Thekong,
Yes I agree with you. I only used the 12mm as that was what was used on the Kuzma video Richardkrebs referred to.
The key point as you have indicated is that the Kuzma and Terminator arms will have 3-400% higher lateral force on the cantilever due to their horizontal effective mass being 3-400% higher.
In my view this isn't great and I would worry about using medium to high compliance cartridges with these arms. From your comments I can see you are very careful on setting up your arms.
Will be very interesting to see what you think of the ET2.5 when you have had a chance to set it up. I would encourage you to try my set up recommendations, using my decoupled counterweight suggestion - which means running the I beam very very loose, and tuning the bottom end response by slowly adding dampening to the movement.
Bruce Thigpen has clearly put a lot of thought and experimentation into the decoupling methodology and the low mass.
If you read his manual and patents he starts with a low mass arm, and then brings the effective horizontal mass up very very gently by providing variable spring rates. This is to keep the resonances between horizontal, vertical in sync with the compliance of the cartidge and the Q of the system. The Q is related to the dampening of the oscillation - the use of magnetic dampening will shift this slightly. Very small adjustments can give quite dramatic changes to the sound, especially in speed and articulation.
Yes I agree with you. I only used the 12mm as that was what was used on the Kuzma video Richardkrebs referred to.
The key point as you have indicated is that the Kuzma and Terminator arms will have 3-400% higher lateral force on the cantilever due to their horizontal effective mass being 3-400% higher.
In my view this isn't great and I would worry about using medium to high compliance cartridges with these arms. From your comments I can see you are very careful on setting up your arms.
Will be very interesting to see what you think of the ET2.5 when you have had a chance to set it up. I would encourage you to try my set up recommendations, using my decoupled counterweight suggestion - which means running the I beam very very loose, and tuning the bottom end response by slowly adding dampening to the movement.
Bruce Thigpen has clearly put a lot of thought and experimentation into the decoupling methodology and the low mass.
If you read his manual and patents he starts with a low mass arm, and then brings the effective horizontal mass up very very gently by providing variable spring rates. This is to keep the resonances between horizontal, vertical in sync with the compliance of the cartidge and the Q of the system. The Q is related to the dampening of the oscillation - the use of magnetic dampening will shift this slightly. Very small adjustments can give quite dramatic changes to the sound, especially in speed and articulation.