Eminent Technology ET-2 Tonearm Owners



Where are you? What mods have you done ?

I have been using these ET2's for over 9 years now.
I am still figuring them out and learning from them. They can be modified in so many ways. Bruce Thigpen laid down the GENIUS behind this tonearm over 20 years ago. Some of you have owned them for over 20 years !

Tell us your secrets.

New owners – what questions do you have ?

We may even be able to coax Bruce to post here. :^)

There are so many modifications that can be done.

Dressing of the wire with this arm is critical to get optimum sonics along with proper counterweight setup.

Let me start it off.

Please tell us what you have found to be the best wire for the ET-2 tonearm ? One that is pliable/doesn’t crink or curl. Whats the best way of dressing it so it doesn’t impact the arm. Through the spindle - Over the manifold - Below manifold ? What have you come up with ?
128x128ct0517
The newer Magnesium wand is definitely heavier, and precluded my using a stock I-beam. In the final listen, I had to conclude that two springs work best in my setup, with two little damping pads removed, allowing freer movement. Bruce said I didn't need them.
My cartridge is supposedly best with the top surface parallel to the record surface. This is hard to eyeball, especially when the arm wand looks parallel and the cartridge looks tilted back.  Does anyone know if, when the arm is parallel to the record, the cartridge is parallel as well? I mean is this a good starting point for setting VTA? My eyes are old and parallax gets the best of my judgement.
Thanks,
John 
What started me thinking about the issue of how much to (not) torque down on bolts/screws was when I realized that I had inadvertently compressed and deformed one of my wands’ "head shell" to the point that the cartridge would no longer be "parallel to the record surface"; which I believe, in theory, it should be. Obviously, that is still no guarantee of intended VTA.

Thanks frogman,
I don't overtighten my cartridge screws, and my wand is spanking new.
So, can I assume that if the wand is parallel to the record, the cartridge top is as well? I just need a starting point.
John  
Before setting for Cart VTA.

There is 1) manifold air bearing height and 2) armwand height.
3) Then the Cart.

That’s how I have done it. When I was on that slippery slope with the turntables I must have mounted the tonearm; well you know I don’t know how many times on different tables. Different height platters and armboards. Sometimes no armboard, but separate armpods instead.
So what I do.

1) Air Bearing height
The inscribed line on the middle of the manifold is the guide for proper vertical height of the air bearing spindle. With the VTA range in the middle raise/lower post height to try to get as close to possible to having the record surface even with the inscribed line in the manifold.

2) Armwand height
If your armwand height does not allow you to mount your cart properly, raise/lower the armwand height. The stock joint (gooseneck) allows for lowering or raising the armwand to get parallel. I lost this adjustment with the Aluminum Gooseneck I got from NZ. The upgraded Aluminum Joint that Bruce sells now still retains this adjustment.

3) Cart
This should get you in the ball park with being parallel, and use the VTA to fine tune by ear. Now due to how complicated the vinyl set up is, (so many variables) , I always set up Digital first, get it working right, then I unleash the vinyl and see how close I got. This is what I have done in the past going by memory.

*************************

A couple updates.

I struck out today at the hobby shop on trying to get some kitty attracting foot long I Beams. 8^0
They looked really good on the internet link I posted but were way to thin and flimsy in person.

I also asked Bruce in the ideal situation how long should the I beam be. He told me shorter than a foot and as close as possible to the length of the armwand. This supports the teeter totter analogy I used earlier. I told him to consider doing a run on the longer I Beams as they are fairly inexpensive even with our Canadian dollar :^( and that there would probably be people interested when they found out.

Hi Pegasus

I’m not exactly shure what this would mean? More upfront placement = faster bass?

No not faster but bass that when you hear it, is not bass that has bounced off your room walls - God only knows how many times (being sarcastic) before it finally reaches the listeners ears.

So in reading further into your post. you said.

But I agree, that close-field placement is the preferable "error", because a) the excursion / level of the subwoofer can be considerably lower, b) the decrease of room reverberation level relative to the direct sound level should reduce audible room resonances & bass colorations = c) the modification of the subs frequency response by room resonances drops an order of magnitude.

Yes - and all of these benefits include the sub lasting longer ! You know I consider subs disposable items. When they fail - good luck getting the amp and electronics out of the good ones as it has to be glued in there good with all the vibrations. In fact I won't say which manufacturer, but a very well respected one - told a friend when his failed "we can't repair" but,  "we will sell you a new one" 8^0 .

All it takes is one 22 year old blasting XXXXX music over a period of time - that sub will indeed fail sooner. Let me know if you wanna hear some funny stories about my 22 year old male with his two JL Audio subs under the back bench seat of his Honda Ridgeline ? his truck has 350,000 kilometers. Still no rattles.