The Arm/Cartridge Matching Myth
Before I address the interesting comments and Links posted by Dover and The Professor (Timeltel)......I need to ask a serious question that has been bothering me 🤔 Why is it so important for a few Posters to continually, repetitively and monotonously gnaw and harp, howl and vent, rail and condemn against a personal honest viewpoint that is contradictory to theirs? I get it when they make crystal clear their viewpoints the first time they do it? I'm not trying to convince THEM to change their viewpoints..... Why do they insist on trying to change mine? 🧐 They will probably claim they are doing it to 'protect all you newbies out there from destroying your audio lives' by actually CONSIDERING my viewpoint. Atmasphere even wants to have my opinions 'struck out'.....'banned' 🤯 If my Thread were a book.....he would have it burned in a public square and on this 75th anniversary of the liberation of Auschwitz Concentration Camp.....it is wise to reflect on where this ideology leads..... No....their outrage is not altruistic. It is all about ego and 'power'.... They NEED you to believe that THEY know more than you.... If I read someone's opinion on a Forum that claims that valve amplifiers are inherently better than solid-state....do I really need to harangue that Thread to attempt to prove him wrong? I say 'fine'.....as long as you're happy. If that same Poster produces charts and technical reports to 'prove' his case.....do I then think to myself "I'm never going to listen to another solid-state amplifier again"? There seems to me, to be something inherently 'twisted' about people like this 🙃 I even provide over a hundred YOUTUBE VIDEOS of my System playing dozens of varying, revealing and demanding tracks (not the bland 'close-miked' female and one guitar Audiophile-Approved track favoured by Hi-Fi Shows) so that you can listen for yourself to see if you can hear the problems the industry is warning you about. Do these three individuals take the opportunity to reveal their 'superiority' by actually pointing out the problems they can HEAR on my videos? It's much easier to 'poo-poo' the videos than reveal their hearing deficiencies or admitting their fallibility. Do they take the opportunity to post their OWN videos to show what a 'REAL' system (like theirs') sounds like? Don't hold your breath because that would be the ultimate revelation of the 'Emperor's Clothes'. Now I'm off for our regular Thursday 'Lunch With The Boys' where we sit around for three hours devouring bowls of Laksas and an entire bottle of the finest blended Scotch between the three of us 🥃 Dover and the Professor will have to wait....😉 Oh...and @mijostyn.....I think I've discovered the Parrot the Pirates are trying to sell me. |
Regards, gentlemen: Halcro (Henry) is remarkably experienced in audio. I've trusted his impressions and continue to do so. Allow me to elaborate. In a paper presented to the AES by Shure technician C. A. Anderson: "resonance exists because the arm and pickup assembly behaves like an effective mass that is coupled to the record groove by means of a stylus assembly with its own mass, compliance, and mechanical resistance". Seems pretty clear, yes? Let's take it further then: Ideally, frequencies BELOW the natural resonance produced by warps, eccentric groves or surface imperfections will not disturb the signal because the tonearm and cartridge move as a unit. Ideally. This occurs when compliance and mass allow the tonearm and cartridge to remain centered above the groove. Precisely what I expect of my tonearm(s). What might our experienced listener hear ***in his system***? : Resonances can be considered as being constructive or destructive. When a recorded signal matches the natural resonance of our tonearm/cartridge, it's commonly accepted that the recorded signal can be enhanced by 6 to 20 dBl. Excessive excursion of the cantilever is the source, current is proportionate to stimulus and response is the sum of mechanical and electrical properties. View either the cantilever or tonearm as a rod, tube or beam, either will none-the-less tend to resonate at certain frequencies. At resonant frequencies the stylus tends to "scrub" in the groove. In the instance of a gross compliance/mass mismatch the entire tonearm can be seem moving laterally, sometimes leaving the groove entirely. Wow, flutter and warbling might be observed. In the instance of destructive resonances a diminution or exaggeration of signal at specific frequencies might be anticipated. Under certain system related conditions constructive resonance may (or may not) be heard as beneficial. In fewer words, "if it sounds good, it is good". How this relates to an accurate transcripion of the media is another matter and a discussion I'll not be drawn into. None-the-less and regardless how "good" it sounds (Henry my friend), any argument that spring/mass relationships are not a consideration might be re-examined. Looking forward to your comments & Peace, |
TL;DR I was however fortunate enough to catch @kirkus’ post. Thanks for taking the time to post. --- Have you ever played with tonearms which have multiple counterweights that can be used in different combinations? The resonant frequency shift from using different combinations (maintaining the same tracking force) it typically much less than 1 Hz, but the effect is salutary. When I perform a setup for a customer with an arm having this capability (Kuzma 4Point, Tri-Planar & Moerch being three examples), there’s an optimum combination, for any particular cartridge. Once you hear this, you’ll understand that resonant frequency tuning is more than about warped records. Thom @ Galibier Design |
