Strange Tonearm Tweak. Long

Colitas, yes, I drilled the bases of the lead weights to fit the cap-nuts on the bearing axle. You have to use a 1/4" drill to do the depth of the rounded part of the cap nut, and 5/16" to fit over the flats of the nut. It is really 23/32", but if you use 5/16" and ream it a little bit, then it fits over nicely. I recommend super glue because it sets fast, but if you want to make it easily removeable, you can use clear silicone seal. It takes overnight to dry with silicone seal, so you need to make sure that you have the weights securely positioned during the glue-drying process.

Hey TWL are you still checking this thread? When you say you drilled into the bases are you talking about the lead weights? I would like to try this on my RB300. When you attached them did you just glue yhem on with super glue?

I just installed Tom's Hi-Fi mod, and it made a significant improvement to the sound. I hear way better bass - much tighter, more defined. Also, the trebble is more refined - I had been experiencing some sibilence on some slight high pitched vocals, but that's gone now. Finally, there is more detail - I'm hearing things I didn't hear before. Thanks Tom for a terrific mod!! (My vinyl rig is Teres 135/OL Silver/Shelter 501MKII).

The Well-Tempered Arm is already pretty well damped. There is sand in the arm tube, and a big glob of silicone under the bottom of the stabilization disc. If anything, it may even be over damped. I strongly doubt that you are getting any ringing from that arm.

Perhaps as Basement states, you might get some benefit from doing something to the support housing for the arm. I don't know about that. I never tried doing any Well-Tempered mods.

The arm. I thought that perhaps there would be some significant gains there, but don't know much about it.

Thanks

You mean damping in the turntable, or arm, or what?

Thanks for the tips, Tom. BTW, the WT is an unsuspended table, so no worries of weight on the string bouncing around. Any ideas on vibration damping?

Jim, the hanging counterweight is good on my arm, but I don't know how it will affect the Well-Tempered. If the turntable doesn't bounce around much, it may be ok. It is not too good on Linns and tables that have springy suspensions. Also, if you are going to try it, I'd recommend using a rubber O-ring slid onto your end-stub at the correct place, and using that to stop the string from sliding backwards when you cue the tonearm. I found that without the O-ring as a "stop", the string wants to ride backward on the tonearm when you cue it, and then you lose your VTF setting, and it is a pain in the butt. The O-ring placed behind the string, at the correct point for the proper VTF setting, keeps the string from sliding and will retain your VTF setting, and is much more pleasant to use.

It is worth a try to use the hanging counterweight. It's cheap and easy to fabricate. If it doesn't do well in your application, it's no big loss. You can always go back to adding weight to your existing counterweight, like you were going to do.

The main idea is to hang it like a swing, with the string going across the arm tube, and holding the counterweight cross-wise, so it doesn't rotate around. Just hook the string to both ends of the lead bar. This works in my application, and the rubber O-ring keeps it in place on the end stub. It takes a little fiddling to find the exact place on the end-stub for the O-ring to be, but a few minutes with the VTF scale, and some very fine placement adjustment of the ring, will give you the proper spot. Once this is done, you can even totally remove the counterweight, and then replace it with the string against the front edge of the O-ring, and you have the same VTF setting. It is like a place holder. It just stops the string from sliding backwards. It isn't a clamp for the string, just a slide-stop.

Make the lead bar the same, or slightly heavier than your existing counterweight. Make the string the right length, so that when you hang the weight on your end-stub, the lead bar is about at the same level as the platter surface. Then slide the O-ring onto the end-stub, adjust the position until you get correct VTF with the string right up against the front edge of the O-ring. That's it.

Hopefully, there will be no parts of the tonearm housing that will be in the way of this during use. If there is, then you have to modify, or go back to Plan A.

Tom- Would I be better off hanging a lead weight off the end stub than attaching lead to the bottom of the counterweight on the WT? Thought that lead on the counterweight would also serve to dampen vibration, something that decoupling would not achieve.

I would suppose that, if using a hanging weight, the shortest string possible would be better to keep it from swinging?

Basement, regarding your thoughts on counterweight mass and absorbing vibrations, I have developed a new hanging counterweight for my arm that totally de-couples the mass from the arm, and the only thing that contacts the end-stub is a short length of fishing line. The counterweight is a lead bar that hangs under the end-stub like a swing, at the height of the platter surface. I have found that this beats the holy hell out of the Expressimo Heavyweight on my arm, and I am using it exclusively now. The sound is way more open and unencumbered, and really kicks ass. In my case, I found that getting the mass of the counterweight off the tonearm shaft entirely, really opened up the sound. With this counterweight and the HiFi mod, I am really in the top league with this tonearm now.

Basement- I'm not clear on the WT arm tweak you mention of arm wrap on the base- exactly where do you mean?

