That is the everywhere touted and very expensive tonearm. Touted by all professional reviewers and obviously " satisfied " owners ( around 70 of them. ).

Here some reviews:

and you can look elsewhere the TAS one and others.

Obviously that the proudly owners started to buy the tonearm because those reviews and trhough audio shows but mainly for the " great " reviews.

It was ranked class A in Stereophile and I know are coming two new models that inludes a 12" tonearm.

Other than the very high price I never was interested on the tonearm design due that is totally out of my budget. Its price cost what a decent whole audio system cost.

Anyway, a few months ago in an other analog forum and through a TT review the SAT appeared in that discussion thread and was here when I decided to analize this regarded tonearm design where I found out that those 30K+ dollars are a true money lost and does not matters of what reviewers and owners think about where there are not clear facts all of them are extremely satisfied with the SAT.

Let me explain a little why I said that through my post to MF:


from your Stereophile review the SAT specs are as follows: P2S: 212.2mm, overhang: 22.8mm, offset angle 26.10° with an effective length: 235mm.

Those numbers tell us that you are listening ( with any cartridge. ) way higher distortion levels, that you just do not detected even today, against almost any other tonearm/cartridge combination.

Obviously that the SAT needs a dedicated protractor to make the cartridge/tonearm set up but we have to analize what those specs/numbers has to say:

the SAT maximum traking error is a really high: 3.09° when in a normal ( Jelco or Ortofon. ) 235m Effective Length tonearm Löfgren A alignment ( IEC standard. ) is only: 1.84°

the SAT maximum distortion % level is: 2.67 when in that normal tonearm only 0.633

the SAT average RMS % distortion is: 0.616 when in normal tonearm only :
0.412 ( Löfgren B even lower: 0.37 ).

All those makes that the linnear offset in the SAT be 10mm longer than in a normal tonearm ! !

All those are facts and you or Mr. Gomez can’t do nothing to change it. Pure mathematics reality.

You posted in that review: """ Marc Gomez has chosen null points of 80 and 126mm instead of the more commonly used 66 and 121mm. """

that’s a deep misunderstood on tonearm/cartridge alignment input/output calulations in the overall equations used for that alignment:


In the same is not true your statement: """ the more commonly used 66 and 121mm. """

that " commonly " just does not exist and only depends of the standard choosed for the calculations.

There are several other things in that SAT design that not only are not orthodox but that has a negative influence in what we are listening it:

he said that the tonearm owner can change the bearing friction levels and this characteristics could tell to you that’s a " good thing " but it’s not but all the way the opposite because makes not a fully 100% steady bearings.

Ask you a question?: why the best top cartridges use cantilevers of boron and not carbon fiber, it does not matters that laminated carbon fiber the SAT has.

Carbon fiber is way resonant no matter what. In the past existed cartridges with CF cantilever and sounds inferior to the boron ones. ....................................................................................................................................................................... the designer was and is proud that the tonearm self resonance happens at around 2.8khz, go figure ! ! !. It happens way inside the human been frequency range instead to stays out of that frequency range. """"

Dear friends and owners of the SAT: way before the mounted cartridge on it hits the very first LP groove and against any other vintage or today tonearm you have way higher distortions that per sé preclude you can listen a real and true top quality level performance and does not matters the audio system you own.

What we can listen through the SAT is an inferior quality performance levels with higher distortions. Obviously that all reviewers and owners like those heavy distortions but that does not means they are rigth because and with all respect all of them are wrong.

Some one send the link of what I posted to the SAT designer and latter on ( I do not knew he read my post. ) I ask for him for the information about the effective mass of the SAT. He gave me a " rude " answer and did not disclose that information that in reallity was not important in that moment.

I have to say that at least two professional reviewers bougth the SAT tonearm., both with the Continnum/Cobra TT/tonearm. At least one of them say the SAT outperforms the Cobra one ( maybe both, who knows why bougth it the other reviewer. )

The credentials of the SAT designer are impecable and really impressive ones but no single of those credentials speaks about audio and certainly not on analog audio.

He is a true " roockie " enthusiast ( and I say it with respect.) and obviously that is welcomed in the high-end " arena/area/ring " where all of us are learning at each single day. Any one that’s marketing an audio item has a true merit and this is not under discussion: SAT designer has his own merit for that.

