Eminent Technology ET-2 Tonearm Owners

Hi Pegasus - I think I missed my calling. I am amazed by the physics that is happening with my turntable setup. Here I went, and became a consultant involved in a field, Business/IT, that was so new and exciting some 35-40 years ago. Who knew back then that it would be ever and always changing; so much so, that if you did not stay current, even for a few years, you become obsolete very fast.
  
You can't change Physics. Many have tried. Some have even tried with the ET2.

:^0

I happen to come across this Bruce Thigpen '07 interview in a Machine Design publication. It has some nice insight into Bruce and his products.

My lifelong fascination with audio and sound reproduction resulted in the start-up of Eminent Technology in 1982. Unfortunately, 1982 was also the year the compact-disc player came along. And so it appeared that our first product, a high-end, air-bearing phonograph tonearm, wasn't going to keep the lights on indefinitely. Still, the demand for high-tech, high-end record players never disappeared entirely.

8^0

In the article Bruce gives good info on how dipole speakers work, and the reason for their bass limitations. There is also good info on how the rotary woofer works.  

Enjoy.

here is the link 

http://machinedesign.com/archive/good-vibrations-0

Thanks Chris, interesting info from Bruce, a very talented, clever, and creative engineer. Why his LFT-8b loudspeaker isn't more widely known and owned is a mystery to me.

Bdp24
Why his LFT-8b loudspeaker isn’t more widely known and owned is a mystery to me.

Hi Eric
Well imo..they sure don’t have any WAF. He should make a white wood version maybe, sort of like the jacket the assistant in that article is wearing. :^)

I think without the grills they are the coolest looking speakers I have ever owned. Others would say ....huh ? those are speakers ? Sound comes from them ? Regretted selling mine.
As far as I know from a few years back the LFT8 speakers have always been in demand with a backlog when ordering?

Hello,

Been reading for about a year but this is my first post.  It is a real testament to the ET arm and Bruce that this thread has lasted over 5 years for a tonearm over 30 years old. The real purpose of my post is to thank you all for the knowledge and expertise you have shared.  While I have owned my ET II arm for nearly 30 years, I have only recently started tweaking it.  My tweaks are a direct result of the knowledge  shared by all of you. 

I have the original ET II arm with few upgrades except the trough which I abandoned years ago.  I found The silicon migrated out of the trough and created a real mess.  I was still using the original pump that came with the arm but had added a home made surge tank.

After reading posts here I bought a Wisa pump from eBay.  Got stung.  The pump was extremely noisy and had obviously been used with a salt water fish tank.  I took it apart and got it quieted down but it only lasted about two weeks and broke down.  I replaced it with a Medo pump and in the process discovered my surge tank was leaking at the connectors.  Built a new PVC surge tank with brass connectors and bought a pressure gauge which showed I was running @ 8 1/2 PSI.  The improvement in sound quality was jaw dropping.  And remember, this an original arm without the high pressure manifold.

 However, the Medo pump was a little noisy and since it is rated for only 60 minutes, it ran quite hot.  So.......I built a soundproof (well almost soundproof) box, installed a fan on one end and vent on the other to enclose the pump.  Voila, not audible from more than a few feet away and now runs just barely warm.  

Well, with this success I had to have more and read a bunch more posts here which got me intrigued with the debate over less weight further out the beam or more weight closer in.  I am using a Lyra Delos cartridge which Bruce considers light weight.  I was using 4 weights at about the 3 1/2 position on the beam.  I removed one weight which moved me out to about 4 on the beam. This lowered base response but was muddy and sacrificed high frequency response.   I considered adding weight back and moving them in, but thought, what the heck, let's take more weight off and move further out.  I am now using only two weights and they are at the end of the beam at the 6 position.  Wow!  Base got even deeper, tightened up and the resolution returned in spades.  Add me to the fewer weights, further out crowd. 

I am not sure which of the tweaks had a larger effect, the higher pressure pump or the weight redistribution. I do know they were not the psychoacoustic improvements that disappear in a day or two.  These tweaks were the equal of a major cartridge upgrade.

Thank you all for sharing your knowledge and experience.