I'm going to try adding lead to the bottom of the counterweight next week. Maybe an ounce (25 grams). Any other WT tweaks you've heard of?

Thanks
Jim

YEAH!! I dig tweaking. It sounds like your ideas should work real well for a # of reasons, so here is my pre-feedback on your proposal- I have had great success adding lead to the couterweights of all the arms I have tried it with. My origoinal goal was to increase the mass of the arm (If I recall correctly, it was because I read that this was a tweak applied to the well tempered arm, replacing the counterwieght with a heavier one). When considering this keep in mind that there is a difference between what is referred to as effective mass and mass. Effective mass is the 'effect' that the mass has on the inertia of the arm. As twl states, increasing the mass of the counterwieght and moving it closer is a perfect example of increasing mass without changing the effective mass. Twl's mod is an example of the opposite- the mass applied at the pivot changes the effect in the vertical plane very little, while the effect on the horizontal is increased disproportionally. So, if you were to consider a graham arm with adjustable sidewieghts, and spread the sidewieghts out from the pivot equally, the mass does not incease, but the horizontal effective mass increases because it then takes more force to effect movement in that plane. The vertical effective mass remains unchanged because the weight remains at the same point relative to vertical movement.
The reason I go into this so much is because if you see a picture of the newest version of the immedia arm, you will notice that mr. perkins has moved to a scheme that has the counterwieghts extended out to the sides. He has increased the effective mass in the plane that effects azimuth.
The immedia is a unipivot, so stability in this area is important, and the well tempered is also a unipivot, with a very similar damping scheme.
The rb-series is not a unipivot, so the azimuth is fixed, and while the aftermarket counterwieghts do move the mass of the arm lower, I wonder how much of the improvement is because the mass is lower, or because the properties of energy absorbtion. With a counterwieght that is perfectly round with it's energy transfer dead center, the energy would be reflected back equally and at the same time, and if the point of energy transfer is off center, this may serve to be an effective way of breaking this up. As evidence I would point out the reported success of mods that change the tension of the rear stub of the rb-type arms and they're success relative to these droppoed counterwieghts.
And also, regarding mass for benifits of energy absorbtion, One of the best tweaks for the well tempered arm was arm wrap on the base, and also, the immedia arm first had a base that was very similar to the base of the well tempered arm, until it was changed to the heavy stainless piece it is now, and the success the graham 2.0 has because of it's heavier base over the 1.5.
I am looking foward to hearing about your results.

Jim, there would be no problems, as long as you don't make the mass of the counterweight so high as to not be able to move it close enough to the pivot to allow counterbalancing of the cartridge. The heavier you make the counterweight, the closer it must be positioned to the pivot, in order to balance the arm. At some point, you can make it so heavy that you run out of room to move it forward on the arm, because you run into the bearing housing. That's the limit. Put the additional weight at the bottom where it will do the most good for lowering the center of mass.

Tom- In your tweek, the effective mass of the arm doesn't change. Doing what I propose on the WT would change the effective mass in the same way as the heavy teardrop counterweight would- correct? If so, would there be any downside? (I suppose that the length of the arm is sufficient leverage to handle an extra ounce of counterweight, though.)

Thanks for your comments.

Regards
Jim

Jimbo, you can do what you are proposing, and it will improve the sound to some degree.

The improvements, however, will come from the lowering of the center of gravity of the counterweight, and not from increasing the horizontal mass component of the tonearm. This is because when you increase the mass of the counterweight by adding the lead tape, you will have to move the counterweight closer to the pivot in order to balance the cartridge. As such, the mass components as the cartridge sees them, will remain the same, or at least very similar. But lowering the center of gravity of the counterweight by adding the lead tape will improve the tracking of the cartridge and I suspect the improvement will be audible.

Due to the things I mentioned above, I think that adding the lead tape at the very bottom of the counterweight would be the most productive place to put it, in terms of making the most sonic improvements. If you have to make several layers on top of each other, to get the desired effect, then that is what you should do. Bringing the majority of the counterweight mass down near the level of the platter is known to improve the tracking performance.

However, I don't think that it will do anything for increasing the horizontal mass component. But hey, any improvement is worth doing, right? It's innovative, and cool to do your own tonearm mods.

Tom et al- After considering all that has been brought up on this thread and how I could apply it to a Well Tempered table, I've come up with a simple method that might work, but I'd like thoughts/opinions from the group on it before proceeding. Here it is (You may have to look at the WT website to picture the Record Player arm)-

Quite simply, mount "X(?)" amount of the aforementioned lead tape to the the left and right side of the counterweight, but below the level of the arm tube. This would provide the stability of the "teardrop" shaped counterweight (and possibly some resonance control) and maybe a little more lateral than vertical damping. (Yes, I know it would be better to have the weight at the pivot point, but the WT arm's pivot point is unusual.)