You that are reading this thread permit me to ask: what do you think, overall, about?, at the end audiophiles are the ones that has the last " word " or should be that way.

Regards and enjoy the MUSIC NOT DISTORTIONS,


Ag insider logo xs@2xrauliruegas
Admit it Raul, you really want one of these but are just trying to talk yourself out of it.   ;) :)
Only if you need some evidence that will stand up in court to prove you are insane .
Btw the SAT tonearm is now discontinued and will be replaced with two new models . One of them is a 12 inch.

 You would be so happy your 30k tonearm is obsolete in only a few years
Dear @ferrari275: """  this person initiating the thread has never owned nor heard one.  ...."""

agree but that is not the main subject here and elsewhere.

What we ( you, me or any one else. ) like it or not is non-important but to stay truer to the recording, this is my main home audio system/room target.

Now, please let me know if ( even that you have the kind of money to do it. ) or ask your self:

will you buy a  new Ferrari Testa Rossa knowing that it has/comes with a motor/engine manufacturer defect/failure?

Well, that's something similar on what happens with the SAT tonearm and even worst than that. 
The whole SAT subject goes " deeper " that what we can imagine and let me explain a little on it:

- it's incredible that all the prpofessional reviewers and tonearm distributors along the tonearm designer never ask by it self: WHAT AM I REVIEWING OR SELLING OR DESIGNED FOR ???

-  the tonearm was reviewed by at least two gentlemans considered in the AHEE as the analog " gurues ", no one knows more than they. Obviously that the corrupted AHEE tell us a different history here.

- I'm not a professional reviewer not even a reviewer but only a learning ecah single day audiophile but even that I'm only a simple " mortal " in the last years I don't trust any more in that corrupted AHEE and the SAT tell to all of us the whys/facts.

- a professional reviewer has at least a  minimum responsability that's to inform audiophiles what is happening " down there " in any item review and no one of those gentlemans did it and I'm convinced ( I have facts ) that they did not by their ignorance levels on the SAT subject.

- I want to think that the designer did not disclosed those numbers by " ignorance " too because if he knew those " numbers " and choosed not disclose it then the situation is really critical. So, it's better for all us to think was by his ignorance levels on that regards.

- I made the SAT calculations first to know if those 30K+ dollars comes with a true advantages over what exist in the market and to my surprise I found out that it not only does not comes with advantages but that comes with true disadvantages even before the mounted cartridge on it can hits the first LP groove ! ! ! 

- as I told MF: good that you like it but problem is that what you like are only higher distortions. Obviously that those higher distortions is what like too the other reviewers and all those SAT owners that losted ( this is the rigth word: losted. ) 30K+ dollars .

- I'm in " shock " that no one analized nothing on the SAT overall design ! ! !   This was and is the analog centuries " stampede ": 

" hey why are we running ?  don't ask and keep running .  To where?  : never mind and keep running .  Ovbiously  to nowhere, a complete disaster.

But look what one of those regarded reviewers said it: 

"""  What I found fascinating is thatbMarc tracked my two cartridges ( Atlas and A95 ) way below their recommended VTF with no mistracking. That results in less groove deformation as well as less wear and tear on stylus. .......................................................................................................

Let's say listening to the SAT arm really answers a lot of questions about the analog medium. It is a very special arm.  """

Sure is very special but he ignored why is so special ! ! ! ? ? ? ?  That reviewer was the worst ignorant of all them.

You posted:

Nevertheless, the SAT tonearm remains on my short list .  """

Go a head and welcomed to the AHEE where all of us belongs.

Regards and enjoy the MUSIC NOT DISTORTIONS,

I have a SAT, before that I used SME V and Graham Elite on my TechDAS Air Force One turntable. SAT has blown the previous two arms away by a very clear margin.

I am not a scientist, just a music lover. The sound from SAT is simply better, more resolution, more dynamic and less noise.

The overhang from SAT protractor is much larger than other. I used Acoustical Systems smartractor to try different settings. The sound was not as good. They are dim and flat when compared with SAT one. You may call it as distortion, but to me it is a distortion in a good sense.

I know a few SAT users, all of them are very happy with it. Tango in Thailand actually bought a second SAT after the first one to be installed onto his multiple turntables. The fact and the sound speaks for itself.

SAT is a good tonearm. I have no doubt about it. Listening is believing.