What Does It Take To Surpass A SME V?

@dover Thanks for your comments! Based on your comments i think its very possible that I've not experienced the arm with the right cartridge. It is true that you only need 2 connections for a balanced line; since this would leave the arm tube ungrounded, you would need a high common mode rejection ratio at the input of the phono section to avoid noise (but any SUT would suffice for that).

@mijostyn using multiple weights is a method of adding some adjustability to any arm with respect to effective mass. The Triplanar uses the same idea but any arm could.

Pindac, Interestingly, when you are angry, at me or anyone else, I find your posts much more comprehendable.  Not that I would deliberately piss you off. So, if you agree that the tonearm pivot and the turntable bearing need to be tightly and rigidly coupled, then why did it make you angry when I said so?  I also allowed that an outboard tonearm pod can be done right by a designer who knows what he is doing and why he is doing it.  Ergo, we seem to agree much more than we disagree.

Mijostyn, Why do you continue to ignore my argument that it can be beneficial for a tonearm to exhibit a higher effective mass in the horizontal plane than in the vertical plane?  You've neither derided it nor acknowledged it.  If you hate the idea, I would like to know why. Some noteworthy tonearms are designed to conform to that paradigm, e.g., the Dynavectors, the Moerch (which you hate for being a unipivot), several vintage Japanese types, and all linear trackers, of course.

@mijostyn your statement " the outright performance of a turntable is not a matter of aesthetics, it is one of sound mechanical engineering understanding the intricacies of life as a vibration measuring device and what it takes to get all the information out of the groove with as little distortion as possible " .

That statement is your obsession, it is your Fantastical Place, it is your Never Never Land.

 I am very relaxed about the whole subject, I don't want what is not available, and I don't want to bludgeon anybody with ideas that are unobtanium.

I have a thought process I use, when it comes to how I like to see a TT and Supporting Ancillaries Set Up. There is a design that I like to see in place and Materials used that will compliment the design.

This as the methodology, used in conjunction with all the flaws to be found in using a Vinyl LP as a Source and the Flaws present in the Mechanical Parts and Interfaces, is sufficient for my needs, I achieve a Successful Replay consistently   .

It is no different to any other individual, who has a TT and Supporting Ancillaries. They have a thought process in place, which is the parameter of choice to be used, there are no concerns to be made known, the outcome is a Successful Replay. 

None of this has to do with aesthetics, it is to do with Interfaces between the Parts required to create a Successful Replay .

I have not got a developed and obsessional prejudice towards any methodology used to create a Successful Replay

My interaction is to encourage others to create their own methodologies, not to poo poo their ideas, or put the idea on the table that a choice made for hard earned monies used to make a purchase, especially one that an individual may have desired to aspire to for a Long Period. The very idea of bluntly suggesting this has been incorrect and not of a value is not my remit. 

A Turntable with any method of creating a Interface between Supporting  Ancillaries that considers the Critical Geometries and Dimensions between the interfacing parts, is going to Successfully Replay a LP Album.

In all the time I have discussed this variance in ideas for interfacing the Ancillary Parts to the TT. There has never been the suggestion that the different methodologies are going to be the ruination of the Replay.

@mijostyn The statements being made by yourself are not ones I am willing to hold as the only way, I create measures to have a influence on a replay that satisfy myself. There is more than one road to Rome, when it comes to how a Vinyl LP is able to be thoroughly enjoyed as a Replay of a recorded material, I welcome each to share their experience and certainly won't be poo pooing all over it when shared.

The clever thing about ET’s counterweights is that using a lighter counterweight should decrease the horizontal moving mass (non-rotational) while increasing the vertical moving mass (moment of inertial). That should nudge the 2 movement dimensions closer towards parity, though I’m not sure by how much. And too long a lever arm (facilitating the lighter weights), will eventually become unwieldy.

I still have an ET2 in the closet, with a broken headshell lead. It’s been many years since I ran it, and it was NOT a good arm for an analog neophyte back then. But I still remember how clean and pure the sound quality was, with Ortofon Kontrapunkt "a" and MC20 cartridges. I’d like to get that up and running again at some point.

Not sure about arm pod idea - perhaps there are some reasonable use cases. But for use with a suspended table (like op’s SOTA) does NOT seem like one of them!

@mulveling Not sure about arm pod idea - perhaps there are some reasonable use cases. But for use with a suspended table (like op’s SOTA) does NOT seem like one of them!

The Standalone Arm Pod has become quite a hot subject follow an earlier Post where a Stand Alone Arm was used with a SME 30/12.

A SME 3012R was not able to be mounted on the TT, so a Arm Pod was used to trial a SME V and 3012R.

I made it known I regularly encounter a SP 10R with a Glanz 12" Arm mounted on a Stand Alone Pod, and have never felt something was amiss.

The high risk of convection occurring, where the Standalone Arm Pod and TT were set to be on a collision course was the counter offensive to the idea, not too further on in the Thread.

I take the idea of a Arm Pod used in conjunction with a TT as a much more plausible method to achieve a Successful Replay, than considering Convection being present is the cause for the ruining of the replay. 

The Known Flaws in the entirety of the Set Up to achieve a replay from Vinyl are very well known, it is spilt milk, not worth crying over. Measures are known to be put in place to minimise the impact, but not remove the impact.

Most who are enthusiasts are settled with the impact of the Flaws they are exposed to. There are a lesser in number group who attempt to see how environmental changes can influence the flaws.

Then there are some individuals that are actually unable to separate from the influence of a Flaw on the replay, the effect on the Sonic is a attraction that is to be maintained. 

I have one like this myself, I crave my Chicago Blues Albums to be replayed through the system with a  Hooked Up, Coloured Cabinet Speaker, with a Noticeable Bass Bloom, these are the antithesis of my ESL's.

 Blues through the ESL's has not got the attraction to the music I so much enjoy, I feel so at home when the noticeably coloured sound is filling the air.

Obviously I am Heretic and need to be struck down for being so openly public about embracing a non Hi Fidelity Sound.