I don't think there should be a concern about bearing wear except that the string just needs to be able to support the additional weight. (It's 12 lb test fishing line)

The only problem I foresee is being able to fine-tune the tracking force as, with the additional weight, a little movement will create alot of tracking force change. I guess it would be possible to add a fine-tuning counterweight of some sort.

Anybody care to weigh in with suggestions?

Thanks
Jim

Zaikesman, yes I think that is possible. I have tried to build several tensegrity constructions, and they all have problems with rigidity. It seems that the wires that I used always had some amount of stretch to them, and this always resulted in flex of the structure. Very disappointing. But it is a very cool concept.

Back to the Tensegrity subject for a sec: Visited Frank Lloyd Wright's Taliesin West in Phoenix recently, and there was an obviously handmade Tensegrity sphere (composed from wooden rods with some kind of natural fiber cord and about a foot in diameter) diplayed sitting atop one of the living room tables and looking fairly old. Unfortunately, our tour guide knew nothing about the object or its provenence, but it seemed solely decorative in purpose. Could FLW himself have toyed with this construction, and also come to the conclusion that fascinating as it was, its only practical application is purely asthetic?

a wonderful thread.. i've learned a lot. thanks twl for this post!!

I should be working instead of spending time here, but I can't help myself. Besides, I have had a lot of benifit and fun from the interest this thread has spurned, so I feel I should put in another 2 cents.
Thank you Mr. Rockonroni for mentioning your appreciation. Your description of how it effects how you can easier identify mistracting and setup is insightful. It is helpful that you mention such because besides the obvious advantage of being able to set up better, it is an indication that what is lost are likely distortions, and what is gained is likely more accurate. I should mention that my experience in that area mirrors yours; mistracting errors seem to be easier to identify for what they are, they seem to 'stick out' more obviously.
I think it worth mentioning that although I have not wieghed it, the mass the HIFI adds is closer to the immedia than without, (I say I haven't wieghed it but it is obvious enough it is not nessesary to know that), so the only issue would be the correlation between mass and sonic benifit, not any danger of excess wear or damage (or not functiong or tracking properly).
Furthermore, the sample I got (the only one I have used) came reamed out to fit one the ends, but not with any glue, and I fastened it by pressing it on, and did not use anything to help hold them. They fit pretty darn good at first, but one would occasionally fall off. As this continued they fit less secure. I then put more effort into 'cramming' them on and I noticed the sound improved. Perhaps there is a correlation with the fact that they are lead and right at the bearing, having some sort of damping effect, similar to other mods that have been succesful on rega's.

Eldartford, any spindle centering problems cause quite slow moving variations in the tracking of the groove by the tonearm. This mod handles that with no trouble whatever. Any relatively slow movement of the arm in a side-to-side direction, can easily be managed, and are managed by a tonearm with this mod. A record with even 1/8" off-center hole punch will only vary by 1/4" over a full rotation, and it is spread out over the whole rotation. This is nothing that would cause a modded arm to have any trouble. The arm moves with the groove as it tracks toward the center of the record quite accurately, manages off-center records as well as that arm ever did without the mod, and makes sound better. I'd consider that a successful result. If the arm has a wildly off-center hole punch, I'd consider that a defective record, and I don't design my arms to handle defective records, to the detriment of their ability to play normal records better. You could also say that if a record has a warp like a potato chip, then an arm wouldn't handle it, but is that the fault of the record or the arm? Even so, my modded arm tracks off-center records like a champ.

Low inertia is needed in the vertical plane so as to track warped records. But many records don't have the spindle hole placed exactly right, so there is some side-to-side arm motion, similar to warp but in the other plane. Your arm modification would make that problem worse.

Ted, the needed lateral mass is relative to the compliance of the cartridge suspension. The lower the compliance(stiffer), the more lateral mass is needed for proper stabilization of the arm.

Hi Tom
I was reading all the responses to your tweak and got a stiff neck! I don't have the technical mastery of theoretical parameters of the tonearm's design. I have a very good intuitive understanding of the fundamental physics that are involved in a correct design, one that employs natural principles to it's function. This is the reason that I regard the frictionless "Schroeder" type of arm to be the most natural sounding which also implies that it must be the most musical sounding. The German reviewer said so when he compared it with the SME and other top quality arms. It didn't have the best base,(which is understandable given it's design) even though all the information was there, but in the concert hall, one does not hear "base" standing out, but a seamless wall of sound.
I have designed one such tonearm but I am stuck in the technical aspects of how much strength the magnets that stabilize the arm should have, so that it's inertia relative to it's mass, is not excessive. This of course can be achieved by increasing the magnet's gap so that their strength is decreased making the lateral motion easier.
What I am asking is, if there is a formula that can be understood by a layman, to calculate how strong the resistance of the arm should be in proportion to it's mass. In other words, what is their ideal ratio?
Thanks in advance!
Ted

I'm real happy that you like the mod, Ron. Thanks for your great descriptions about the sonic improvements. I've even been getting some more interest from others in the HiFi mod now. Maybe it will actually "catch on" after all. I just like to improve my system, and thought others would like the nice benefits of something I figured out. Everybody seems to have the same reaction. Usually they just say, "WOW!", like you did earlier.

