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
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.



fleib
1,124 posts
 

Griff,

Our posts crossed. There is no conversion between 10Hz cu and 100Hz.  100Hz cu is a measure of tracking ability at 100Hz, not compliance. We've converted some AT dynamic cu by measuring resonant frequency on known arms, and have a sliding conversion scale, but it doesn't always hold true, especially at the extremes.

VTF might give a better idea and better yet a test record accurate even for an individual sample of a cart model.

Regards,

griffithds
852 posts
 
Flieb,

  I would not consider a 30cu as 'pretty high'.  That is 'extremely high'! (grin)
Like I said, all depends on where you want to draw the line between what you consider 'high' and what you consider 'low'.  To me, under 10 is low.  Yes, Dover.  If you only look at the numbers, then the FR's would be considered low.  But not if they (the Japanese), were using @100 Hz for measurement.  It would make those FR's closer to 12cu  if they used the 10Hz method.
  I am still at a loss as to why the Sonus works so well on the Lustre.  I was actually worried about mounting it on the high mass Lustre.  It's not like I could easily go out and find a replacement stylus for it if I happened to destroy the suspension by using it on this 'high mass' arm.  
  I did make an armboard just for the Lustre so I can quite easily swap the Lustre for the JVC 7045.  I left the original armboard from the TT-81 attached to the JVC 7045 and I will leave the new armboard attached to the Lustre.  Even left the phono cables attached to each (2ft. Signal Cable Silver Resolution).  So remove 4 arm board screws, and do the quick swap. Piece of cake!  (grin)
This way I can continue to use the JVC 7045 for cartridges like the Sonus. 
That is if I can ever pull myself away from those FR's. (grin)
Regards,
More to discover