Eminent Technology ET-2 Tonearm Owners

ketchup

I originally tried the 0.003 wire(0.005 coated) from phoenix, but just could not get a good solder connection and breaking the wire pretty easily while trying to handle the rca plugs.I got tips about sanding the teflon off and that did help improve the soldering process.

also the thickness wire i was discussing was the coated diameter. If you are nifty with handling the fine wire, the smaller diameter is the way to go. If the diameter is too large, the wire is too stiff and will impact the freeplay of the tonearm. Sorry about not discussing the smaller diameter earlier. I went back to the spools i actually used, and the 0.005 bare (0.007) was very similar to the 0.003 wire from Phoenix in my ability to handle (ie, hard to handle without breaking or getting a good solder connection). The 0.008 bare (0.011 coated) is what is I am using on my tonearm. The 0.010 bare(0.013 coated) was easier to handle but was a little to stiff for my application. I did not mention earlier the type of air pump I use but my apollo uses the original superquiet pump from maplenoll but my ariadne signature uses a JunAir compressor which i really like. Very quiet and dependable. It also has a good air regulation control system that i like.

Thekong, congratulations! As should be clear so far, we feel this is a terrific arm. And if you enjoy tinkering...well, you'll be in heaven. I think the ET's reputation for requiring a lot of maintenance is exaggerated and unjustified, as I have found that once you have it set up well it will stay that way; pretty much. As a footnote, I have my TNT on a wall mounted platform bolted directly into the wooden studs in a wall of a 100+ year-old house. I have wondered why the arm needed rebalancing every few months. Then I started to notice a pattern. I realized that the seasonal shifting of the studs/walls due to seasonal temperature changes was causing the arm to need rebalancing.

I would be very interested in learning how you accomplished direct-coupling of the counterweights, so please keep us posted. As posted earlier, I made an I-beam with less compliance than even the double spring stock version in an attempt to get vas close as possible to a dc arrangement. Apbii, does a good job of explaining the theoretical pros/cons of more or less compliance at the I-beam spring. From the standpoint of sonics what I can tell you is (as Ct found out out) that the effects of less compliance are not subtle. As always, you will have weigh your personal tonal balance preferences against what will be a much better organized sound, with more tightly controlled imaging and over-all leaner sound. You may also come across a cartridge that simply requires higher compliance for good tracking; I have not owned one that didn't track at least adequately with the lower compliance I-beam.

If you want to experiment with really low compliance tightly coupled counterweight you could just wedge something like a tooth pick in the joint to essentially remove the spring from the equation. I think Bruce mentions this somewhere, in any event I didn't invent it, just passing it on.

Frogman..Good point on the wall mount, I usually check the TT level often for that very reason.
Ketchup.. Thanks for the tip on shim stock.

With regards to the damping trough... if the best results come from the paddle lightly touching the fluid, would there be any sonic difference in trying different weights of fluid or is that going way too far out in left field. Has anyone tried this?

Hi TheKong
Welcome to the ET2 ET 2.5 Music Lover Fraternity :^) - look forward to hearing about your coupling ideas.

I have an I Beam and 3 separated springs coming to me. I am going to try 2 then 3 springs. I quick look through the manual showed me no mention of multiple springs or trying them. Just the single spring - it it buried somewhere.

Frogman my two current I beams are not the same. They both have one spring but someone has added another what appears to be (folded aluminum type shim) to one of them.

From the Et2 manual - Page – 28 “By changing the weights used and the effective mass of the arm. You can change the low frequency performance of the tonearm.”

This tells me we can play around with it.

In my discussions with Bruce and it states it in the manual he has designed this arm to be neutral down to 5 hz with a medium compliance cartridge. For this is reason it is my opinion that the instructions in the manual reflect and support this.

We all have different gear/rooms listening preferences – you need to experiment here. There is no free lunch / silver bullet in audio. I have learned in the last 18 months comparing turntables that this is a vibration hobby and a black hole. My two ET2 and ET 2.5 were my best tools during this. We need to try things and use your ears and nothing else IMO to decide for yourself. BTW - I do not use the VTA scale on the arm. I use my ears. It can introduce resonances. I removed it.

Has anyone tried a brass or other material counterweight bolt and heard the effects in your room ?

I have been experimenting with the weights closest to the spindle. I have removed enough weight from one of my ET2 arms and positioned it at the end to compare. Frogman and others, have you found the very end to be best or to be just a tad in on the IBeam ?

Early impressions some aspects improved others not so sure. The multiple springs and the IBeam may tell the story for me. It appears from Frogmans experience that we need multiple IBeams for matching up cartridge compliance ?I see this as an advantage in Bruce' design that we can do this. It takes only a few minutes to change an Ibeam out with another one. I have been using this high compliance MM for comparisons. I got involved with Rauls MM thread this past year. It provided me with the means $$ to buy two very good cartridges to do my comparisons. I am familiar with the sound of it so will leave it on for this comparison before I switch back to an MC cartridge. The sound definitely got a tad brighter in my system with less weights out to the end. But other aspects improved. To early to say anything. Any opinions on this ?

I have received emails since the thread started. Some prefer more weight closer to the spindle. The manual supports them being out to the end as Frogman made clear.

I understand why when I ask Bruce about weights – adding/removing/ positioning he is smart to say – IT DEPENDS ON THE CARTRIDGE and compliance. He then said to have fun and experiment.

BTW this thread is at 1500 views. I can see this through the old web page. I cannot however see or access my virtual system page yet when I try to get in from the new web page. Any one else with this problem?