Another “How to choose an arm” question

@holmz : " fewer are interested in whether there are actual resonances. "

Not really and I can say that many of us are the other way around.

Maybe our first target ( at least mine. ) choosing a tonearm is to choose a well damped design and the ones with tonearm removable headshell uses this design characteristics to mate in better way their cartridges testing it with different headshells.

SAEC tonearms were a non-damped design and depending of the cartridges mounted in the arm those non-damped resonances always change as change with well damped tonearms but the resonances ( that we can’t avoid. ) comes with different characteristics, more benings damaging the less the cartridge signal.

If you go for measurements as your main choice target then your choice must be the Rega RB300 or the Moerch DP6 that measured way better than SAEC.

I told you that I owned the top SAEC designs that are very good looking tonearms but terrible performers, the today " new " tonearm in reality is and old design with the same bad characteristics. I'm not questioning that SAEC is what you like, fine with me as your measurements too.

R.

@rauliruegas ​​@holmz , The way tonearms are dampened is a complicated issue with many different approaches. Some have fluid damping like the 4 Points others use magnets like my CB and the Graham arms. Many arms do pretty much nothing other than to stop their arms from ringing with damping materials like foam.  How do you tell what works? There are not any good tests for this. I am not fond of having to depend on just listening but this is one situation where there is not anything else you can do. This is going to turn some heads but what I have been doing is comparing the analog performance against a digital file using music that was remastered at the same time in both formats. What I prefer cuts both ways but in general vinyl performance is very competitive in terms of dynamics, lack of sibilance and pitch stability. Noise is always higher with vinyl but that is expected. With a good record this does not seem to influence enjoyment. I can not help but think there is a psychological draw towards vinyl because of the tradition it represents. I have been flipping records since the age of 4 with extreme enjoyment. I have been an early adaptor all my life but I can not seem to get away from vinyl in spite of it's disadvantages and expense. You may be able to teach an old dog new tricks but, it is another problem getting him to stop the old ones. 

@rauliruegas  ​​@holmz , The way tonearms are dampened is a complicated issue with many different approaches. Some have fluid damping like the 4 Points others use magnets like my CB and the Graham arms. Many arms do pretty much nothing other than to stop their arms from ringing with damping materials like foam.  How do you tell what works? There are not any good tests for this. I am not fond of having to depend on just listening but this is one situation where there is not anything else you can do. This is going to turn some heads but what I have been doing is comparing the analog performance against a digital file using music that was remastered at the same time in both formats. What I prefer cuts both ways but in general vinyl performance is very competitive in terms of dynamics, lack of sibilance and pitch stability. Noise is always higher with vinyl but that is expected. With a good record this does not seem to influence enjoyment. I can not help but think there is a psychological draw towards vinyl because of the tradition it represents. I have been flipping records since the age of 4 with extreme enjoyment. I have been an early adaptor all my life but I can not seem to get away from vinyl in spite of it's disadvantages and expense. You may be able to teach an old dog new tricks but, it is another problem getting him to stop the old ones. 

^that^ sir, is brilliant.

We could probably take it a step further and digitize the analogue, and then difference that relative to the CD.
The only problem there is that the W&F needs to be dechirped to line up the analogue signal.

This sounds like a fun project. I’ll be looking at the ADC this weekend or early next week which is needed to digitize the analogue path.

I found a second hand Schroder CB-9.
So I’ll make a new arm board to hold it.

@holmz Great News that you are to try out a Tonearm that has an attraction to you. I am sure you will start to notice differences immediately and the curiosity will be further ignited, you will not be alone in this, my daily mantra is 'What If', my talk on HiFi yesterday was with my friend who is almost completed a design for a Tonearm that could become a marketable product.

I was with the individual when the concept was discussed with another Tonearm designer, I have been demonstrated it as it has evolved and have made suggestions of which one has been adopted. 

Yesterday the discussion went to the methods that can be employed to allow it to show its full capabilities when set up, from Internal Wiring, Mounting and the entirety of the TT's Isolation, with the suggestions made and the shared ideas, it is a 'What If' moment, luckily there are proven methods known, and there are the required knowledge and materials on standby to allow the trials to be undertaken at short notice.

I have a 'What If' that might be worth considering for your own investigations and satisfying a curiosity.

A previous Post suggested the Rega RB 300 and this model or a derivative, could prove to be a very good experience if this is added to the 'What If' list.

I have already suggested that there is not a need to go to the expense of the SME V.

My suggestion for not going to the expense of the SME V was relating to the fact that a used purchase will most likely be the purchase method and that there are other used purchase Tonearms available that have proven to be very good competition to it and are not as near in the cost area, as they are in the matching the  performance.

The RB300 Arm was introduced approx' 3 Years before the SME V was released, the RB 300 has a one piece Cast Arm Tube / Headshell and a Ball Race/Pivot Bearing Assembly, with other built in set up tools that are quite unique at the time of the launch.

Over the years there have been modifications added to the RB300 that have taken it to new levels of performance and are have been quite affordable to adopt, I am sure a Tonearm can be found with much of the modification work done.

It is quite possible that the Rega Brand of TT's along with the RB300 was a tremendous success and the media was all over it with positive appraisals, terms such as, outstanding, exceptional. there has been nothing like it before, are commonly found to describe it, combine this support for the RB300 along side the support on offer from the HiFi Retail chains, to elaborate, my recollected experiences of this period when I read the media and visited HiFi retailers is that not many were offering anything else as a competition to Linn, it was a Hard Push toward CD, or then Linn or Rega, to discover a alternative of these two Brands, a HiFi Show was usually the  place to find the more obscure products and buy direct from the producers or their agent.   

As time has gone by the design of the RB300 has appeared in the Market Place supplied by other Brands with their Mod's on board and some of these Brands ended up producing their own Tonearms using the same infrastructure used for the RB300, in the earliest days Linn were quick to notice where the strengths of the RB300 were and utilised the Bearing used on the RB300 for a Tonearm that was costing approx' 3 x more to purchase.

SME were next in line to adopt the RB300 methods and produced the SME V, which did not materialise until three yeas after the launch of the RB300.

It is most likely that the SME V would not exist, with its Cast Arm Tube/Headshell and Ball Race/Pivot Bearing, if the RB300 was not produced and supplied the basis for a design. SME were thoroughly wed to their earlier designs and stood by them for almost 21 years following the release of the SME V, I don't see how they could have come up with the Cast Arm Tube as a concept, all their previous design intent  was for a Tube used as a wand. 

Origin Live and Audiomods, are other Brands that will not have materialised if not for the them being Brands that had carried out modification work on the RB300. At the least their popularity is mainly due to the RB300. 

This modification work, evolved into the Two Brands being competitors with their own Tonearm Ranges, and as the RB300 is not too forward from the shadows the Tonearms in the Limelight are derivatives of the RB300.

A selection of the Origin Live range, AudioMods and SME V / IV are the competitors in the market place with the direct lineage to the RB300.

I own a AudioMods Series Five and SME IV , both are quite similar in their presentation and the way they influence the sound. I no longer use these, I have opted for a design that has been much more attractive to myself when used.          

 As for the OP, I feel there is a very good learning and satisfying experience to be encountered if they can try a RB300 or a Derivative within their system.