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
My turntable is Denon DP80 with DA401, and the mat is a stock. It has AT618 disc stablizer (clamp). DA309 is with PCL7 headshell. I ordered DK2300 from Japan. Once I get it, I will try to have dual arms installed for DP80.
It is a long thread and loaded with technical details most of which I am not familiar with, but I will try to make those understood by myself.
Thanks for your comment.
Dear @ihcho  : The DP 80 is a good vintage TT that even in its Denon plyth needs damping even at the arm board where it's seated in the plynth and with its footers.

You need to a better clamp and different mat than the stock one.

As you said when you have all mounted you can " know " what to do which " road " take.

R.
@mijostyn
You don't need a damping trough with a CD playere - just seismic pods.

Pre-Galileo most thought the Earth to be the centre of thee solar system.

Using a tangenital arm - with a a needle in a groove is inherently flawed. It does not change that it is my preferred method pf music playback.

The trough system has worked on every arm I happen to own. I wonder if the naysayers have experienced it - or is a bit like people comparing cars they have never - or never will - own?

I appreciate the banter and pseudo-science of most the posters here - me - I prefer the dissertation of Bugge signed off by professor Dinsdale - pm me if you want a copy - Max Townshend said I can share it.

I just wish that on occasion some posters will admit they like a warm, bloomy, sound that  is ultimately a lack of focus created by extraneous vibration. I have to say its very entertaining (FR64S arm is a great example - and I own one).