Tonearm recommendation

Fleib - 
There was a discussion on FR64 geometry earlier in this forum. I use Dertonams recommended geometry outlined here -
https://forum.audiogon.com/discussions/the-pivoted-arm-experiment-is-over
There is also a valuable discussion on geometry at it relates to various arms and records here -
https://forum.audiogon.com/discussions/uni-protractor-set-tonearm-alignment
Both these threads are well worth reading.
The general consensus from FR64S owners was that Dertonams recommendation of 231.5mm pivot to spindle was beneficial. If I recall you would expect a reduction in tracking error; I think that his theory was also based on a reduction in break torque.

Dertonam has created his own nulls (UNIDIN) based on the records in his collection. They are available with his Acoustical Systems Smartractor alignment tools.  As you would know the optimum null points in an ideal world would be chosen based on your record collection. eg. a classical collection from the 50's/60's with a small runout groove vs a vintage jazz collection with a longer run out groove.

As I don't have the Smartractor I am using his recommended 231.5 pivot to stylus distance and the Dennesen protractor which uses Baerwald. This was Dertonams recommended protractor prior to his own.

I have compared the 2 P2S alignments with several cartridges in the FR64S including the Dynavector Karat Nova 13D, Koetsu Black, Victor X1 (original with beryllium cantilever/shibata tip, Denon 103D, Ikeda and in all instances I get a more natural sound, much larger soundstage and increased transparency within the soundstageusing the 231.5 P2S.


     

Dear shubert: México.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.

Hello Stringreen,

the same EXACT sequence occurred for me back in 2000 when I had the 
JMW-10 with a Grado Statement.

Your observations mirrored mine exactly.

And a difference, as you noted, of only a single drop of oil in the well made all the difference in the world.

Cheers,                    Crazy Bill

Dear fleib: """ your bit about pure musical information going through the wires is bizarre. Of course you can overdamp an arm. Look at the output on a scope. """

of course is bizarre but remember that I’m talking on an " ideal and perfect audio world "": that’s what all audiophiles want (  "" pure musical information going through the wires...""" )  and only can dream with. At least me.

Why? because that’s not posible with so many vibration/noise/resonances/distortions/anomalies sources that not only surround the LP/cartridge but where any single part of the whole analog rig has and intimate relationship in between others making more complex to identify each one source of those " overall anomalies " and the result when those single source " anomalies " are mixed with the other ones coming for the other analog rig sources and that’s why we need to " overdamp " each one of those sources of " overall anomalies " that always degrade the recorded signal because all those " anomalies does not exist in the recorded signal that comes in the LP groove modulations.

Now, I posted this so try to give you the answer to that WHY? and share your answer or answers with all of us:


"""" Why exist the still points, vibraplane platforms, after market tubes dampers and " better " tubes circuit board bases, items to damp speakers/CD players/amps/preamps, cable elevators, clamps and TT mats, room treatment, speaker designers that take care of internal cabinet damping along the choosed build materials, speaker designers that take care seriously that the speaker crossover be perfectly damped and even designs with an external crossover, we audiophuiles that are looking how to kill vibrations anywhere the audio system?

Why every one: designers, manufacturers, reviewers, customers are looking where is that best damping item? WHY? """""


Yes, we can damp a tonearm or any other audio item at different damping levels even " overdamp " looking at the output of a scope ( as you said it. ) and this is part of the main subject of what I’m talking about. In an ideal world what I need is that looking to that scope signal exist no " anomalies/deviations " of any kind to preserve that critical/sensitive/fragile " pure music information traveling in the internal tonearm wires ".

" Overdamp "?, to whom? where is the damage to the music signal coming in the wires that comes from what’s recorded in the LP grooves modulations?

I made those questions to you and any one but first that any one even think about I would like to ask to you and the other contributors in this thread this:

DO YOU WANT TO LISTEN WHAT THE PHONO CARTRIDGE PICK UP FROM THE LP MODULATIONS WITH OUT ANY SINGLE " ANOMALIES " OR YOU WANT TO LISTEN IT WITH ADDED FULL CONTAMINATION OF EVERY KIND OF SYSTEM GENERATED DISTORTIONS?

that’s my target and for I can be nearer tho that target I have to mantain at minimum all the audio system generated " anomalies " at each single system link and damping is only an important step to do it along other steps.

Due that that’s my main target I have not fear to " overdamp " because according with that target no one can do it.

Which your target?

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.


PS: btw, there is in this thread a gentleman that ( some years ago ) , if I remember, posted answering to an Agoner that " we can´t overdamp " a TT or platter TT " ( more or less. ).

I know he is reading this and I hope he can post about because is a person that I have high respect for his knowledge level and if he posted that I know he has several reasons about.