2. analog
  3. 1117142645

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
dougdeacon OP
3,338 posts
 
... ultimately what counts is whether a person knows what they are talking about.
Agreed. In this case the measure is how music sounds with and without the trough. We know. You don't.

The OP requests that you avoid further postings on his thread, which he started to help people willing to help themselves, not to argue anyone into something they're unwilling to try.
paperw8
165 posts
 

08-27-10: Dougdeacon

... ultimately what counts is whether a person knows what they are talking about.
Agreed. In this case the measure is how music sounds with and without the trough. We know. You don't.

The OP requests that you avoid further postings on his thread, which he started to help people willing to help themselves, not to argue anyone into something they're unwilling to try.
What I know is what you say you hear, but you have failed to give a logical explanation as to why you are hearing what you say you are hearing.

As it turns out, some of us have other things to do rather than to spend all our time listening to a wide variety of audio equipment. Since some of us have limited time, we need to cut down the search by pre-screening down to a set of logical candidates to investigate from the wide variety of available audio equipment that is sold. That's why I look for logical explanations, because that is how I get clues as to what is worth my while to investigate further.

Don't get me wrong, I think that there is a limit to what you can learn from objective data. If you want to optimize a system to your specific tastes, you can only do that by listening to the actual equipment. But you should understand that there are real limits to subjective evaluations: they are subject to being colored by various preconceived notions. That's why you, and audiophiles in general should learn more critical thinking about this stuff. You will find that seeking out objective information and data to support your subjective assessments will help you in your own evaluations.

Ultimately, what you do is up to you. But what I am telling you is that when you post your opinions on public forums like this one; those comments are going to be evaluated by people like me based on whether subjective comments can be supported by an rational explanation (or at least some evidence of reasoning) of why you might be observing what you are observing. In my mind, relying on well-worn buzzwords just doesn't cut it.
thom_at_galibier_design's avatar
thom_at_galibier_design
729 posts
 
Dear Paperw8,

You went to the effort to quote my comment about the the THIN BAR to which the trough mounts, and then conveniently side-stepped my point by IGNORING this bar and turning your attention to the trough itself.

The (relatively) heavy trough hangs off this (relatively) flimsy bar. I don't have time to make this any more obvious to you.

Yours is a classic straw-man argument and has no relevance to my point.

I completely agree with you and with Ralph, in that the Tri-Planar's arm wand is extremely well damped. It is however, not perfect. No tonearm is.

The well behaved properties of the Tri-Planar's arm wand is is no reason to ignore other sources of gremlins - vibrations entering from other points in the arm.

The more I learn about hi-fi, the more I learn that EVERYTHING matters, and the less inclined I am to be dismissive of others' observations.

I agree with you, that this forum is a cauldron of ideas from which we all distill and refine our collective knowledge.

I applaud that you want to spend more time listening to music, and as a designer, I frequently longingly look back at the "innocent times" when I didn't have to listen to my hi-fi so critically.

I for one however, am grateful for the efforts of people like Doug. The lifting he does, I don't t have to do. With infinite possibilities, no single one of us can track every last gremlin down.

Of course, we still have to pick and choose our battles, based on what makes sense to us, and this is dependent on our experience set.

Without a critical mind we run the risk of letting charlatans and snake oil salesmen who would help us part with our money.

There's a fine line however, between a discriminating mind and a closed one, and when you struggle to twist someone's words to suit your preconceptions, you have lost me.
You are correct, people can discuss this stuff until they are blue in the face, but ultimately what counts is whether a person knows what they are talking about. In my case, I tend to make that determination based on whether I can make sense of what the person is saying.

Based on this logic (presuming that you're not a particle physicist), then quantum mechanics and string theory is all hogwash.

One final comment - many of the tweaks Doug suggests will be wasted on a mediocre turntable. The hierarchy still applies, and if you don't optimize your basic platform first (your turntable), then much of the ground Doug has traversed won't be appreciated.

I'll let others comment further. I have a turntable to release in time for the Audiofest ...

Cheers,
Thom @ Galibier
paperw8
165 posts
 

08-28-10: Thom_mackris
Dear Paperw8,

You went to the effort to quote my comment about the the THIN BAR to which the trough mounts, and then conveniently side-stepped my point by IGNORING this bar and turning your attention to the trough itself.

The (relatively) heavy trough hangs off this (relatively) flimsy bar. I don't have time to make this any more obvious to you.
What is obvious to me is that you have a different tonearm than I have, because on my tonearm, the bar is rigid. In fact, the entire assembly of the trough and bar is rigid. It does not look like "flimsy" construction to me.

You didn't say what it is that you design, but it doesn't appear to be electronic equipment (then again, judging from your comments about quantum mechanics, I gather you aren't a physicist either - as it turns out, I took a class in quantum mechanics when I was in college). If you look at the specifications of some audio equipment, you see that some makers list data that seem to have no practical value other than to look impressive. For example, the frequency response of an amplifier at 200KHz is of no significance to me - I can't hear frequencies that high anyway.

This is the point, you try to sort out what matters and what doesn't matter from the constant barrage of claims that you see relating to audio equipment. To sort it all out, you need more than buzzwords; you need good data and information. You say you're hearing what you're hearing. I'm not saying that you're aren't hearing what you say you're hearing. But if you can't give a logical explanation for why you are hearing what you are hearing, your opinion has less value to me. On the other hand, opinions that are attached to some rationale have more value to me. That's not being dismissive, and that's not being closed minded that's just my saying that you haven't given me enough information. I ask for a logical explanation and all I get are "wizard of oz"-type assertions of "we know what we're talking about! Don't question our knowledge!" Neither you, or anyone else here, owes me any specific information but I do evaluate information based on the extent to which it makes sense to me.

I mean, when I read stuff on this forum, one reaction that I have is that I find myself thinking with amazement over how some guys seem to blow a lot of time and money constantly turning over new equipment in pursuit of some "ultimate" audio experience. Hey, if you're got the time, money and motivation, then from my perspective, have at it - it's your time and your money as far as I'm concerned. But I'm just not one of those people who is looking to go out of my way to spend large amounts of time and money on audio. I'm thinking about it now because I am in the process of replacing components in a system that I have had for over a decade.
dan_ed
2,451 posts
 
What is obvious to me, Paperw8, is that you have had your TP for a few months, we're going on many years of our own experiences with the TP. I have had my TP for five years and I know that is far less than the length of time Thom and Doug have owned their arms. I see that you are relatively new to Audiogon, so maybe we all need to get to know one another a little better before we go poking sticks, or tapping, in other people's faces.

Tapping on a Rega to find resonance points is one thing, tapping on a Triplanar is plain foolish and will not reveal the differences in nuance that these tips address. The vibrations created at the cartridge are entirely different from the vibrations you created by tapping on your arm. Your empirical observations are completely irrelevant to what happens in the cart/arm during playback. And let's not forget that the particular cart in use will have an impact on the vibrations the arm sees.
More to discover