The Popularity of the Kuzma 4P (11")

I was looking at my 2019 invoice of a Kuzma 4P and noticed that I had paid $6800 plus taxes (at full retail).  Today, that the price is at $10k - which is almost a 50% increase over a four-year period. Compared to my other two arms- Glanz MH124S and SME 3012 R, performance wise, the Glanz holds the top position with the 4P in close second. I do have to say that the queuing mechanism of the 4P is the best I’ve experienced – super smooth.  I have had no issues with the 4P, but I guess its popularity has increased the price point significantly. I'm also not aware of any improvements since the ruby sapphire cups which were rolled out in ~ 2018. So, is it because the arm is worth $10k or just the way things are going in today's economy or something else?


There are now enough wealthy people willing to pay any amount for what they want. Until that cohort changes its purchasing behavior, vendors can charge what the market will bear. Look at how housing pricing has increased 20-50% almost overnight. Irrespective of supply chain issues, it is apparent that manufacturers are cashing in on the current situation.

First of all, that is retail. Nobody pays retail. Second of all, the Glanz may have a super smooth cueing device but it is an inferior arm on all other accounts. 

I am regularly able to encounter the Glanz 1200S in use, I am not familiar with the 124S.

I was also contributor to the preparations being put in place to choose a Tonearm, of which the 1200S, was to be the chosen model.

The Glanz user had a loan of various Tonearms to be used with their newly acquired SP10 R.

In the line up of loaned TA's were their owned Linn Arm, my owned SME IV, a New Model Reed Arm, and New Model Origin Live Arm.

The idea of maintaining the Linn was quite attractive as Zero Cost was the outcome, the SME IV was of interest as it is commonly seen used at fair asking prices, the Glanz, OL and Reed Arms were to be New Item Purchases, so carefully evaluated.

The Glanz owner wed to the Glanz MH-1200S during this period of demo's and selection.

I have always thoroughly enjoyed the 1200S in use, with their modified Miyajima Cart' and modified Kontrapunkt B Cart'.       


Don't have to. The Glanz is a stable balance arm the 4Point is a neutral balance arm which is inherently more stable. The 4 point arm shaft is much stiffer and better damped. The 4 point does not have an additional set of contacts at the headshell the Glanz does. The 4 point has lower friction bearings with no inherent chatter. The only thing the Glanz has going for it is a nice lifter. The Galnz is an arm I would not give a second look at.

You are welcome.

@rdk777 It does look like you thoroughly enjoy your system as a means to experience your Vinyl collection, and are now aware that machining of materials which are critical to enable this to happen are items that will always appreciate in cost, which is what you are witnessing. It is this impact on the market values that allow for good returns on used sale items. 

A friend recently had a substantial amount of parts produced for their New Tonearm design, as a means to control escalating costs on later produced production runs.

ln relation to your mentioned equipment, I have witnessed a reasonable amount of criticisms of equipment on the Analog Section of this forum, especially equipment that is quite capable of replaying recorded music in a manner that is very comprehensible and able to be enjoyed as a very satisfactory experience by the listener.

It is not uncommon to see the challenges come in from the flanks, presented by a limited number of Forum users, where there is to come worthless digs about the equipment/choices made by a forum member.

The supporting others in their enjoyment of experiencing replays of recorded music as an Vinyl LP medium, seems very low on the schedule of priorities for this limited number of members even though is does seem this idea can surface occasionally as a smoke screen.  

Every so often such types who present themselves in such a manner end up in exchanges that are only to be futile and of very little use to any individual looking in at the present or as a visitor in the future. There seems to be a periodical need to offer only what is on the verge of being unkind, or at the least, only offering the anti-thesis of being helpful, what ever that is to be described as.  

Once more, where is the unadulterated enjoyment of replaying recorded music to be found, where such a attitude, is at the surface. 

Am I a innocent, no I am not, I have seen quite a few acts of the anti-thesis of being helpful, of which my response to such content, has been very real as a result of being observant of what is manifesting.

I have seen with my own eyes the writings of certain types, who in my interpretation have been seen to be quite harsh to an individual who is sharing their own personal experience of equipment in use, (not hearsay, ideas or questionable prejudices based on contempt prior to investigation). There does seem to be a attitude developed between a few, that if the individual is not with the experience of having heard devices of a substantial value in a substantial value system, this is good reason to discount an assessment shared.

Once more, where is the unadulterated enjoyment of replaying recorded music to be found, where such a attitude is at the surface. 

I have through using this forum, come to develop a thick skin and wrecking ball attitude toward certain regular contributors'.

It is not difficult to discover there is an inconsistency from certain contributors in in what is posted, the need to be the authority status is seemingly standout as the underlying ambition/agenda. The ideas spieled out one day within a post as not of any value, are able to be discovered on another day as the accepted method. Simple searches within the forum has proved this to be the case on a regular occasion. 

