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
 

Rauliruegas,

What is wrong with you? Things get interesting and you're not the center of attention so you say something stupid and insulting? 

Get some help my friend. You have a lot of friends around here and no one will hold it against you.

Regards,

Post removed 
Ag insider logo xs@2x
rauliruegas
13,002 posts
 
fleib: Don't try to create some kind of confusion in the people for what I posted here ( what I posted in other thread has additional explanation that because you are so dogmatic can't turn your " face " and only stay staright. ).

In reference to what I posted here my advise is that you read again the original Löfgren  works/solutions on tonearm/cartridge alignment. It's useless to follow the analysis with you till you read that original white papers where you could find out that the effective lenght does not change because is one of the fixed numbers/value in the equations solution ( we can change it if we want it but this is not the main subject. )  As I said what Löfgren equations solutions ( and Baerwald/Bauer/Pisha/Stevenson/et. ) gives are: offset angle, overhang, pivot to spindle distance ( by diference. ) and null points not effective lenght.

We can manipulate those equations to achieve a tonearm effective lenght  but that again is not the subject on what I'm refering to. I'm talking of the Löfgren original work.

Enough for now.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
fleib
1,124 posts
 

Raul,

You're fond of calling other people ignorant, questioning their sensibilities and powers of discernment, yet your ignorance is so great you're like a child who skipped school.  Look what you've done. Nearly a day has passed and the conversation has stopped except for Raul trying to prove his superior knowledge level. I was trying to give you an easy out, but you're tenacious like a bull dog ripping someone's pant leg.

You quoted a sentence out of context. Ironically, that sentence happens to be correct. The only stipulation is mounting distance remains constant. I thought that was obvious from the context which wasn't about either of the Loefgren alignments, so put it to bed. You don't know what you're talking about.  Now you have an explanation why a table S/N can be 92dB or whatever and you're saying I'm dogmatic?  Ignorante!

What happened at Lenco Heaven? There's a wild story on your MM/MI thread about your emotional problems and cat photos etc. I don't want to embarrass you, but you make it impossible not to. 

I think you need a time out from here to straighten out emotions. Why don't you take a break and find someone to talk to?  I won't be back to this thread. I'm too busy now and can read about any further developments. I was serious when I said you have many friends here and I don't think people will hold it against you.

Regards,




Ag insider logo xs@2x
rauliruegas
13,002 posts
 
fleib:  """  The only stipulation is mounting distance remains constant """

I ask you or gave my advise ( twice . ) that take a look again to the original Löfgren papers and I can see you did not and follow posting that kind of sentences that does not help. Why don't do that and share with us your findings and if not that be that way. I can't help about.

"""   I'm too busy now  """.

OH !  I see that "  you're tenacious "  too!! and that you don't want to help you . Fine with me.

Anyway and with this I'm finish in this critical audio subject for any audiophile:



"""  Look to these real calculated numbers/values for a 10" tonearm using Baerwald and Lofgreen B alignments:

both cases the cartridge offset angle is the same: 21.586

the difference in cartridge overhang in between is only 0.457 mm  """


that is what I posted to don_c55 where that overhang diference came from the individual Baerwald/Löfgren calculations: 

Baerwald: 16.224  and Löfgren:  16.681

what fleib said is that the tonearm mounting distance in that 10" tonearm stay the same and only has to adjust the overhang.

Well, in those papers I'm talking about the equations solution, not only for Löfgren but for the other similar kind of alignments states this:

M= L - d      where M is the pivot to spindle distance and d the overhang with L as effective lenght that was part of the input data in those equations and here for this particular 10" tonearm.

L is data input and M changes according the new calculated overhang (d) . The new tonearm mounting distance is: 

237.78 for Baerwald   and   237.32 for Löfgren. Mantaining same effective length.

As I said we can manipulate those original equations to leave M as data input or anything  we wish but that is not the main subject here.

Btw, Stevenson calculated values are: 

overhang:  13.43  and offset angle:  19.912°   for that 10" tonearm.

Stevenson has two solutions as Löfgren the first one is similar to Löfgren A and the results here is his second solution, way diferent.


In the other side you can't embarrass me  on that subject especialy when  you don't participated  there. So, don't worry about, I'm not I have nothing for what there or any where I could have some kind of that " embarrass ".

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.


More to discover