2. analog
  3. 161137-245

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
big_greg
6,655 posts
 
Raul, I use the Technics for used records and have a VPI Classic 2 with a Classic 3 tonearm (no damping). With cartridges that cost about half of what the one on the VPI does, I would say the sound quality is close to 95% of the VPI. I like being able to swap cartridges so easily on the Technics. Right now I have a Clearaudio virtuoso wood on it. I think I paid about five hundred bucks for the Technics. It's quite a bargain and very enjoyable.
Ag insider logo xs@2x
rauliruegas OP
13,101 posts
 
Dear @big_greg: I'm not surprised tha your Technics gives you the 95% quality level vs your VPI.

Technics was one of the few Japanese tonearm designers/manufacturers to have in its tonearm designs a dedicated damping mechanism, obviously that it can't comes in the 1200 because price and because Technics is not dedicated to the true high-end market.

In the other side your Virtuoso cartridge is very good performer and as your Technics better that what audiophiles can thing. Good ! !

Rergards and enjoy the MUSIC NOT DISTORTIONS,
R.
Ag insider logo xs@2x
rauliruegas OP
13,101 posts
 
Dear @billstevenson  : Yes, controversial due that not all audiophiles have first hand experiences with tonearm/cartridge after market damping ( any kind of damping. ) " devices ".

Well your first set-up as you said and JGH too was a " state of the art " combination and that Shure cartridge is a great tracker so not easy to be aware of damping benefits and certainly can't be a " huge " benefits but as you posted you detected " something " for the better.

Now, the Shure brush is a terrifc damping help that permits the cartridge to track everything including the most severe warps we can imagine ( I owned and even still own a Shure other models. ) and even that something happened down there and this " something " means a lot about coming from that tonearm/combination.

"  that it made no discernible difference until too much fluid was added.  " Here as in any other damping fluid tonearm the key is: how much and to determine that we must try. We need patience and time but the rewards always are worth to do it.

In your second set-up you posted:

"  Hyperion made no audible difference, although using the Ortofon Test Record, it did track a bit better. I have not experimented with fluid levels on this set up, but left the level below half full. "

and the important experience there is that improved the track a bit better and this means lower distortions levels and more music information and again you need to test with fluid damping levels.

"""  an "O"scope was used in all my tests. Really this tool is essential for these kinds of tests to be useful and repeatable.  ""

In my case it's not a essential tool if we have the rigth evaluation overall proccess and I have it where not only one track but several LP tracks can tell you very easy if fluid damping was for the better with out necessity of " Oscope ".
Telar 1812 or RR Dafos or M&K Flamenco Fever works marvelous about if you know exactly what to look for and if the room/system has an adequated whole resolution. Those LPs are not the only one that can tell you about.

Nice to read your true contributions.

R.
Ag insider logo xs@2x
rauliruegas OP
13,101 posts
 
Dear @lohanimal  : "  I have a Townshend Rock Elite with  a Helius Omega. Sounds very good without the trough - sounds significantly better with the trough. For the uninitiated Townshend Rock turntables use a silicone damping trough at the headshell end. I have used other arms too and the step change is consistent regardless of arm

Would you have a car with spring suspension alone, or damping too?.  "

Your great tonearm comes in the OP due that's the " extreme " on overall damping thread subject.

Yes, damping benefits almost all tonearms/cartridges combinations and I said " almost " because I don't listened yet all tonearms down there.


"  I agree that cartridges do have some in-built damping but it is actually quite crude (it's a piece of rubber). The problem with a rubber spring is the opposite and equal reaction back - ie it's like puncing a ball against a wall. That's why car suspension uses damping whether through air or oil leaving the spring to do its part.

placing the damping at the front where the cartridge is creates a significant mechanical advantage and prevents spurious resonances going down the arm in the first place.  "

Quite correct and precise and that "  spurious resonances going down the arm in the first place "  is what happens with the Townshend but with a different tonearm the silicon fluid and the tape around the tonearm wand makes a really good job about. 

The @big_greg first hand experiences with his Technics 1200 is evidence that confirms with out doubt your posts.

"  The CST/Wt was partially arrived at to stop it dripping - he says a thinner oil works and to try and use the thinnest weight that carries out the resonance control whilst also allowing the treble transients to shine through. I hasten to add that I personally don't think that the silicone weight commonly used robs treble energy - it simply cleans up splash.  "

  Exactly: "  it simply cleans up splash. " !  .


Btw, great contribution for the thread and for all of us and any audiophile.


Regards and enjoy the MUSIC NOT DISTORTIONS,
R.


big_greg
6,655 posts
 
Raul, I should add that I have also upgraded the feet on the Technics and have the KAB RCA jack plate which allows me to use higher quality interconnects.
More to discover