Dear friends and @mijostyn  : The OP thread is aBOUT THE sat TONEArm but mike brougth here the FCL unipivot tonearm design and posted " serious " statements about his experiences wioth that tonearm like: " the FCL is doing things that no other arm can do " that with out explanation in true has no sense and till today he does not gives us that explanation.


Anyway, when talking of tonearm designs some of you already know that some of us as @mijostyn  and me just do not like unipivot designs and for very good reasons.

I owned and still own unipivots ( but I don't use it any more. ) as the Naim Aro ( not bad at all. ), Grace ones I think Stax and the like.


The FCL designer says that with his field  copil bearing desing all is solved and he says:


""" We always were fascinated by the simplicity and purity of the unipivot bearing design. The classic unipivot tonearm can sound quite good but has some serious drawbacks. First of all, we never could get used to the handling of the wobbling arm wand. This makes everyday use very unpleasant. A classic unipivot tonearm has also an unfavorable ratio of tonearm balance and bearing point. The center of gravity of the tonearm is much deeper than the bearing point and that leads to a high moment of inertia. Another, often OVERLOOKED POINT IS THE FACT,THAT ALL THE ENERGY FROM THE TONEARM IS DERIVED AT THIS TINY POINT ( bearing. ) INTO THE TONEARM BASE. THE ENERGY THAT A CARTRIDGE TRANSFER INTO THE ARM WAND when playing an LP IS ENORMOUS and THE ENERGY TRANSFER  AT THE BEARING POINT IS VERY CRITICAL.   "


This last disadvante on unipivots is , as he said, CRITICAL and we can't avoid it because Law's Newton are what are and that ENERGY appears again in the arm wand as feedback in more critical way than in non-unipivot tonearm designs.

That huge energy develops high distortions type that the cartridge pick up ones and again. Every kind of energy/resonance, vibrations, distortions pass through that single point and return through its. Very bad.


The FCL designer says: " and sonically performance unmatched by any other uni-pivot tonearm design. "  Obviously that the designer took care not to post " unmatched by any other tonearm " but only unipivots.


Mike likes it a lot the FCL when compared with the Tosca but he in some ways was accustomed to unipivots when for years he owned the Durand ones.

In the other side the Tosca and the FCL are not only totally different designs but his FCL is 12" long and we all read here ( in objective terms not subjective . ) why shortest tonearms is the way to go . 

I have to mention too that been an unipivot FC or not the 12" has a higher torsional microscopic movements than any 9"-10" tonearm and his sample is made of wood. Other characteristic could be that the internal FCL wiring and headshell cartridge connectors be different in the Tosca than in the FCL, only these different characteristics along the 12" long sure that makes differences and in objective way I can't see why those differences could be for the better.


We all know that not all what " shines " is gold and I respect the mike opinion but I like to go alittle deeper in my observations that ceratinly can be true or not .


Anyway, that's my opinion with out listen the FCL and as @mijostyn with the SAT not only I don't need a new tonearm but I certainly do not buy even if the money is no object.






@rauliruegas @mijostyn out of curiosity what do you consider great arms say in the 5 - 10k range? Kuzma 4Point? 4POINT9?

To me there is so many variables to make a great tonearm.

As you all say there is external vibrations finding it's way up to the tonearm, and there is bearing chatter in the tonearm and probably other unwanted resonances and at the end of the wand/rod there are we mounting firmly/rigid a pickup/cartridge.. so it can pickup all of those problems that the tonearm is serving it.

Then we want to solve the problems with constructing the wand/rod so it will dampen/isolate and eat up resonances and vibrations. With a lot of engineering and the sofisticated data modeling and printout in fancy rainbow colors. Impressing and with a impressive price tag then it is good stuff and nobody can say that it is a "gizmo".

A cartridge is approximately 7g to 10g.

Mass for a stylus and cantilever, typically the best cartridges have about 0.5 mg or less. 


So the cartridge body has 14 to 20 times or more mass than the stylus + cantilever have. Then the stylus is moving back and forth in the grove and register all the "wiggles"/information on the grove walls that are so tiny (micron). If you look at the stylus while playing a LP you will not be able to see those super tiny wiggles with your eyes.

So we understand that a low mass stylus and cantilever in comparison to the cartridge that not even we are able to see that it is moving it is even not movements (micron) side to side it is 45°upwards.


Then the stylus and cantilever is working against VTF that is coming from above and the inertia of the mass of cartridge (+tonearm effective mass) that is far more in grams than the VTF that is the smaller of them and still is enough.

When we realize that only the mass of the cartridge is more than enough for the lateral forces and the VTF is there for the vertical force.

So bear with me now and think outside of the box and the common solutions, we want the cartridge to be "free floating in the air" but it needs to be attached also in the same time.

The tonearm is just holding the cartridge so the stylus has all the right angels, VTF and so on. While doing that we get all the other down sides that mentioned above.

What if we isolate the issues that comes from the tonearm while keeping the stylus setup that the tonearm provide.


There is where the funk houdini is coming into the picture when it isolate the bad things that comes with using a tonearm, and the cartridge itself on the other side of the houdini.

As seen in a short clip in Michael Fremer video at 13:50. We see that Arthur is trying to explain and show what his different products including houdini is trying to solve in practice. More or less the same issues that other conventional tonearms also trying to do with their wand/rod. It seams to be a hard and expensive way to solve the issues that the tonearm is giving the cartridge.

(But please don't tell the customer that we don't need to fasten/ground firmly the cartridge to the tonearm and transmitt all the issues from the tonearm as they were one homogen piece. Then we get out of business. If they knew that.)

But it is a total different approach for solving the issues.

Funk firm Arthur Khoubesserian

It is great to have a guy like Arthur that are thinking outside of the box and coming out with new and many different solutions for old problems and issues we have with traditional solutions. 



out of curiosity what do you consider great arms say in the 5 - 10k range? Kuzma 4Point? 4POINT9?

or stretch to a used Durand Tosca. that would be the smart play.

Thanks Mike but the Glanz MH-124S Premium is priced at $26 500 retail! I was looking in the 5-10 k range. Being retired if the wife found out I spent over 25k for a tonearm I'd probably be 7" shorter 😉