Eminent Technology ET-2 Tonearm Owners

Chris, your diligent follow up with Bruce Thigpen is much appreciated:

If the weight is coupled the system resonant frequency would be extremely low, a resonant frequency at 3Hz with a significant rise in response (6-12dB) results, which would affect tracking slightly because of the asymmetric position of the cantilever, we opt for splitting the horizontal resonance frequency into two points and lowering the "Q" which improves tracking.

More important than tracking, the intent was to reduce the modulation effects of low frequency energy (FM and AM) that increase distortion in the cartridge,

Bruce Thigpen’s contribution affirm my statements over the past 7-8 weeks that Richardkrebs fixation with adding lead mass to the arm and coupling the I beam will increase distortion, affect tracking and produce an unnatural bass lift in response. My own analysis has long been based on a thorough understanding of the design principles and physics involved.

It is disappointing that those who disagree, and clearly do not grasp the principles involved in this arm, have resorted to denial and personal attacks

03-04-13: Richardkrebs
Dover
Your scaremongering

03-17-13: Richardkrebs
Dover.
Hasn't this discussion run its course.

03-18-13: John47
Mr Dover’s bombastic contentions.

03-21-13: John47
Put on your knitwear cardy so don't catch a cold, your thick lensed glasses so you don't fall, then pop out and replenish your Prozac.

03-23-13: Gnnett
As a New Zealander I would like to apologies for the behavior of Dover. It is a narrow country and this breeds narrow mindedness.

All too often denial and personal abuse is the last refuge of the desperate.

Sadly those posters who are fixated with the idea of adding lead mass and removing the decoupling will continue to deny the science and exhaustive testing and measurements that underpin Bruce Thigpen’s design.

If they prefer the sound of the arm set up incorrectly, there are clearly fundamental flaws in their system and they should look at the rest of their components and set up. This includes the environment in which they are listening.

03-04-13: Richardkrebs
Dover
I am the only person here who can speak with any authority on the subject.

Richardkrebs, the ET2 is a brilliant design and deserves to be treated with respect.

Frogman/theKong, others – regarding lowering the position of the lead weights.

Based on my own experiences, positioning the lead to be lower is not something imo, that any ET2, ET 2.5 owner is going to do naturally or instinctively. The reason being it is not as ergonomic. When you try it you will see it is easy to touch/scrap the plinth/armboard with the end of the I Beam, when you lift the arm at the end of a record. That is, if you have developed a habit like I have, of lifting the arm tube higher than required in protection of the stylus. This was an easy habit to break.

I talked to Bruce about it and he said multiple parameters get changed when doing this and that in general he's for an adjustment that results in an increase in VTF requiring the lead being moved further out on the I Beam. But we need to try it out in our rooms/gear. Look forward to both of your impressions when you get a chance to try it. I’ve had two positive listening sessions with now.
Cheers

Chris - thanks - no war down here.
My motivation is to help people set their systems up correctly and learn more. We all learn from shared experiences. The debate over the past 7-8 weeks could have been much shorter had it not been inundated with junk science.

Richardkrebs, claims to be an authority, yet all the way through been belligerently dismissive of Bruce's recommended set up procedures and of the design principles that underpin this arm. Many of his arguments put forward were simply nonsense.

Everything I have said has since been verified by Bruce Thigpen's recent communications. The addition of lead mass and removal of the decoupling of the I beam will load the cantilever, increase distortion, and deliver a bloated bass response.

Would you have rather everyone who read this thread ignore Bruce's advice - add lead mass and bolt up their I beams as was suggested ad infinitum?
That, along with much uninformed comment, is an affront to the time and dedication that Bruce has put into this product. It is impossible not to have robust debate when basic scientific principles continue to be denied.

Dover.
To address the points raised.
Scaremongering.
This comment was posted in response to your claim that the weight of my arm was sufficient to cause damage to cartridges. You actively warned others against adding mass because of this belief. During the course of this discussion it emerged that the Kuzma is actually heavier than my arm.
While it is self evident that the forces seen by the cartridge will be higher with the Kuzma, you have posted zero evidence that these forces are sufficient to cause damage. The Kuzma has been around for long enough now for any problems of this nature to have surfaced.
Scaremongering....Absolutely.

My comment about being the only person who could speak with authority on the subject was referenced to the sound of my modified ET in its current form. That is a true statement.

It must have been 5 years since we heard each other's systems.
I have not commented on my impressions of yours because I assume that your system has improved since then and any comments I made would be out of date.
I would expect the same courtesy from you.
For the record. While the room is small, it is larger than you recall.
Re the acoustats, they may still look like 2+2s but that is where the similarity ends. Further someone once said something like. .. many a fine tune played on an old fiddle.

BTs letter is clear and well understood.
My position has always been that there are valid alternatives
Rockport, Walker, Kuzma. Just like Bruce, these arms are designed by people who are obsessive in their quest for ultra quality accurate record reproduction. The sales and reviews of these products would suggest that they have indeed achieved superlative results. With a design approach that you claim is fundamentally flawed.
Their designs are valid and I would say that it is l disingenuous on your part to suggest that the owners of these arms possess equipment that needs to be "looked at" , that they are all listening in comprised rooms and that they all prefer one note, excessive bass, along with the sound of miss tracking cartridges.

Yes the ET2 is a brilliant design. There are other brilliant designs