I wanted to respond to Basements post of 10-06-02
First of all thank you for your post, a lot of thought and work went into it.
You seem to ask a question about arm movement and cantilever movement.
As Tom stated in his original post, with a low compliance cartridge like a 501,the one we both use, this demands a lot from a tonearm. The lower frequencies are always harder to reproduce because this energy is most times so difficult for the cartridge to trace. The bass energy moves the arm not the cantilever.

With the Hi FI mod you can now hear so much more bass information it is scary. This proves Toms theory that the arm is working better. The loss of those high end frequencies is I believe as you stated, really a loss of distortion, because everything is so much clearer,has more detail, more information.

I just wanted to add that I have in the past had trouble setting my VTA. This is a thing of the past, with the arm working so well it is now very easy for me to hear where the vta is best. I now have two settings, one for 180-200 grams and one for the rest.

This is another reason I like the Origin Live Aurora Table with its open design it only takes me 10 seconds to make a VTA adjustment.

Origin live states you should not tighten the base nut of the Silver Tonearm to tightly because it deadens the sound this is also much easier to hear now.

Thanks again Tom, this is truly a mod for the ages. We all struggle to improve our systems, new amps, speakers, wire cryo, you name it, but this mod does so much to improve the sound. One cannot over state it's significance. I have not heard a Rockport or Walker, but NOW, I think I now know how they sound, really its that good. I know I can improve my system more, and when I do, it will not be as dramatic as this mod, but I hope and pray that it is.

Sure David. This mod was originally designed for the OL Silver tonearm, and can just as easily be applied to any Rega tonearm. There may be others that could benefit, but I haven't actually tried any others. The key factor is that they must have a bearing yoke arrangement where the weights can be attached to the bearing axle locations without interfering with anything else in the mechanism. Some arms have an enclosure or housing surrounding the bearing yokes, and this is something that would preclude the use of this mod. The Rega and OL Silver arms have very open architecture in this area, and are easy to mod with these weights. At this time, I have not tried to use this on any unipivot arms, and I am hesitant to recommend its use for unipivots, because generally the result would have negative results on the vertical behavior of the arm. It is critical for this mod to be directly concentric with the bearing axle that controls vertical movement, so that it has no effect in that plane of motion. With a unipivot, that location is very difficult to achieve.

Tom, can you share, in a general sense, the types of arms on which this mod can and cannot be implemented?

Hi Tom, Im back in the game. Whenever you have time, lets discuss feasobility of the beta-mod on my ancient rig {Pluto audio 6A Special arm (plutoaudio.nl) / S Yorke S4 / Clearaudio Insider -- stiff}.

Thanks, Tim.

Tom:

I have kept returning to this thread with interest over the months, and while the market for you to go full retail may still be evasive, I would like to jump into the water as a paying customer.

As I've mentioned in other threads, I have an RB-600 and am currently running a Dynavector 20xh cart. Can you email me directly with purchase price for your HIFI mod and any installation hints, as well as any setup adjustments you'd recommend based on my current cartridge?

Thanks!

Tim

So far, a grand total of 5 beta-users. All very happy.

Nrchy, it appears momentum may yet be building slowly... :-) Twl, with Roni on board, what is the grand total of beta-adopters?

WOW! WOW!! WOW!!! WOW!!!! WOW!!!!! WOW!!!!!! WOW!!!!!!!
God Bless Tom W. Lyons "esquire"
Thank you so much Tom, It’s as if some one has remastered my Record collection.

It is truly a shame that this tweaek did not take off. The cost is virtually nothing and the benefits are huge. There is nothing a person could do to their turntable or arm that will is this cheap and sounds this much better. A person could spend hundreds of dollars on a better arm that would not be as much of an improvement.
TWL should be in line for the tweak of the year award. This is a product that should have been incorporated in better arms for years. Why it has not been done before is anyone's guess, but it should be done now.
The improvement is not subtle, it makes a dramatic differerence.
Anyone who has a pivoting tonearm needs to have this. Even if a person is not handy! This is easy to do, and worth the minimal cost.

Best of luck, Twl, with whatever venture you may undertake to market your idea - have you sought patent advice? I'm just sorry that I can't try it out for myself, as I would love to be able to test this on my own ears. Well, I returned Saturday from a brief out-of-town excursion, and as usual, I came home laden with scrounged vinyl, so at least I have something to console myself with!

