TriPlanar Tips


The manual that comes with the TriPlanar Mk VII tonearm is fairly complete, but there are a few things I’ve learned only by living with the arm. Note: I do not know which if any of these would apply to previous versions of the arm. My only experience is with the Mk VII.

1. NEVER raise the cueing lever while the arm is locked in the arm rest. This pressures the damping cylinder and could cause a silicone leak. For this reason and also for safety, whenever the arm is in the arm rest the cueing lever should be DOWN. This is backwards from most arms and takes some getting used to.

2. If your Tri-Planar doesn't cue straight down there's a quick fix, which may be included on some new arms. The problem is insufficient friction between the arm tube and the hard rubber cueing support bar. Just glue a bit of thin sandpaper to the underside of the arm tube. Make it big enough and position it so it hits the cueing support bar at all points across the arm’s arc. (Note: after doing this you will need to adjust the cueing height, see Tip #3.)

3. When adjusting cueing height (instructions are in the manual) always do so with the arm in the UP position. This adjustment is VERY touchy, since the cueing support bar is so close to the pivot. Be patient and be careful of your cartridge. (Note: after doing this you may need to adjust the anti-skate initiation point, see Tip #4.)

Chris Brady of Teres told me of a way to improve cueing even more by re-shaping the cueing support. Moving the cueing support point farther from the pivot improves its mechanical advantage and makes the cueing height and speed adjustments less touchy. This mod is easier than it sounds and requires only a length of coat hanger (!), but I don’t have pix and haven’t yet done it myself.

4. Changing the cueing height affects the point where anti-skate kicks in. (Yes, it's weird.) Once cueing height is satisfactory, adjust the short pin that sticks out of the front of the cueing frame. That pin controls where the anti-skate dogleg first engages the knot on the string.

5. The Tri-Planar comes with three counterweight donuts of differing masses. Many cartridges can be balanced using either of two. The arm usually tracks best with the heaviest donut that will work, mounted closer to the pivot. Of course this also reduces effective mass, which may or may not be sonically desirable depending on the cartridge. It also leaves more room for Tip #6.

6. For fine VTF adjustments don’t futz with the counterweight, there’s an easier way. Set the counterweight for the highest VTF you think you’ll need (ie, close to the pivot). Pick up some 1/4" I.D. O-rings from Home Depot. To reduce VTF a bit just slip an O-ring or two on the end stub. Thin O-rings reduce VTF by .01-.02g, thick ones by .04-.05g. Quick, cheap, effective. (For safety, always lock the arm down while adding or removing O-rings.)

7. When adjusting VTA, always bring the pointer to the setting you want by turning it counter-clockwise at least ¼ of a turn. This brings the arm UP to the spot you've selected, which takes up the slop in the threads. You can easily feel this happening.

Hope someone finds these useful. If you know any more, please bring ‘em on!
dougdeacon
Many have tried it, including me. No one I've met in five years likes it.

In my case the result with Shelter 901, several ZYX's and a few MM's was always the same: dullsville. Transients that should explode off the record like a Leroy Neiman just lolled around like a Rubens.

I suppose it might help tame some cartridge that sounds totally raw and edgy, but I'd rather get a better cartridge than fix a bad one with band-aids. Besides, the TP's noise floor is significantly lower with the damping trough removed.

YMMV as usual. If you like Rubens, give it a try!

Note: this has NOTHING to do with fluid damping in the bearing well of arms like unipivots from such as Graham or VPI. Fluid damping on those arms is differently implemented and IME it's beneficial with almost any cartridge. Perhaps a unipivot bearing doesn't sink resonances away from the cartridge as well as captured bearings (?). Whatever the reason, on those arms it's a big help.
Thanks for the reply, Doug. I had never removed the trough (even though I had never added fluid) but last night I gave it a try at the suggestion of Kevin (from KAB) who suggested it might cure my rumble issue.

It didn't - but it certainly changed the sound. I'm now wondering if removing the trough would help (I'm desperate :-))
Having just bought a Tri-Planar V11 U11 to go with GPA Monaco table and not having seen this thread I contacted Doug via a recommendation on another thread to get some advice in respect of damping fluid level. His advice was, as clearly stated in this thread, to get rid of the trough and pack it away. I followed his advice and as you no doubt all know the rewards were immediate. I haven't stopped smiling. Also, I have adjusted anti skate to the minimum level with again beneficial results but this time not as great as getting rid of the damping trough. My thanks to Doug for sharing his knowledge of this arm and assisting me in maximizing its performance (or at least getting a great deal of the way there). Now why is that trough and the silicone fluid included?
Phaser,

Congrats on your table and arm. I went the same path as you and really have enjoyed my GPA Monaco and Tri arm. What cartridge and arm cable are you using?

I also put 2 o rings on the cueing lever, one down a ways and one up. On Antiskate, I decided I like the weight better than just o rings, so I flanked each side of the weight with o rings jammed as close to the weight as I could. Seemed to marginally help a little.

But agree with others, the damping trough is just awful, it should be left it box automatically and only added by user desire.
Can anyone tell me why the damping trough should be such a negative as claimed? Do you think it is the damping per se or is it resonances set up by the physical presence of the trough and paddle? In that regard, have you all checked that the screws securing the trough were tight, in the process of deciding to remove it entirely? By the way, between Leroy Nieman and Rubens, who would want the former? An unfortunate analogy. How about Rubens v Pollack or v a great French Impressionist? Nieman is trite.

I am going to try it, because now that I am also listening to a Dynavector DV505, I notice that the Dyna is more dynamic sounding than the TP.