Interesting “facts discussion” about linear vs. radial tonearms, most have probably read it:
http://forum.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/fr.pl?eanlg&1266367593&openfrom&1&4&&st100
Sadly mostly boring (ie. repeated, but skewed arguments)… but some interesting points. A main point is the quotation of a High Performance Audio Review test in the 80's measuring much higher actual sideforces and deflection of the cantilever on a SAEC radial tonearm vs. an air bearing arm.
The reaction of the (radial) “experts”: Hilarious, ridiculous! The facts don't follow their invented orthodox belief, so the facts must be wrong! The reaction of other more pragmatic non scientifical audiophiles: This is only one situation, we must collect other… (measurements).
Experimental science means, one well set up experiment with a non expected measured outcome can expose any pre-existing contrary hypothesis as wrong. In this case the “excessive side-forces”. But what am I as a humble pragmatic thinker compared to the pope(s)?
Over most of the thread the effect of mass and bearing friction on a cantilever are confounded, and bearing stick vs. bearing friction isn't even mentioned. Neither are there attempts to define the magnitude of differences of (horizontal) friction of radial vs. air bearing arms. I think/suspect that even with the “lever advantage” the best radial arm may just quite cope with an air bearing. Horizontally that is. The rest is wrong thinking about the optimal horizontal mass aka. the desired horizontal resonance frequency – for best bass reproduction with lowest phase shift. The dynamic side forces on a cantilever are simply a result of friction (mostly non existant in an air bearing) and mass. Ie. they correlate with the horizontal resonance frequency – and are taking part in a compromise, where the sonic optimum lays much lower than audiophile orthodoxy.
http://forum.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/fr.pl?eanlg&1266367593&openfrom&1&4&&st100
Sadly mostly boring (ie. repeated, but skewed arguments)… but some interesting points. A main point is the quotation of a High Performance Audio Review test in the 80's measuring much higher actual sideforces and deflection of the cantilever on a SAEC radial tonearm vs. an air bearing arm.
The reaction of the (radial) “experts”: Hilarious, ridiculous! The facts don't follow their invented orthodox belief, so the facts must be wrong! The reaction of other more pragmatic non scientifical audiophiles: This is only one situation, we must collect other… (measurements).
Experimental science means, one well set up experiment with a non expected measured outcome can expose any pre-existing contrary hypothesis as wrong. In this case the “excessive side-forces”. But what am I as a humble pragmatic thinker compared to the pope(s)?
Over most of the thread the effect of mass and bearing friction on a cantilever are confounded, and bearing stick vs. bearing friction isn't even mentioned. Neither are there attempts to define the magnitude of differences of (horizontal) friction of radial vs. air bearing arms. I think/suspect that even with the “lever advantage” the best radial arm may just quite cope with an air bearing. Horizontally that is. The rest is wrong thinking about the optimal horizontal mass aka. the desired horizontal resonance frequency – for best bass reproduction with lowest phase shift. The dynamic side forces on a cantilever are simply a result of friction (mostly non existant in an air bearing) and mass. Ie. they correlate with the horizontal resonance frequency – and are taking part in a compromise, where the sonic optimum lays much lower than audiophile orthodoxy.