2. analog
  3. 119516-43184

Tonearm recommendation

Hello all,
Recently procured a Feickert Blackbird w/ the Jelco 12 inch tonearm.
The table is really good, and its a keeper. The Jelco is also very good, but not as good as my Fidelity Research FR66s. So the Jelco will eventually hit Ebay, and the question remains do I keep the FR66s or sell that and buy something modern in the 5-6 K range. My only point of reference is my old JMW-10 on my Aries MK1, so I don't know how the FR66s would compare to a modern arm. So I'd like to rely on the collective knowledge and experience of this group for a recommendation.

Keep the FR66s, or go modern in the 5-6K range, say a Moerch DP8 or maybe an SME.

Any and all thoughts and opinions are of course much appreciated.

Cheers,      Crazy Bill
wrm0325
fleib
1,124 posts
 

Griff,

Thanks for the answer. It's quite interesting, glad I asked.  The 801 is the heaviest of the three, yet performs better with hi cu carts.  I would guess this is due to the magnetic/dynamic application of tracking force - dynamic VTF w/o mechanical liability.  Would you concur?       

Regards,

griffithds
852 posts
 
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,
dover
2,249 posts
 
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.

griffithds
852 posts
 
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,
fleib
1,124 posts
 

Better look out guys, this is getting interesting and you know what that means.....

The FR7 isn't high cu either. A 981 @ 30cu is pretty high, work on the 801?  Maybe some med/high cu?

Maybe there's something about steel, like a mass/ rigidity combo, which boosts arm performance. I don't mind a little mod to adapt an arm. We do it routinely with carts - glue a stylus, pot a 103, etc. but an arm is held to a higher standard. I have a titanium arm which needs a little extra damping. So what? I like the arm, it's a keeper as far as I'm concerned. 

Speaking of standards, an arm is designed with a particular alignment geometry. When mounted at specified distance with mfg. alignment, the plane of the cantilever points directly at the pivot or the intersection of the pivots. To set up or align an arm in some other manner is to defeat the design unless it's coincidental. When you adopt a different alignment you're also changing effective length and offset angle.



More to discover