Interestingly enough, I did have the vta adjusted like this for the second part of my listening. Before this, I was careful to match the vta to where the vta was on the immedia, which is usually about 1 millameter higher at the beginning of the record with the cartridge just before the lead out groove. While in readings it seems that that is unusually high, both me and my dealer found the same vta for the clavis seperately before we consulted each other. I found this true with the lydian as well. Every other cartridge I have used has been with the vta lower in the back.
That experience alone has made me pay attention to vta. While tonal balance can be affected, I don't adjust vta for it. I don't think that you have either, but right off I would think that the mod is allowing for a set up that is more orietated to extracting more detail, rather than subtracting it in the mod itself. As I have listened to it a little more, I have no indication that there is anything odd or incorrect in the tonal balance. Subjectively I would say it is more correct.
A freind of mine stopped by while I was playing a record, and he commented on how good the system is sounding. He hears my stereo often but he is a non-audiophile.
I am still in the direction that there is improvement to be had in the rb that is more revealed by this mod, rather than that it is just a trade off for the improvement in other areas. I have always thought that the rb sounded a little weird, somehow, in it's energy, and the reviews that I have read, all think it is a great arm but every reviewer, evan those of a glowing review, have something they hear that keeps them from putting it at the top of the best they ever heard, or what they believe is the best, etc.
And also, bear in mind the reputation for the tonal qualities of the immedia.
This is one of the most fun and promising mods I have done in a long time, my own or purchased, or tried from another's idea, maybe the best. I hope you get the credit you deserve, because you (twl) have brought me much enjoyment in the sound evan if I was to leave it at this.
But don't think I will.

Glad you guys are enjoying the mod. I emailed Basement and suggested a VTA change to restore the tonal balance. With the added authority of the bass info provided with the HiFi mod, it is concievable that a VTA change could be in order. I speculate that a slight rise in VTA will give him the mids and highs that he wants, and more detail will be shown there too. With his VTA previously adjusted for the tonal balance of the unmodded arm, this mod just may require that VTA adjustment. I needed to adjust mine also.

Nate, if you didn't notice as much bass improvement as you may have liked, you might try lowering your VTA a slight amount, and see how you like that.

I am very happy that this has been an improvement for both of you, as well as for myself. I think that this is absolutely a Kick-Ass mod.

I am looking into the packaging and marketing aspects of this right now.

TWL, it looks like you are getting a little following here. As the opportunity has presented itself I have continued to listen to my TT and hearing better sound on familiar recordings.
I have an original Columbia six eye Dave Brubeck LP on right now. WOW! Detail I never heard before, air, soundstage, and bass. I want to glance over my shoulder and see the guy playing the horn. It sounds so real.
I had considered selling the RB 900 for a while, but as I hear it now, why would I want to sell???

