Eminent Technology ET-2 Tonearm Owners

Dover.

You need to research the difference between the two air bearing types. The Kuzma is unusual in its choice of bearing construction. So how am I wrong in my statement that the use of porous material appears to be unique?

This in no way detracts from the ET2 bearing. I was just showing that other options are out there.

At frequencies below resonance the cantilever is free to push the mass of the arm sideways. This does not defy physics, it is physics. In other words the cartridge suspension is stiff enough to accelerate the arm mass sideways. Think of a tension spring with a weight suspended at one end. This combination will have a resonant frequency. If you hold the spring end opposite to the weight and move it up and down at a frequency below resonance the weight will move up and down in sync with your movement. The spring will NOT stretch as a result of this movememt.

No, the video does not show the cantilever, that is why I asked him if it was a problem. I have to take his word on this that it is not, and resonance formula back him up. Further this confirms what I see when my arm is tracking eccentric records. I repeat the video is shown specifically to allay fears of problems due to high horizontal mass.

The Kuzma is unusual in its choice of bearing construction………… the use of porous material appears to be unique?

In his review on the Kuzma Airline, Michael Fremer also mentioned that the Airline use porous material in the airbearing, while the older, but similar designed, Rockport 6000 utilized a groove-compensated bearing, which has lateral grooves in the bearing wall.

He went on to comment that due to the difference in the bearing design, the much higher air-pressure used in the Airline didn’t necessary mean its bearing was stiffer.

It is also interesting to note that the arm on the Walker Proscenium turntable shares a similar design with the ET2, but using a fixed counterweight and much higher pressure at 45psi.

I believe Lloyd Walker is well known as a fanatic tweaker, who would not stop to squeeze out the last bit of performance from his turntable. So, why would he not use the decouple counterweight design (if he sees any advantage in it), or is that patented by ET?

Thekong
I don't know how long patents last, but would suggest the reason that Lloyd does not decouple the counterweight is simple.

It sounds better.

It sounds better

Hi Richard, I am no engineer, so has absolute no idea about the physics behind it. However, as Lloyd didn't use the decoupled counterweight (which is not hard nor costly to implement), I also believe it probably sounds better that way, at least to his, and apparently also to your, ears.

Actually, I have also fabricated a fixed counterweight for my ET2.5, but unfortunately have no time to test it yet. When it happens, the ET would be compared to my favorite arm, the Rockport 6000!

Thekong

We look forward to reading your comments.