2. analog
  3. 161137-245

TONEARM DAMPING : DAMPED OR NOT ? ? USELESS ? ? WELCOMED ? ?

Dear friends: This tonearm critical subject sometimes can be controversial for say the least. Some audiophiles swear for non damped tonearms as the FR designs or SAEC or even the SME 3012 that is not very well damped in stock original status.

Some other audiophiles likes good damped tonearms.


In other thread a gentleman posted:


"  If a cartridge is properly matched to the tonearm damping is not required. " and even explained all what we know about the ideal resonance frequency range between tonearm and cartridge ( 8hz to 12hz. ). He refered to this when said: " properly matched to the tonearm ".


In that same thread that a Triplanar tonearm owner posted:


" This is the one thing about the Triplanar that I don't like. I never use the damping trough...... I imagine someone might have a use for it; I removed the troughs on my Triplanars; its nice to imagine that it sounds better for doing so. "


At the other side here it's a very well damped tonearm:


https://audiotraveler.wordpress.com/tag/townshend/


Now, after the LP is in the spining TT platter ( everything the same, including well matched cartridge/tonearm.  ) the must critical issue is what happens once the cartridge stylus tip hits/track the LP grooves modulations.

The ideal is that those groove modulations can pass to the cartridge motor with out any additional kind of developed resonances/vibrations and that the transducer makes its job mantaining the delicated and sensible signal integrity that comes in those recorded groove modulations.

 That is the ideal and could be utopic because all over the process/trip of the cartridge signal between the stylus tip ride and the output at the tonearm cable the signal suffers degradation (  resonances/vibrations/feedback ) mainly developed through all that " long trip " .


So, DAMPING IS NEED IT AT THE TONEARM/HEADSHELL SIDE OR NOT?


I'm trying to find out the " true " about and not looking if what we like it or not like it is rigth or not but what should be about and why of that " should be ".


I invite all of you analog lovers audiophiles to share your points of view in this critical analog audio subject. WHAT DO YOU THINK ABOUT?


Thank's in advance.



Regards and enjoy the MUSIC NOT DISTORTIONS,
R.






Ag insider logo xs@2xrauliruegas
bukanona
174 posts
 
noromance - there is major difference
750 - ball bearings
850 - knife edge bearings
if to look into all knife edge bearings - SAEC, SME and new Jelco series all of them looks ok without extra damping.
Ikeda/FR uses spring  + weight for that purpose
Dynavector uses magnet
Alfred who modifies cheap Ortofon tonearms from the past uses balsa inside the tube


mijostyn's avatar
mijostyn
8,570 posts
 
Raul, all the clowns I know are really nice people. Pretty smart also.
I think you do them an injustice relating them to ignorant. 
antinn
395 posts
 
@rauliruegas,

You and @lewm have it right - every application is different.  Its more than the just the cartridge and its compliance.  There is a decent article on tonearms in this Audio Magazine https://worldradiohistory.com/Archive-All-Audio/Archive-Audio/80s/Audio-1980-06.pdf, and as stated in the magazine - all materials have some damping capacity - https://sites.utexas.edu/taleff/files/2019/10/jmatersci_v28n9y1993p2395.pdf.

The tonearm manufacture is literally between a rock and hard spot trying to design a tonearm for the multitude of table and cartridge designs that all together form a resonant system.  But, as has been stated, if your cartridge has the option for viscous damping then it may be worthwhile trying - but its success aside from table/cartridge could also be music type - maybe good with classical but not with vocals.  All the more reason for multiple arms and/or multiple tables LOL.

Just some thoughts.
atmasphere's avatar
atmasphere
11,807 posts
 
many years ago Sumiko marketed the Analog Survival Kit that is a great analog accesory.
A friend of mine, Warren Gehl (currently at ARC) was the designer of this product. I had pre-production and production sample that I used on my SME5, which really did seem to benefit from it, although it raised the mass of the arm which limited the number of cartridges I could use.

Eventually I moved to the Triplanar, which has a damped arm tube and so I didn't need the Analog Survival Kit any longer. IMO, if you really want the most out of an LP, the arm tube should be damped in some manner.


Warren also designed the platter pad I use. It is very effective in damping vibration in the LP, so it can't talk back to the stylus as its tracking the groove. Warren only made a few of these mats (less than 50) and the last one I saw sold used went for about $1200.00. IMO/IME the platter pad is an unsung but very important part of the LP playback alchemy.
mijostyn's avatar
mijostyn
8,570 posts
 
Atmasphere, I thought we were talking about oil or silicone based damping systems with troughs, paddles and goo. Obviously arm tubes can't ring which is why aluminum is frequently used. Stuff makes a worthless bell. It is the additional damping required to control a pronounced resonance peak you might see with certain arm cartridge combinations the worst being a very compliant cartridge in a heavy arm.
Schroder uses wood arm wands because of their extremely damp nature.
Kuzma machines aluminum conically to spread the resonance out of existence. SME does the same but in magnesium another relatively dead metal but lighter. Triplanar uses a composite tube with "coaxial damping" whatever that is. It also has a trough but I have never seen it in use and I suspect it would only be useful if you stuck something on it like a Shure V15. I have no idea why you would do that but hey, people do silly things.
More to discover