Eminent Technology ET-2 Tonearm Owners

Hi Thekong

During the testing phase, my ET2.5 will be set up with a ClearAudio Sigma.
When the final comparison comes, I will be using the Ortofon A90 between the Rockport and the ET.

Look forward to your observations.
Based on their specs for compliance and weight with similar spec carts I own, I have had really good experiences with the double leaf spring I beam.

It would be very easy to compare your custom counterweight later on to the decoupled counterweight.

If you contact Bruce he can send you a couple empty I beams with 5 loose leaf springs that you can glue in yourself to make a double and triple I beam. The beams cost about 10 or 15 dollars.

Three are shown in this pic.

single, double and triple

The double in the middle does not have the extra weight on it so looks thinner. The one I am holding is a triple and it makes the I Beam very rigid.

Will use it with the heavy, low compliance XV1.

I posted this earlier somewhere from Bruce on his opinion of the different I Beams.

With respect to the i-beams, this is correct: a stiffer (lower compliance) I Beam works better with a lower compliance cartridge.

Hope this helps - brucet

Cheers Chris

Dover
Again you enter into needless personal attacks

Does the cantilever deflect due to the higher lateral forces imposed upon it?
I see no movement with my cart tracking eccentric records and the math predicts none. However in absolute terms no one could say that there is zero deflection. A more appropriate question would be. Is the additional horizontal mass dangerous to the health of the cartridge, which has been your accretion all along. It would seem that this is not so. There appears to be no issue. If there was it would be all over the web that arm XYZ is a mass murderer.

The second important question should be. Does increasing the effective mass of the ET2 make its performance better or worse. For those of us with untrained ears the answer is yes.
We would need to include BT in at least a semi trained ear camp, as he advocates stiffening the counterweight beam on the arm he designed when using low compliance carts. This is counter to what you advocate when you loosen further the leaf spring.

I like your analogy of a pipe being moved independently at each end.
This of course presupposes that the cartridge body is moving relative to the groove. If it is not, which is what we want, the cantilever has one fixed pivot point at the suspension. The stylus end describes an arc as it traces the groove.

Richardkrebs,

There was no personal attack. I simply addressed the anomalies and reasons for the errors in your post dated 03-14-13.

I will review your latest post tomorrow.

Richardkrebs

With regard to cantilever deflection on eccentric records, it is clear you are confused. Let me explain:

Your original statements on this matter were and I quote
03-12-13: Richardkrebs
Below this resonant frequency the cartridge is able to move the arms weight, start it and stop it, without cantilever deflection. I do not need to talk to cartridge manufacturers to confirm this. Do the math.

03-13-13: Richardkrebs
What I have constantly said is that this force will not be enough to deflect the cantilever while tracing an eccentric record, provided the resonant frequency of the arm / cartridge system is above 0.55 hz for a 33 rpm and 0.75 hz for a 45 rpm record.[/quote]

Now however your position is, and I quote from your post of 03-16-13:

I see no movement with my cart tracking eccentric records and the math predicts none. However in absolute terms no one could say that there is zero deflection.

Richard, you have made two conflicting statements in two consecutive sentences in your latest post of 03-16-13.

Your first sentence states the maths predicts no cantilever deflection.
Your next sentence contradicts that sentence and all your previous assertions for the past week or two and states that no one could say there is no deflection.

Should readers of this thread take it that you now agree that Bruce Thigpen and I are correct and there is cantilever deflection below the resonant frequency. You were incorrect when you stated "Below this resonant frequency the cartridge is able to move the arms weight, start it and stop it, without cantilever deflection".

Dover.
No confusion at all. In Engineering, the term absolute is.....absolute.
By way of example, over on the TT drive thread, a fellow poster said that " there is no stretch in the silk thread I use to drive my platter." or words to that effect. Within the loading the thread sees, this statement is almost certainly true. However if he had said that "there is absolutely no stretch..." he would be making an indefensible statement.
One would also be very unwise to say that "tracing an eccentric record with a standard ET2 causes absolutely no cantilever deflection"

Hasn't this discussion run its course.
Like the light weight ET2, there are many heavy weight linear arms in use, performing well, producing beautiful music.