Eminent Technology ET-2 Tonearm Owners

Dover
As you said we will never agree on this.

The difference is that I have tried both light and heavy ETs. As far as I can tell, I am the only one who has done that. If so, I am the only person here who can speak with any authority on the subject.

People are free to try, it is entirely their choice. Install an alternate cheap cartridge, play a record you don't like, if you are that worried about damage to same. Your scaremongering may have dissuaded people from trying a simple reversible mod, which is a pity since we could have advanced the collective knowledge of this diverse group. And isn't that exactly what these forums are for?

“para 1 - not obvious to everyone.”

Why not, there are only 2 words to understand: ‘modified ET2.’

“Adding lead mass creates higher inertia but does NOT retard motion.”

Yes it does, more energy is required to activate the system.

You’re banging on about lead mass and inertia as though it is a random activity.

Required mass (and its related inertia) will be cartridge specific, so isn’t it simplistic to state or imply that no mass should be added to an ET.

Thank you Chris, Dover, Richard, and all for the fascinating data, opinions, and food for thought. I continue to enjoy the, admittedly, subtle effects of using a single weak magnet with my ET.

I can't claim to understand the physics involved well enough to give a thorough explanation of what happened in my particular case, but I have to concur with Dover about the concerns over added mass. In my case, it was not mass in the spindle, but a case of too much mass at the "headshell" and cartridge itself. A few years ago I managed to destroy the suspension on one of my VDH cartridges by applying too many bits of Blu-tac to a "naked" MC1, and to the top of the headshell in an attempt to dampen a cartridge that sounded overly aggressive in the highs. It worked to smooth out the ragged highs, but within days, experienced a collapsed suspension. The cartridge was properly balanced and setup at the appropriate VTF.

****Does damping not mean - reduce, diminish, dull - to a point that reduces some of “vinyl’s nasties”, caused mostly in this case with the ET2 tonearm – the off center hole - but we want to do this without taking away too much from the music itself ?**** -Chris

In the endless debate about wether footers, pads, etc. have a beneficial effect on music playback accuracy, I have always contended that, in absolute terms, it is not possible to overdamp a component's resonances by adding mass. Added mass can only be a good thing; in theory. While it may be possible to tweak the resonances to suit a particular system or listener's tastes, eliminating/controlling resonances can only be a good thing for a component's electrical performance, if not it's role in a given "system" (including the listener's ears) which is functioning in the electrical domain. But, it seems to me that in the case of a tonearm, we are not talking about simple resonances, but how added or removed mass affects the movement and stability-in-motion of the arm/cantilever "system". Sorry for possibly stating the obvious, but it helps me to make better sense of all this. Thanks again for a most interesting discussion.

Frogman.
I enjoyed your post, thankyou. How much blutac did you add to the headshell? By way of comparison I have added a net 0.77gm to the headshell of the ET2. (Lead in, teflon out.) Not a lot of extra weight.

On damping... If it is not meant to move, make sure it doesn't.

To everyone..I'm sure that you have experienced this. Last night's listening was great. All the planets seemed to align. So what causes this? Clean power? Just the right room temp, humidity? My own state of mind? Off topic, I know, but I am curious to read your views on this.

thanks
Richard.

Hi Frogman,

Thanks for the feedback. You have highlighted the nub of the issue in your last few sentences - when the arm moves laterally to accommodate eccentric records it becomes very complex. In addition to the bearing tube moving back and forth we have -

1. The arm mass pushing the cantilever back and forth through its pivot point
2. The counterweight, if partially decoupled with a spring, starts to oscillate as the bearing tube moves back and forth.

My approach to the problem has 3 elements all of which work together -

1. Lighten the arm to minimize resistance to lateral movement. Remove any soft spongy material - shrink wrap/foam if using the old aluminum arm tube.
2. TOTALLY decouple the counterweight ( no spring, no fixed coupling )
3. Minimal magnetic damping

Counterweight Set Up

In my view fixed, coupled counterweight is wrong because it adds inertia, a resistance to any correction for eccentric records.
I also think a spring is suboptimal, because although by tuning it we get a lower resistance, and maybe better bottom end on round records, on eccentric records the in and out motion means the counterweight will oscillate and feed back into the bearing tube, affecting its horizontal stability.
I would surmise that when you tune the spring, you are probably synchronizing the motion of the counterweight with the arm motion to minimise these conflicting forces. This will vary with the cartridge compliance and how eccentric the record is.
With both coupling and spring ( partial coupling ) the arm movement is inhibited – causing cantilever flex that is disconsonant with the music.

The key question is - What do we want the counterweight to do on eccentric records ?
The answer in my view is nothing.
We want it to continue to load the tracking force.
We want it to remain absolutely still horizontally whilst the arm moves in and out so it does not inhibit the arm movement. ( we don’t want the tail wagging the dog ).
Think of a hinged counterweight, rigid vertically, but free to move so that when the arm moves the counterweight stays still.
My solution was to remove the spring action by loosening off the end cap such that the counterweight beam just flopped at a touch; then inserted teflon wedges loosely either side of the spring to provide the tiniest dampening of that I could apply.

The combination of the "floppy" counterweight in the horizontal direction and minimal magnetic dampening gave me the best result – very quick bottom end.
A bass drum has harmonics and overtones up in to the high frequencies – the highs tell you how a drum is hit – so for me I trade off a little bottom end weight for accurate, clean and extended high frequencies.
Funnily enough this approach gives me the quickest and most tuneful bass.

How much magnetic damping to apply ?

My experience is as little as possible. What I have found is that I set the amount effectively by tuning the bass for optimum speed. Remember that the eccentric arm movement is affecting all frequencies. The dampening will affect all frequencies.
My view is that if you use too much magnetic dampening you will stiffen up the bottom end, but at a cost over over dampening the high frequencies. That’s why I was interested in Chris testing the eddy clamp – which I suspect is just too much.

I wanted to clarify that for me the use of minimal magnetic damping goes hand in hand with how I set the counterweight up and the low mass/minimal resistance.