell from word of mouth and forums such as this. Just look at the upgrades discussed on this forum alone. Many here now have turnkey systems. One button turns everything on. When people buy these ET2 tonearms used they do not realize that the price being paid is not the price of admission. Significant investment and more importantly time needs to be made in a proper pump system. A new ET 2.5 is not cheap, and then the pump is not included. Bruce Thigpen makes it clear on his website, that sourcing of the pump system is not included but they will offer advice and help to source one. For someone inquiring into a ET2.5 and maybe getting to the next step of ownership – this is not appealing. But there are so many pump options available with it that Bruce has no choice but to leave this option open. Unfortunately most into analog want plug and play I have found and are not willing to do their homework here.
Cheers

Dg, I use 1.5 meters of wire with no sign of any issue due to length. I suppose it's possible that a shorter length sounds even better, but the Cardas and Discovery looms are both 1.0 m and the AN is obviously superior to both; according to my tastes, of course.

Hey guys, I've mounted my Acutex 420 and thought I'd send some intial impressions. I am having a couple issues with my current wire loom that's keeping me from an optimal set-up. So please keep this in mind regarding remarks I make on cartridge performance.
My wire loom was made with longer than usual cartridge clips that require me to use an 1/8" spacer. Now that the cartridge total height has increased, I've had to make adjustments to allow for this by raising the manifold assembly in the vertical post. Only now can I get the top of cartridge body parallel to the record surface with the arc block centered in it's adjustment range. So, now the center of the spindle is farther than I'd like above the height of an lp.
The tonearm exits the back of the armwand: I constructed this with a braid/shield inside the armwand and had it exit around an 1" . This makes it impossible to get overhang exactly right with this cartridge at this point. I'm about 1/32" too far forward.
Obviously, I will correct these issues in the future.
I'm using a double leaf spring, w/ VTF @ 1.5 grams, top fo cart. body parallel with lp, running slightly above 17 psi. All remarks are comparing the just removed Dyna D3.
The first thing that hits me is the bass. It has greater authority, the bass lines are very easy to follow, has greater realism.
The midrange is natural and unforced. The treble is pleasant and has no edge. Not as extended as the Dyna.
Soundstage has nice separation, placement of performers and instuments are nice in the context of the total picture.The spread isn't as wide as the Dyna. The Dyna has more of an airly quality. Soundstage doesn't extend beyond speakers.
Doesn't do audio gymnastics, but that's is fine with me.
I'm loving it already and do not miss the Dyna.
The two lps I've listened to so far are Police "Ghost in the Machine" which was the last lp I heard befor making the switch and Shawn Colvin "Steady On". If you don't already own the latter, I can recommend it.

Bear in mind that you are not comparing a Dynavector 17D to an Acutex 420.
You are comparing a "Dynavector 17D plus Bob's Cinemag 3440 MC transformer" to an Acutex 420.