I have finally recieved the HIFI mod for my rb-300, and I have to say that evan though I had ideas of how it would sound, I am stunned.
First off, it is important for me to state that my system is lower in resolution than what I have been used to, and I have to state that it is more than likely lower in resolution than most of the systems that poeple would likely have that wanted to add these sidewieghts. I point the finger solely at the vanderstten 2ci's, while the are sweet sounding, and convey the music, and make the room sound quite good, they lack accuracy. I am not driving them with the best amp for them currently as well.
The reason this is important to say is because to get the 2ci's to stage, to pinpoint, (one of the inherent strenghts of vinal) and to play clean at the same time is more of an accomplishment to be able to hear with these speakers.
The other arm that I am using is an older model immedia. Comparisms are nessesary because frankly right now the immedia is a better arm. It conveys more detail and information. There is roughly twice the cymbal info, separates the midrange instruments better, offers an easier to define bass line.
But compared to the rb-300, the rb does something the immedia can't seem to get. It boogies. The bass is subjectively more involving, more of a tune. The voices of instruments seem to come out with more emotion. While a simple a-b between the two would reveal that to almost anyone, the immedia would be more accurate, and better, what the rb does is impossible to ignore. For me, the obvious goal is to make the rb as good as the immedia. At first, I would understand this to be to somehow make the rb convey the low-level detail of the immedia, stage as pinpoint, and be overall more accurate. Direct comparisms between the two would lead me to believe that most of this would happen in the upper frequencies. So a modification that would seem to take the arm in another direction might seem backwards.
At first, it did. upper midrange information seemed to be attenuated. The air that surrounds cymbals, and the vibrations that pop out and accompany certain voices and horns and lead instruments were the first casualties. But while some of this energy that I would initially seek went away, right at that same place was more depth. I was playing ELVIN!, a record in which Elvin jones is miked up front, with Art Davis on bass to the side and toward the back. This is a great recording for finding detail, as part of what makes it so exciting is Elvin's speed and energy on the kit, and the way it was recorded, there is an abundance of different sounds coming from the drums.
While some of the snap from Elvin quickly wacking the cymbals and rims was not as apparent, And Art didn't pop out onto the room quite the same as I have come to expect, Elvin's kit was also wider, and deeper. Art's bass also had what seemed to me another octave down. I couldn't decide which was better, and I knew I was in for more work in listening. this was going to be harder than I had expected, and it was time to pull out the records that I know like the back of my hand, dirty or not, and wear them evan more.
Next was Van's THE HEALING GAME. There is a track that has a lead bass and another playing the low. And on this record, there is a distinct decay that can be heard of the room when Van sings loud. This would surely tell me something. As I expected, There was more separation between the two basses, But what I actually didn't expect, is the definite lower octave of the second bass, that made comparisms betwwen the two moot. Van also, took up more width betwwen the speakers that before. this is curious. He is undoubtably miked in the center no matter which system it is played on, and to hear a voice take more width, that can easily be disterned is baffuling. At the same time, The back up vocalist, who repeats Van, was farther to the right and back, and more of a pinpoint, and smaller. On to another track, with an opening of an organ. The bass pedal of the organ was deeper. This is the stuff that makes me want to listen to the rb more than the immedia, but I still had questions about the detail and accuracy.
For me, this means getting out Cannonball PLUS, the origional issue. This is my most accurate recording. It starts out with Cannonball's horn which is followed by a natural echo that you can follow as the soundwaves travel acrass the room and SLAM into something and scatter. The bass is recorded up front, and the bass player actually speeds up in his exitement, and the drummer struggles at first to keep up. He seems to be hitting the cymbals harder to keep the pace, so there is cymbal sounds scattering all around.
What I heard here was definite. The bass was definitely deeper, there was another octave down that I have never heard before, except on occasion with my Theta. The air that seemed to be missing from the high frequency energy was shown as a resonence that when missing, revealed the cymbal playing, (which is quite loud and up-front on this record) to be the best I have heard on this record so far. Instead of splashing all around the upper left side, there was a cymbal being tossed side to side, that was definite and discernable as a cymbal being tossed as it is being wacked.
I played more records, but I'll sum up here for now. I was able to decrease the tracking force to 1.65 grams and regain some of the lost midband energy, with no buzzing or other audible mistracking. I was able to visualy dicern the slightest cantilever movement, both with the HIFI and without, but not enough to see at this time whether there was a difference, but it was both less than I have observed with other arms at times and within the accuracy that I usually set up the zenith. All records, in an a/b with and without the tweak had a change in staging, which was wider and more behind the speakers, and that is something that the vandy 2ci's have trouble with. The 2ci's don't pinpoint well, but the differences were audibly "visible" as far as distances before and after.
As for the lost energy in some of the frequencies in the upper and mids, I'm right now of the opinion that it could be replaced somewhere else, that would in the end be more accurate and detialed. I can't be sure whether the energy that is lost is from the start inaccurate in the first place, or whether it is revealing another fault in the arm that was not present before, or whether it is actually a side effect of the tweak. I am sure that it adds positve, more accurate effects, in the bass and in the staging qualities. It moves the overall performance farther away from the immedia, in the tonal presentation and the presentation in the mids, but closer in the pinpointing and staging, (something the damping effects in the immedia, hmmm), but the bass the immedia just can't do.
In the effort to get better sound, more accurate in some or all areas, rather than add to the qualities that are good it is more accurate to subtract those that are bad, evan as it initially seems to go in the opposite direction. In the end this is where transparencey and exitement is.
In my case, the HIFI stays.
And this is just the sound, what it is actually doing I am still with my origional guesses, that are posted above, but I have less doubt that the cantilever is moving in relation to the coils. It is not an issue anymore, as far as damage or evan having a negative effect on the sound, but what is still a guess for me is what it is really doing. The difference in horizontal mass and vertical mass, is still something I think may be something to pay more attention to.
I wonder if this is measuruble, definable and proveable, and I actually wonder what arm may possibly be as accurate in the bass as this. It has taken me a while to write this, and I have actually never heard a vinal playback system have such an accurate, full bass. It would take a direct comparism to know, with more than my humble system.
Its time to step up to the newest of grahams and immedias, the wheatons and such. It is past the older immedia and the rega's.

I've always wanted to see a tensegrity application for some common practical purpose, but there is none I'm aware of. It's just so damn cool, I want tensegrity to be good for something beyond spheroid toys and Kenneth Snelson towers. I doubt a tensegrity stucture would really be useful for a tonearm, but I have wondered whether it may be helpful as an isolation suspension device for components, maybe even TT's.

Just to make an announcement, this mod now has an official name. It is called the HI-FI(Horizontal Inertial Force Increaser). Assuming a positive response from Basement, I will begin to look into a market for these products.

