Eminent Technology ET-2 Tonearm Owners

Slaw- from my experience if another adjustment is needed for overhang, something is off in the setup. To break down the set up we have 3 sections.

1) Sub-base plate – the one with the 3 leveling spikes and the one bolt holding the arm. Holds all the goods.

2) Mounting base and post. (includes the VTA arc block) – holds manifold, spindle, armtube, counterweight. Mounting post needs to be level and true with platter level for VTA to work properly.

3)The actual manifold housing, air bearing spindle, along with the armtube and counterweight.

If the ET2 is setup properly, the mounting base post should be level and true with your platter. The mounting base post is after all what holds the VTA gearing that raises and lowers the ET2. The platter is what the stylus overhang reference gauge rests on. The two are a marriage.

Check level on both. How true they are to each other will determine imo how true your overhang is when you raise and lower the VTA.

Richardkrebs - Here is a conundrum. Stylus drag is significant, being able to slow some TT platters.

What about the other side of the coin?
What about a TT platter system that doesn’t slow down with stylus drag, but can’t slow down fast enough after a real tough vinyl passage?

That can sound interesting? Some really like this sound. :^)

Chris and Slaw. This whole geomerty thing is interesting.

This is how I understand it...if we set up a curved pillar in Slaw's "neutral zone" for a given record thickness, the arm will land the stylus at the same point on the LP for a range of VTA's, provided we always use the same thickness record. Change the record thickness and the stylus will land at a different place.
For a straight pillar, the stylus will land at the same point for different record thickness when setting the same VTA, but will move when we use a different VTA.
This could explain Slaw's need to adjust overhang for different thickness records.
So the choice is which feature do you want?

Chris. Speed accuracy, yes a Pandoras box.
Cheers.

06-12-13: Richardkrebs
Slaw.
"Variations in the degree of trueness"
Totally agree. Since I had the luxury of building the arm and TT, almost concurrently, I could deal with these topics in real time.
Getting accurate alignment when two components are brought together from different manufacturers, without the ability to adjust, would be pure luck.

Yes I suppose almost concurrently could be considered real time for some folk.

What you have forgotten is that the ET2 has 3 adjustable feet that ensures that the arm can be leveled for any turntable.

I should also point out to readers that engineering wise it is almost impossible to machine 2 flat surfaces, without manufacturing 2 or 3 of each component and flipping, polishing and lapping in the 2 surfaces to be mated. So in most instances the 3 footed approach of the ET2, properly anchored, will be inherently more stable than 2 “flat” surfaces mated together.

06-16-13: Ct0517

Richardkrebs - Here is a conundrum. Stylus drag is significant, being able to slow some TT platters.

What about the other side of the coin?
What about a TT platter system that doesn’t slow down with stylus drag, but can’t slow down fast enough after a real tough vinyl passage?
That can sound interesting? Some really like this sound. :^)

Ct0517 – the question I ask myself is
How can someone listen to a direct drive for 30 years, before discovering that the timing is out, and finding a “fix” ?
It would seem to me that they must be less sensitive to timing errors and other artefacts from the speed instability to have put up with this for so long.

Is it possible that the insertion of a lead slug and the removal of the counterweight decoupling on the ET may help to slow down the “sound” on those passages where the composer or conductor got it wrong?