New 55,000 Euro tonearm

@optimize 

It is good to know that we have a humble expert here that we can lean on without owning and living with a houdini or SAT cf1-09 I presume. 

We have many posters here on audiogon who are experts on products they have never heard.

They usually resort to scientific arguments - but of course they forget that scientific research and discovery should include both theory and practise (testing). I call it the new science, in the old days they would have called it speculation or in Kiwi parlance - a brain fart.

Having researched further the Houdini cartridge decoupler and the principles behind their arm, I learn that their idea is to decouple the cartridge from the arm by securing it to the arm with a non-rigid fixing.

This is just about the most stupid idea ever conceived in the history of recorded sound.  The principle of sound reproduction via LPs is that the stylus is fixed rigidly in the arm which is only allowed movement in lateral and vertical planes, i.e. no twisting or turning.

The reason for this is plain.  If the stylus is allowed to move whilst it is tracing the signal recorded in the groove (other than movement induced by the groove's modulations), distortion will be introduced, i.e. signals other than those recorded in the groove.  Movement of as little as one micron will introduce distortion.

Most reputable designers of tonearms have gone to great lengths to ensure a rigid cartridge fixing and bearings with minimum slack, only for Houdini to magic it all away.

@optimize     non-rigid cartridge fixings also introduce unwanted resonance into the signal.

@optimize 

You are absolutely correct - the Houdini attempts to fix a problem by adding another. You can't measure the groove unless the cartridge is mounted rigidly. It's a bandaid. However when I owned an audio shop I found that many audiophiles like a mushy homogenous sound - not too challenging - its driven by needs other than audio ( high fidelity ).

Bear in mind I have Zero Interest in this Tonearm, I do not aspire to going down this route to achieve the design or manufacture procedures used for this product.

Following sharing the Link to the SAT CF 109, only with the intention of showing the attached price tag.

I have received the following from an individual who I trust, and has claimed to have had a direct communication with Leif Johannson and quoted something that is in line with a conversation that took place quite recently.

Leif Johannson, chief developer at Ortofon, also uses a SAT tonearm when developing his top systems. In Munich he told me that with the SAT he would hear the "faults" of the cartridges and not the tonearm, which is very important for the development and tuning of his cartridges.
 

while counting angels on heads of pins has it’s advantages, musical expression is a bit more complicated than that. nothing wrong with being a great tool for investigation, but does it satisfy? not saying it does not, although i get mixed feedback on that part.

not lived with it myself, so i cannot say.

In Munich he told me that with the SAT he would hear the "faults" of the cartridges and not the tonearm, which is very important for the development and tuning of his cartridges.