Tonearm mount on the plinth or on Pillar ?

It's remarkable how durable is this controversy over separate vs linked and how vehement are the opinions, one way or the other.  Pryso and Chris, for me, bolting the outboard arm pod to the plinth fits into my philosophy.   Fleib, your statement: "There will be a delay as these vibrations are then transmitted from one to the other. This results in additional smearing/coloration. It could also result in greater amplitude and additional coloration.", is for me a reason why optimally the linkage must be extremely massive and rigid.  Isolating the two elements does not seem to me to be a solution to the problem you cite. Most ordinary tt plinths don't cut the mustard on the criterion of linkage.  Take a look at the underside and "armboard" of a Kenwood L07D, if you want to see an example of what I think is a good way to establish proper connectivity.  Also, take a look at a modern Galibier turntable for another example.  By the way, I have long been of the opinion that a "plinth" that minimally extends out beyond the perimeter of the platter, IOW, a circular but massive plinth a la Halcro's latest or Thuchan's new slate plinth for the TT101, or the Galibier tt's, is optimal.  (There are many more commercial products built this way.) I suspect that the older traditional rectangular plinth which provides a large open flat surface out beyond the platter can induce colorations by reflecting sound produced at the stylus/LP interface back at the stylus, but it's just a guess.  Thus a "pod" for the tonearm is fine with me, but it should be very positively linked to the support structure for the tt bearing, if not directly to the bearing.  

Dear @lewm: """  It's remarkable how durable is this controversy over separate vs linked and how vehement are the opinions, one way or the other. """

Either, by theory or real tests,  some way or the other almost all of us talk about " colorations/distortions " .

The " theoretical " people ( like you ) can't prove those theories with out first hand real tests/measurements and the ones ( like me ) that already tested and made several comparisons in between TT integrated arm pillar and stand alone tonearm pillar neither have scientific measurements of what we are listening or not but the " testers " have a clear adevantage over the theoretical gentlemans: we can attest a " better/lower colored " quality sound level that for example you have not and can't imagine.

As I posted for a theoretical opinion can has value it needs first hand experiences in each one own audio system, if not your opinions are just: useless.

Now, is't easy to measure ( through a scientific methodology. ) the theoretical " additional colorations/distortions " you, atmasphere and the theoreticals ones supports?, I think not for any one.

We have to think how to aisle the specific  " colorations/distortions " created in specific by the sole integrated arm pod variable and the stand alone arm pod variable against all the other variables ( colorations/distortions. ) involved in the end result when the sound waves comes in the air and goes through our ears.

Who of you can make the measures that with certainty.

So and till today the best is to listen it as some of us did it or still do and with all respect for people like you just forgeret on this audio subject.

There are people like you that are willing to try it and some of them will try through the time but you are not even willing to try but always give the same theoretical statement with no single fact that prove it and that's why I posted is useless and with low value opinion.

I know, any one is free to give his opinion: valid or not. So you can go on with.

Anyway, stand alone tonearm pod or not in both " configurations " exist distortions of many kind. Wich configuration puts us nearer to the recording?, this's the question and main subject. No one is the Bible's boss.


Regards and enjoy the music,
R.

@Atmasphere 

What is the vertical angle being cut into the disc where you work ?

thanks  

Raul, You are conflating opinion with fact.  The fact that you listened to your turntable and your tonearms in a variety of set-ups, and by your own admission made no measurements but merely judged the various configurations subjectively, only adds up to.... your opinion of what sounds "best".  Modern principles of science and experimentation show conclusively that unblinded testing of this sort is never free of bias. On the other hand, I may be accused of bias too, but is it not true that one wants no motion at the stylus tip, ideally, except that which is induced by groove undulations deliberately introduced during the encoding of music? (I am hoping you would agree with that premise.)  Then, if so, why would one want to take a chance on movement of the tonearm pivot with respect to the turntable bearing/platter/LP surface that could be due to the differential effect of forces acting on one and not the other or both to different extents?  I cannot think of a reason why that would be acceptable, if it can be avoided.  That's the theory on which I base my choices.  In this case, I think it is YOU who are subconsciously preferring "distortions".  I am completely of the "live and let live" philosophy.  Doing what you like is perfectly OK with me; just don't turn around and accuse ME of being deluded.  There is no science at all in your approach.  If you want to do some science, take some relevant measurements using sensitive instruments. By the way, if you are still using those Audio Technica pucks under your turntable, then even Halcro and the other Copernicans have left you behind, because they have come around to using rather massive cradles for both the turntable and the arm pod. 

Enjoy the music.