When the time seems right for me, it is a case of 'let that wrecking ball swing' and come what may, that wrecking ball when very rarely used, has a habit of creating a silence.  

Dear @mijostyn  :  " is a stable balance arm the 4Point is a neutral balance arm which is inherently more stable. "


That is what the theory says: so what? . I owned several tonearms with those both characteristics and others and what really makes the differences is the overall design, selection of build materials and quality level excecution to the tonearm design..


In the other side : " has lower friction bearings with no inherent chatter. " well the 4 point is a 4 unipivots and that's why has lower friction but the Glanz is not severly behind it because its friction level is lower than 10mg that still is a good one. In the side " no inherent chatter " not only you but even Kuzma can't ( till today ) show facts that at playback microscopic level where the tonearm is receiving " fenomenal " " forces " transmited by the stylus tip tracking there is NO chatter been unipivot and even that is founded at 4 points.

Yes, maybe the 4 Point is better damped ( Glanz design shows workind in damping too but I never had a Glanz listening session. ) and I don't know for sure and yse it's not a remobavle headshell as the Glanz but you already know that in the audio world and especially in analog always exist trade offs and nothing is perfect.


As you I don't look again to Glanz but only because I don't need it.  12-16 years ago I bought more than 25-30 tonearms and you can be sure that if Glanz were down there I just buy it.


Anyway, @rdk777  seems to me that the higher price tag in that mimal time has no justification at all but that always exist gentlemans that pay for it and Kuzma as any other audio manufacturer just take advantage of it.


Regards and enjoy the MUSIC NOT DISTORTIONS,




@rauliruegas ,

The view I take is that everything is important. It is not rocket science to design an arm correctly in all respects. Looks is not ever a factor in my decision making. The arm I use is esthetically rather dull. It is also a brilliant arm in my estimation. Are you going to get a Sapphire? Everyone is raving about it. Theoretically it is way to heavy for most cartridges. That does not seem to matter to everyone except maybe bottom dwellers like me. 

@mijostyn : Sapphire? only ignorantas or extremely low knowledge " audiophiles " can go for it and the ones that already own are extremely happy with.

No, it's not yet  a perfect tonearm.




I have a friend with a Sapphire on a CS Port with a Signature Platinum mounted that I expect to hear shortly. I know this cartridge very well and I will play some very bass heavy records and see what happens.


@mijostyn : That cartridge is heavy weigth and low compliance and can works with that Kuzma tonearm but other than theresonance frequency issue is that dynamic mass ( 75grs. ) that looks the cartridge suspension during that heavy tortuose LP grooves tracking and that comes not at " free " but through the time could be negative/degradation consequwences for that cartridge.

The main issue for any cartridge and specially for tonearm designers is to give all facilities to the hard cartridge ridding work and such heavy way heavy tonearm effective mass can’t helps about.


The " problems " issue with that dynamic mass is not for 100-200 play hours and as a fact almost any cartridge can runs in any tonearm including that Kuzma and will sounds good because today and several cartridges in the past can’t sound bad.

Why sapphire/ruby 70grs. instead a stiffer material and way better like boron? is out of my mind and Kuzma really does not gives a wide explanation. Boron is ideal material for a tonearm as is in top cartridges like your Lambda SL.



Also, there’s no justification for the very high cost of the Safir. Hollow tubes made of sapphire in many different sizes are readily available to anyone who wants a bunch, for very low cost. Beyond that it’s a Kuzma like all the other Kuzma tonearms (same parts). This is not to say it’s not a good tonearm, and certainly other Kuzma tonearms are excellent. And yes, the market prices are bizarrely high for no reason except the market among the filthy rich.

By the way, Mijo, the OP was talking about the Kuzma 4- point, when he praised the cueing mechanism, not the Glanz. I gotta agree with Raul, I don’t care much about stable vs neutral balance, in my case because it only matters when the LP is warped, and only then by an infinitesimal momentary change in VTF that is usually inaudible. If it is audible, then the LP needs to be trashed or flattened.


In a macroscopic world you are quite correct. However obvious and visible warps a one thing. What happens at the level of the groove is another. Very few records are perfectly flat. Vacuum clamping gets them close. When was the last time you were on a roller coaster? Think those forces effect tracking? Neutral balance arem follow those microwarps (if you will) better with less force on the stylus. Making an arm neutral balance is not a difficult proposition. There may be some instances such as the Schroder LT were it is impossible due to space constraints, but when it comes to the tortuous life of the stylus in the groove everything matters. If you want to live with a stable balance arm get a turntable with vacuum clamping. 

Oh come on!!!

You’re actually likening an LP that appears flat to visual inspection to a roller coaster ride for the stylus? That’s more than a bit hyperbolic. Not to mention there are many other factors that affect tracking far more.