What defines a good tonearm


I'm in the market for a very good tonearm as an upgrade from an SME 345 (309). Most of the tonearms I have used in the past are fixed bearing except for my Grace 704 unipivot. I dont have a problem with the "wobble" of a unipivot, and they seem the simplest to build, so if they are generally at least as good as a fixed pivot, why wouldnt everyone use a unipivot and put their efforts into developing easier vta, azimuth and vtf adjustments, and better arm materials. Or is there some inherent benefit to fixed pivot that makes them worth the extra effort to design and manufacture
manitunc
Dear Lewm: I can't understand your question because a pivoted ones are either an unipivot or a fixed bearing one. In the other side if I remember I did not posted nothing in that sense, I only posted the Technics fixed bearing friction spec and that's all.

During our tonearm/cartridge design research/tests we been aware that exist a boundary ( that depends mainly on the cartridge tracking habilities. ) where a " very low bearing friction " is no more an advantage. The cartridge " ask " some kind of control when due to the tracking grooves demands and whole LP imperfections under playback conditions it's going " crazy/out of self control " ( as a race car that by its inertia wants to goes out of the road on curves. ), VTF/AS and bearing friction are the main helpers about. This is really a thought subject on pivot tonearm design, obviously that VTF is the major helper but not always enough. We have to remember that we need that the cartridge stylus tip stay always at the groove and main differences between quality performance level on cartridges came from this " stay in the groove " subject.

Btw, looking at the cartridge stylus tip needs during playback tell us that not only in theory but on real circumstances the AS that some of us diminished is a misunderstood and IMHO a mistake.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear Mike, Did you actually hear a difference between a Reed 2A and a Reed 2P? I thought the only difference between those two was the fine-ness of the VTA adjustment up and down.

Lew, my first Reed was not designated 'A' and in fact was somewhat 'prior' model to official North American import, then my next Reed was an 'A' but without the azimuth adjustment. then i got 2 of the '2P's.

the sound of the first one was not quite as good as the others, not as precise and refined; i think it's bearing was not quite as good. then my 'A' was short the azimuth adjustment.

i felt that the 2P's sounded a small bit better than the 'A', but likely that is the azimuth adjustment, which can be acquired with the 'A'. also, with the VTA lever of the 2P's, it was easier to dial in VTA.

so good catch, it was probably wrong to assign a ranking of Reed's without considering the azimuth adjustment for both....as they ought to sound the same assuming maybe more time for dial in with the 'A'.
Dan_ed and Mike, are you attaching meaning where none existed? I really did assume that you and Mike did have such an LP, as I know others in this community for which that is true. I just wanted to get a copy.

As for the Talea, I refer you to my previous comments about the arm- it seems to me more was read into them as well.
Well that's it. I'm going to round up Mike and Dan so we can make a record.

Then we can add our names to the long long list of Audiogon vinylphiles who have actually released a record. Can't speak for Mike and Dan but it's humbling to be part and parcel to such a large group.

Since this is a 3 man tonearm based power band, I will call us Tri-Plunders.