2. analog
  3. 1325551242

Eminent Technology ET-2 Tonearm Owners


Where are you? What mods have you done ?

I have been using these ET2's for over 9 years now.
I am still figuring them out and learning from them. They can be modified in so many ways. Bruce Thigpen laid down the GENIUS behind this tonearm over 20 years ago. Some of you have owned them for over 20 years !

Tell us your secrets.

New owners – what questions do you have ?

We may even be able to coax Bruce to post here. :^)

There are so many modifications that can be done.

Dressing of the wire with this arm is critical to get optimum sonics along with proper counterweight setup.

Let me start it off.

Please tell us what you have found to be the best wire for the ET-2 tonearm ? One that is pliable/doesn’t crink or curl. Whats the best way of dressing it so it doesn’t impact the arm. Through the spindle - Over the manifold - Below manifold ? What have you come up with ?
128x128ct0517
ct0517's avatar
ct0517 OP
2,041 posts
 
Hi Dover- ... interesting post. thanks
Wikipedia is ok ...Youtube can be

effective too?

I hate theory so the animation helps me alot; another reason I like posters here on the forum that talk to their direct experiences - not what if this or that.

I am no physicist and I am bad at math to boot. I hate formulae.

Btw – I have found myself the easiest what to find out about physics is to partake in a “hobby” that can kill you if you slip up. You learn really quick.

Ever track a car ......around an oval track that kind of sort of resembles an lp ?
ct0517's avatar
ct0517 OP
2,041 posts
 
Richard - re your last post.

.....So with reference to a rigid or sprung counterweight beam, it is probably an all or nothing event. In other words because we have the "potential" interaction of the swing frequency of the beam and the resonant frequency of the arm assembly, depending on the number of leaves and the number of lead weights used. It could be that tuning here with springs and weights (and their position) is at least partly to do with sorting this possible frequency interaction rather than just the weight or stiffness employed. Others may have already thought of this but, it is just an idea to put out there for comment.

Would not the rigid solution and the all or nothing event - be only applicable to a one cartridge guy and the specific cartridge cantilever needing to be – really stiff ?

As an end user I feel with the sprung counterweight it allows me to use all of my cartridges. Just a thought.

Also
In your custom ET2 setup – are you able to use higher compliance cartridges if you remove the lead from the spindle ? or are there other factors like a custom manifold involved ? that keep you from using higher compliance cartridges – sonic preferences aside for the moment ?
Cheers
dover
2,182 posts
 
Chris -
I assume you know the driving dogs are Kiwis ? NZSPA trained no less, here in Auckland. Not sure if they run ET's, but they demonstrate the benefits of high compliance.
At the Engineering faculty I also remember Dr Fassbender, who had a fetish for experiments with rubber bands -
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M0QShhpqtS8

richardkrebs
418 posts
 
Chris
I tune the arm with a set of different size weights. Don't know if manufactures of linear arms with fixed weight beams offer this, but it would make sense to do so.
Kuzma do suggest that their arm is most suitable for use with carts below a certain compliance. So they have considered this topic.

The weight I have added inside the spindle can be removed or adjusted in weight. No modification of the spindle is required.

The thought that there may be more going on with the decoupled counterweight was triggered by your post where you quoted BT where he said that the ibeam had a natural frequency of 2-5 hz.
This is close to the resonant frequency of the arm itself. This could have performance implications.
ct0517's avatar
ct0517 OP
2,041 posts
 
Thanks for the info Richard.

The thought that there may be more going on with the decoupled counterweight was triggered by your post where you quoted BT where he said that the ibeam had a natural frequency of 2-5 hz.

The figure I quoted is from the manual and I believe it is for a stock single I Beam with the weights that are supplied with the stock ET2 tonearm - not the ET 2.5 – which we agree is a different animal with different resonances.

I gotta believe that adding a leaf spring plus adding the ET 2.5 larger spindle changes things?

I would need to confirm this with Bruce.
More to discover