Zaikesman, the articulated arm you referred to was the Garrard Zero-100 Zero Tracking Error system. I had one of those in the early 70's. The main problems were cheap construction and implementation. The system itself could work with modern materials like carbon fiber and a quality implementation.

I would agree with your assessment that the fluid damping and the horizontal mass modification seem to have different characteristics, even though we speculated that they might have similar ones. Perhaps a combo of these two might prove to be beneficial.

Yes, I knew that a 4-8 bearing setup on a double wishbone for the headshell would be overly complicated, but I was just dreaming about the exotic. I also dreamed about using a Buckminster Fuller tensegrity column for the arm, in which all forces would be resolved in the tension/compression design. Way too complex, but fun to think about, if you are "strange" like me.

Nate, I'm very happy the mod was effective for your application. This lets me know that the mod is applicable for different compliance ranges, and that is good. My initial assessment of your results compared with mine, is that your compliance is higher, so the bass dynamics were not as affected as mine(lower compliance)was,but the general information pickup was improved. With my stiff compliance, the arm is more likely to be pushed around by the stiff suspension on the cantilever. But the fine detail, air, and authority of piano,bell-sounds, and such, is also improved on my arm with the mod. So now we know that it works on an OL Silver with DL103, and RB900 with Benz Glider. Basement's rig is a RB300 with a Lyra Clavis, so we'll see how that one does.

See, sometimes being a "guinea-pig" Beta tester can be very advantageous. You are presently the only other person in the world with this mod, besides me. Basement is the next victim, and his test units are going out in the mail today. I couldn't go down to the store to get more weights until yesterday. :^)

Actually, Nrchy, what Twl said was that he was 'a little different' (than what, I don't know); *You* said he was a little strange (but who am I to aurgue?). ;^)

I find it very interesting [Sorry to interupt, but y'know, whenever I see that phrase, 'very interesting', around here (and I use it a lot), I can't help but say it to myself in that faux-German voice Artie Johnson said it in on Laugh-In as he peered through the bushes with his binoculars. Do you think I have a problem? Or maybe I'm just...'a little strange'?] Uhmm, where was I - Oh yes, I find it very interesting that Nrchy and I have seemingly arrived at fairly divergent sonic assessments regarding the tweaks we enacted (I just went back up top to reread Twl's original post, but all he specifically remarks on is increased 'dynamics and detail'). This could lead one to believe that the two tweaks (horizontal mass-increase damping, and fluid damping) are really not that closely related in the ways which they operate. Thinking about it, I'm actually surprised no one has offered (to the best of my knowledge) a retrofittable fluid-damping kit for Rega 'arms, considering how ubiquitous the design is. Another market?

Twl, your idea about the VTA-correcting double-hinged 'arm, while not persuasive to me as such (wasn't it you who said something to me, someplace earlier up this thread, about not getting too complicated - besides, I'm still not convinced that a momentary VTA error of a few degrees during a warp is really a big deal), reminds me of another variation on this theme. I believe I remember a design, probably from the 70's, and probably not all that up-market (although I can't think of who actually may have made this for the life of me), wherein the headshell was hinged on a bearing permitting it to rotate in the horizontal plane, and a separately-pivoted (from the tonearm) 'control arm' was employed, not quite parallel to the tonearm but running alongside it on the outside and swivel-attached at the headshell, for constant correction of the headshell's offset angle as the tonearm moved across the record, through a slight 'parallelogram-ing' action. Anybody know what I'm talking about here ('cause I'm not at all certain that I do!)? I do agree, Twl, that something along the lines of a wishbone, truss, or I-beam design would have to be enlisted to make an extra-long tonearm as rigid and non-resonant as it would need to be.

I have to agree with Tom's original statement about him being a little strange. I thought this idea was also a little strange, but since I've corresponded with TWL in the past and I have an arm with which this tweak would work, I contacted him and asked about it. I had to drive to his remote mountain hideout and kidnap some of his cats before he would agree to let me try his invention.
First I sat down and listened to an old favorite. Then I attatched the lead wieghts to my Rega RB 900 arm and sat down for a second run through the same LP. It was a MFSL lp which they claim is able to survive repeated listening. I'm still puzzled about how to explain what I heard the second time around. The strangest aspect of change was the fact that I had to turn down the volume on my pre-amp?!? By the time I was through the first two tracks the differences were more obvious. The soundstage was much different. It wasn't deeper in the sense that it went farther back but it came out farther toward the listening chair. I don't think the soundstage was wider than before but it seems to disipate more gradually. There appears to be more height too. I'm talking about inches not feet, but it's noticeable. And the air! There is much more air around voices and instruments. The LP I listened to had some good Grand Piano and bells. The first time through I noticed them but they were nothing special. The second time there was soo much more presense and authority to them. The bells actually startled me. I expected them, but I did not expect how *real* they were going to sound.
I know this sounds crazy. I'm having a hard time believing it, and I heard it!
TWL is on to something here. I don't know much about the technical aspects of this mod and I know nothing about how it would measure but I told you how it sounds. Go figure!

