2. analog
  3. 179948-164720

Tonearm/Cartridge pairing.

Hello to everybody.

My turntable’s tonearm has a mass of 15.6 g (cane + head shell). My cartridge weighs 6.9 g. If I calculate the effective mass of the tonearm the way the maker did (arm’s mass with head shell + cart + tracking force) I get a global 24.5 g mass. The arm + shell mass is 15.5 (15.6 actually); the head shell weighs 10.1g.

My cartridge’s static compliance is rated 20mm/N (I ignore whether it’s @10Hz or 100Hz).

Will someone more experienced than I am please tell me if the cart and the tonearm are suited to each other statically? My cart (Goldring E3) did fine on a friend’s turntable (rega P2) but seems a little ill at ease on mine (Technics SL-1510, ca. 1978).

Opinions welcome,

Thanks
M.

martinguitars
lewm
13,002 posts
 

  Nothing in your OP suggests you’re having a problem associated with resonant frequency. What is it that makes you concerned about effective mass and cartridge compliance?

martinguitars OP
23 posts
 

Hi,

I moved the cart from a rega P2 ( which had minor, inherent issues with pitch) to a good, s/h SL-1510, that hasn’t.

Some old records, though, that the RB220 tone arm tracked well, sound very bad on the Technics. Being in doubt as to what can be the cause, and feeling smooth articulation in the Technics arm by hand, I am investigating the only objective parameter I am aware of.

Thanks

M

 

dover
2,243 posts
 

@martinguitars 

Antiskate too high - should be in the range  0.7-1.0.

What about VTA ?

Good stylus clean.

 

zipost's avatar
zipost
197 posts
 

this might help.  

 

http://korfaudio.com/calculator

martinguitars OP
23 posts
 

Thanks,

I’ll try less anti-skate but the cart is set at 2 g as requested.

The website linked to is interesting, thanks. According to it the cart/arm system should work well.

M

More to discover