Discuss The Viv Lab Rigid Arm

This is a fundamentally flawed arm. It will have way more tracking distortion than an offset/overhang arm. The geometrics of pivoted arms were investigated back in the 30's by researchers Rabinow and Codier. They proved that pivoted arms required overhang and angled offset to have lowest tracking distortion. 

All pivoted arms trace an arc across a disc/record. Rabinow and Codier calculated the lowest distortion arcs for a given tone arm length across a 12" disc. These required overhang and offset angle. To simply, the longer the arm the shorter the overhang and the converse. R. and C. published a table showing the different amounts of overhang and offset angle required for a given arm length/pivot distance. 

@jasonbourne52 1+,  The Viv arms extreme tracking angle error will be audible. It's argument that skating is worse is incorrect. Skating can be minimized so that it has no audible effect. If you want to get rid of skating and tracking angle error the right way to do it is with a Schroder LT or Reed 5T.

I have seen the numbers for tracking error and they are not pretty. Makes me wonder why some people report such positive experiences. Those owners used some nice associated gear. I still have difficulties correlating the math and what they report. Too expensive to take a flyer on just to know. I think I will pass. 

I see that the usual "open-minded" suspects are only too eager to support the status quo in favor of a very interesting departure. First, the Viv does not have "zero" overhang; it is UNDER hung; designed so the stylus tip is a certain distance short of the center of the spindle, and there is a reason for this. By being underhung, the single null point can be set to occur in the middle of the LP surface, or wherever one decides is optimal. Second,the only parameter that can be calculated "mathematically" is tracking angle error, and both Jason and Mijo are obviously correct in stating that the Viv will exhibit much more tracking angle error than a conventional overhung tonearm (but see below). Skating force: the Viv and other underhung tonearms of which there are very few will exhibit zero skating force at its single null point, unlike overhung tonearms with headshell offset, which never exhibit zero skating force, because even at their two achievable null points, there will still be skating force due to the headshell offset angle. Further, the skating force vector generated by the Viv will be a more or less straight line, starting with a force toward the spindle and diminishing to zero as it crosses the single null point and then changing direction as the stylus moves beyond the null point, when the force vector points toward the rim of the LP. (This is why you won’t see an underhung tonearm with an anti-skate device; it would have to change the direction of the pull by 180 degrees at exactly the right moment.) The skating force of an underhung tonearm follows a smooth nearly linear curve if plotted to show magnitude and direction. Overhung tonearms with headshell offset have a constant, constantly changing skating force vector (and tracking angle error), always pulling the stylus toward the spindle but by wildly different magnitudes across the surface of the LP. Is one more audible than the other? I have no idea, but I do know that my wierdly designed underhung tonearm, the RS Labs RS-A1 sounds very good, and if I had to characterize the SQ, I would say it sounds closer to a master tape than do conventional tonearms. Maybe this indicates that zero tracking angle error is not the Holy Grail some claim it to be. The Viv has some other design aspects that I wonder about, like the pivot floating in an oil bath and like the arm wand which looks prone to resonate. I also think it's a bit overpriced in the US market, much less costly in Japan. But it has received many accolades from reviewers who are not stupid. And then too, I admire my RS Labs for its SQ, although the only thing it has in common with the Viv is its underhung-ness.

One wonders what sort of record player Rabinow et all were contemplating when they did their math in the 1930s. Half the world was still using wind-up Victrolas in that era, and no one had stereo of course. Same goes for the sainted Baerwald and Lofgren, who published their papers in 1940, 41.