I have no idea how much the parts and labor would cost to produce this tweak for mass consumption, but for me to buy an arm that sounded that much better than my already good RB 900 would set me back well over $1000. If I could sell my arm for $500 I'd still have to come up with another $700 to $1000 for the better arm. If I could buy this tweak from TWL for $100 I'd be making out like a bandit!

That is an interesting point. You have strange dreams. Do you ever have dreams where you take an rb-250, cut the armtube and put the lead between the two pieces to make it longer?
Actually, seriously, that is a good point. It makes me want to measure this all that much more. It doesn't seem like it would be too hard to measure the differences betwwen the amount of mass as far as their effect, but I am having limited succes learning how. I got a line on a occilascope, but it will have to wait a couple months. I also heard that you could get a computer program and an a/d converter, but I haven't checked that out.
It would be pretty easy to make an armboard, or make more/other appropriate parts I would think, For me I think the hard part would be figuring out how long to make it and figuring the placement of the mass. Actually, figuring out what exactly the mass is doing in a way that could be calculated.

That is an interesting concept Zaikesman. I would attack that in a high rigidity approach. Possibly like a wishbone suspension arm made of carbon fiber and wide spacing at the pivot area, and coming to a "V" at the forward area, where the bearing set for the vertically moving arm would be. The counterweight could then be located between the "V" arms, since there would be much less offset angle. In fact, if you could adjust the bearings close enough, you could use 2 unequal length vertically moving arms, and achieve a "automobile suspension" method of keeping the headshell level, even while tracking a warp. Eliminating VTA changes as it rides the warp. This increases complexity, but sounds like a cool idea.

Now if we could only come up with an idea that would allow us to play scratched records without clicking or skipping, we would really make a million.

Still no word from the Beta testers.

Just to keep things perking along here, while we wait for Twl's beta testers to ring in, I remembered a thought recently which first occurred to me quite some time ago, concerning the Dyna 'arm design discussed above.

I actually had this design idea come to me in a dream (talking now about separated pivot points for the horizontal and vertical components, with the vertical bearing being closer to the cartridge), believe it or not, but realized after I woke up that it was merely a variation on the Dynavector. However, this dream was not about the possibility of increasing the horizontal mass per se.

My dream was inspired by the idea of making such a design in order to greatly increase the tonearm length, for more correct tracing of the groove, and therefore lower distortion, by comensurately reducing the angle errors inherent in any pivoted 'arm, while still maintaining a low vertical mass. This remains a valid concept, but one which Dyna declines to exploit in their normal-length 'arm. One could conceivably employ this type of design to make an 'arm, say, 30" long (with the naturally increased horizontal mass that would come from such a long 'arm), and still achieve a low vertical moving mass by placing that bearing point at a more conventional distance from the cartridge. Such a design would address Twl's theory about higher horizontal mass, while offering tracing accuracy much closer to a linear-tracking 'arm. (It would also allow - indeed, require - the decoupling of the 'armbase from the plinth, something which carries with it both potential advantages and disadvantages, or at least inconveniences.)

Zaik, you're too much!!!

Yes, you got it right--the fluid damper makes the LPs sound closer to the attributes of CDs. This parragraph wraps it all:

"Dynamic events taking place in different areas of the soundstage had less of an effect on one another, permitting the instruments to go about their business without smearing or the imposition of added harshness as compared to before. The result, prehaps paradoxically, was to make gains for my analog reproduction resembling some of the more favorable attributes of CD, for aspects such as separation and contrast, while at the same time actually adding liquidity through the removal of intermodulation. Decays, not the onsets, of transients were the big winners with the damper in place, exhibiting a newfound cleanliness and precision that allowed me follow the flow the music with less guesswork. Image focus became more crystalline-pure and unwaveringly stable, less prone to fluctuate with attacks and crescendos. Although I'm not big on the concept of 'pace', I would actually say that, if anything, the music now seemed to move along at a slightly brisker clip, unencumbered by the dragging disturbance of throwing a larger wake in its trail."

And *that* it's why the damper makes things 'slow down'...there's sooo much music now it seems to warp time!!!

I didn't want to tell you this benefit, for fear of you stigmatizing me as a nut.

Glad you liked it. I think you listened to it too clinically--like a reviewer. Next time get a hold of your favorite "beverage" and/or smokes, relax and enjoy!!!

Get a hold of some funky salsa records...

Adding the Bob Regal foot next to the tonearm gimbal brings more improvement on the bass than the damper, BTW.