TONEARM DAMPING : DAMPED OR NOT ? ? USELESS ? ? WELCOMED ? ?


Dear friends: This tonearm critical subject sometimes can be controversial for say the least. Some audiophiles swear for non damped tonearms as the FR designs or SAEC or even the SME 3012 that is not very well damped in stock original status.

Some other audiophiles likes good damped tonearms.


In other thread a gentleman posted:


"  If a cartridge is properly matched to the tonearm damping is not required. " and even explained all what we know about the ideal resonance frequency range between tonearm and cartridge ( 8hz to 12hz. ). He refered to this when said: " properly matched to the tonearm ".


In that same thread that a Triplanar tonearm owner posted:


" This is the one thing about the Triplanar that I don't like. I never use the damping trough...... I imagine someone might have a use for it; I removed the troughs on my Triplanars; its nice to imagine that it sounds better for doing so. "


At the other side here it's a very well damped tonearm:


https://audiotraveler.wordpress.com/tag/townshend/


Now, after the LP is in the spining TT platter ( everything the same, including well matched cartridge/tonearm.  ) the must critical issue is what happens once the cartridge stylus tip hits/track the LP grooves modulations.

The ideal is that those groove modulations can pass to the cartridge motor with out any additional kind of developed resonances/vibrations and that the transducer makes its job mantaining the delicated and sensible signal integrity that comes in those recorded groove modulations.

 That is the ideal and could be utopic because all over the process/trip of the cartridge signal between the stylus tip ride and the output at the tonearm cable the signal suffers degradation (  resonances/vibrations/feedback ) mainly developed through all that " long trip " .


So, DAMPING IS NEED IT AT THE TONEARM/HEADSHELL SIDE OR NOT?


I'm trying to find out the " true " about and not looking if what we like it or not like it is rigth or not but what should be about and why of that " should be ".


I invite all of you analog lovers audiophiles to share your points of view in this critical analog audio subject. WHAT DO YOU THINK ABOUT?


Thank's in advance.



Regards and enjoy the MUSIC NOT DISTORTIONS,
R.






Ag insider logo xs@2xrauliruegas
Thanx for the credit rauliruegas. The second article explains why lighter arms with resonance frequencies above 8 Hz have improved performance due to lower VTF variations consequently less FM distortion. It specifically mentions low effective mass as the most significant performance parameter and shows very convincing evidence of this in experimental form. It uses this as the most plausible explanation for improved sound with low effective mass straight line trackers. This also explains the poor performance of air bearing and roller bearing types of straight line trackers that have very high horizontal effective mass. The Kuzma airline in particular got iffy reviews. It mentions damping as an afterthought. Thus it asserts that higher compliance cartridges with lower mass tonearms out perform high mass low compliance setups as long as the resonance frequency is kept above 8 Hz. This also explains why turntables with vacuum clamping out perform turntables that do not have vacuum clamping. It would be interesting to perform the same experiment using both reflex and vacuum clamping to see if there is a significant difference. Putting this together it would seem you want a turntable with clamping that will eliminate warps, a lighter tonearm with a more compliant cartridge. This study was done in the 1980s! Maybe moving away from arms like the Infinity Black Widow and cartridges like the Shure V15 was a bad idea. Big arms with stiff cartridges might not be bad as long as the record is kept as flat as possible.
The first article is hard to qualify because the reproduction of the grafts and the explanation of what is going on is rather poor at least for a simpleton like me.  
Raul I can say that you like too much damping and you are losing some signal... so your Micro Seiki is dull. 
So, Raul, for what spring is used? I can help you it was used in Empire tonearm and Ikeda copied it. It was used in Gray Research 103-SL if to look into old times, many old Ortofon tonearms have springs...
Why Ikeda changed from 64 to 64S to 64Fx to current version which is 64S with some tube damping?
Why people pay so much for old SME tonearms with stainless steel tubes, why in Japan they do had R version of SME tonearms. And why Japan ignored SME series V and IV in general? I would like to remind you that Japanese are not deaf and they do go to concerts as at home space is very limited.


Bukanona, I honestly believe it is a cultural thing. They like the aesthetic of a large S arm, removable headshell and low compliance cartridges.
They probably think the newer SME arms are ugly.  
Post removed 
So Raul you don't know answer into simple question? You can walk on water?
Your question about my system do you think that it will help you to gain knowledge? Do you know the meaning of world gentleman?
I can say for you phono part Garrard 301 refurbished with Saec 308sx or Thorens td520 with Jelco 750. DaVa stepup. Bunch of phono cartridges mostly Lomc. Rada phono premp.
So you feel it is enough? I do set turntables for friends so I know what I am doing but sorry I don't walk on water.