Tonearm recommendation

Flieb,

    I have settled on the Lustre 801 for my JVC TT-81 over the JVC 7045.  This is not because one is better than the other.  But because the JVC 7545 has no advantage over my other arm.  the Graham 2.2.  The Lustre 801 does.  The Graham by the way is mounted on my VPI Aries.  The Lustre is able to correctly handle higher compliance cartridges. It is considered a heavier arm than either the JVC 7045 or the Graham 2.2.  The Graham and the JVC are considered light/medium to medium arms.  In actual use, I prefer the ease of  set-up and adjustment of the JVC over the Lustre.  
  The Lustre's original internal wiring is silver.  Same as the Graham's.  There were discussions between Joseph De Phillip of Discovery Cable and Bob Graham as to whether Bob should use ofc copper wire or silver when he was designing the original 1.5t which became the 2.0 and then the 2.2..  Bob preferred silver.  Joseph preferred ofc.  Now that I have heard both types of wire in the Lustre, I also prefer the ofc copper over the silver version.  There is more 'air' around the indivual instruments and the sound stage seems to have more depth.   But this choice only is in regards to the Lustre. I wish I was able to hear my Graham wired with ofc. None was ever offered to the Public wired in this way.  Why does the thought 'tone control' come to mind!  (grin)
   You ask me to state my favorite of the three arms.  I wish I could or wish there were enough differences  to be able to actually prefer the performance of one over the other.  I do have my favorite but my preferences of one over the other have more to do with ease of use or amount of easy range of adjustment. 
The Graham easily is the #1 of my three in this regard.  But performance wise,  I could live life 'happily ever after' with any of the three!  Flieb, I do not mean that to be some kind of 'cop out answer'.  It is truly how I feel.
Regards,    

Flieb,

To use the Lustre, the operator is not aware of it being regarded as a heavy arm.  It does not look like a heavy arm but the arm tube 'is' Stainless Steel where as the Grahams are Aluminum or Ceramic and the JVC's are also of Aluminum mix.  The Lustre also has some priority designed wire damping done inside of the arm tube and a unique bearing pivot design also.  There are many things in regards to the Lustre that was not the norm for a tone arm so too state that " the magnetic/dynamic application of tracking force - dynamic VTF w/o mechanical liability"  as being 'the' cause and effect would be just conjecture on my part. As you are aware, the arms performance is the combination of many different aspects of its design.  
I do not in any way want to 'short change' the JVC 7045.  But my high compliance cartridges seem to have better bass control when they were mounted on the Lustre.  I only own a few of those but one of them is a favorite.  It is the Ikeda 9C III (no cantilever).  I also have a couple of the high compliant FR-7's, one being the 'fz' (another favorite).    The difference between the arms is suttle but once you know that they sound better on a certain arm, it is hard to enjoy them when you do not have that arm installed.
I have a spare (rebuilt) TT-81 that I did my best to come up with a place that I could place a 3rd turntable so that I could leave the JVC 7045 in place, but short of knocking down and re-configuring a wall, I am at a lost as how to get it in a position to actually use.  I'm sure you are aware of space constraints with all those turntables/arms that you own!  (grin)
Regards,

griffithds
I am not sure why you call the Ikeda & FR7 high compliance. I have had 2 Ikedas - they are very low compliance. My experience with the Lustre 801 was excellent results with a Koetsu Black back in the day - very seamless sound, smooth and grain free. Isamu Ikeda does not recommend unipivots with his Ikeda cantilever less cartridges but I have run mine in my Naim Aro with no tracking issues at all.

Rauls comments about the Technics EPA 100 are superfluous in this thread as it was never designed for heavy low compliance cartridges and in fact you have to modify the counterweight for heavier cartridges. Notwithstanding ruby bearings are very brittle and most enthusiasts of the EPA100 replace the ruby bearings with silicone nitride or ceramic balls. I would not buy a second hand EPA 100 without budgeting for the bearings to be replaced.

Hi Dover,

To call the FR’s or my Ikeda a ’high compliance’ cartridge will depend upon where you draw the line between what you consider ’high’ and what you consider ’low’. If you throw in the mix ’medium compliance’ everything changes again. My problem with cartridges manufactured in Japan in this regard is the not knowing at what Hz the published spec’s. were done at. Many of the Japanese publishes their dynamic compliance specifications relative to 100Hz and not at 10 Hz which is commonly used in the Western World. This would produce a different outcome in regards to the actual number presented.
VE states the Dynamic Compliance at 7x10-6cu/Dyne. Is that at 100Hz?
10Hz? I have also run 'high compliance cartridges with my unipivot Graham with no issues. It is considered a medium mass arm. The JVC 7045 is considered a light mass arm. The Lustre 801 is considered a heavy mass arm.
My FR’s and the Ikeda preforms better on the heavier Lustre than on the light JVC. I deducted from all this, that the products I own that have been produced by Ikeda-san are of the ’higher compliance types’.
I am not a ’numbers’ kind of guy. I use my ears.
They preformed better on the higher mass arm than they did on the light mass arm so I have mounted the higher mass arm on my TT-81.
I do not consider it a better arm than the JVC 7045. Just better suited for certain cartridges.
I also have very low compliance cartridges. A Sonus Dimension 5 being one of them. It also sound great on the heavy mass Lustre so go figure?
Like I said, I prefer to use my ears that stated numbers!
Regards,