Discuss The Viv Lab Rigid Arm

Raul, when you align an OVERhung tonearm and set headshell offset angle to zero, as you did out of necessity, that is the worst possible scenario, so it’s no wonder the SQ was poor. For an overhung tonearm, there can be no null points on the surface of an LP unless the headshell is offset at an angle, as determined from any of the standard algorithms. You can prove this with reference to the Pythagorean Theorem that we all learned in high school. That situation is not comparable to using an UNDERhung tonearm and zero headshell offset angle. I seem to be coming off as a defender of the Viv; I am not necessarily taking that position. I only have concluded there may be some good things about underhang and zero headshell offset and the resulting pattern of the skating force. I am urging an open mind. Even the "distortions" that you consistently preach against may be worse with the standard pivoted tonearms than with an underhung tonearm assuming the latter is properly set up. I only wish there was an underhung tonearm that does not also have other unusual features. For example, my RS Labs has many issues that may affect its SQ and have nothing to do with its being underhung (raised unipivot way above the LP surface, dangling counterweight that is free to swing back and forth, decoupled headshell). The Viv has its pivot floating in an oil bath and an arm wand that looks prone to resonate, albeit the oil bath might provide some damping. I have never heard the Viv, but I can report that despite its craziness, the RS Labs can sound very colorless.

Yamaha has recently introduced a new turntable, built to look like the GT2000 but with belt drive, I think. It comes standard with an underhung tonearm with a zero offset headshell. From photos, this appears to be a nicely built tonearm that is otherwise in keeping with modern concepts of tonearm design (i.e., lacking other features of questionable merit). If Yamaha would market that tonearm as a separate product, I would be most interested,

By the way, Neon, your fears of using the MC2000 in your DV tonearm are groundless.  I've mounted the MC2000 in my DV505, and the results were excellent.  Right now, it is mounted on my Triplanar, but not because I was unhappy with the DV505. 

@lewm , you are talking about the GT5000 for $8K. It has a straight underhung arm, a 10 lb platter and a 2 phase AC synchronous motor. They brag about no feedback control but do not mention what the motor is driven with. The arm looks very stiff but it's vertical bearing in above the record surface and it is stable balance. No suspension. Not my cup of tea.

@clearthinker, OK, 3 degrees then. The problem is with signal imaged to the center. One channel becomes out of phase with the other at high frequencies which will hinder the formation of the image. The higher the frequency the worse this gets. It is even worse with modern line contact styluses. I am sure you could see this with synchronized sine waves and a scope.

Then problem with warps is the pitch variation that they cause. Any good modern arm should be able to track most warped records fine. I will never use a turntable w/o vacuum clamping. The lack of pitch variation gives the music a solidity of presentation and makes the effect more realistic. With a clean record one could easily confuse it with a digital file.

IMHO the CLXs are the best speaker ML ever produced. 

Mijo, I am talking about underhung tonearms as a separate subject relative to the Viv tonearm.  Whether the GT5000 is totally to your liking or not is not the point, but I did notice that the tonearm design on the GT5000 does have the technical flaws you mention.  As previously discussed, the placing of the pivot at the level of the LP surface, or lack thereof in this case, has relevance only with warped LPs.  To which you may reply all LPs are warped to one degree or another.  To which I would reply that really tiny or minimal warps are also really tiny and minimal problems in terms of altering VTF.  Anyway, neither of us is going to buy the whole turntable just to get an underhung tonearm.  All that said, I would be very curious to hear the GT5000 in a good system.

@clearthinker @atmasphere 

The hardness of the metal in the bearing is not the only issue.  The fineness of the machining is fundamental.

And let’s not forget materials such as the yoke etc. as some materials reflect energy while others may absorb.

@mijostyn 

twist your cartridge 5 degrees in the head shell and listen to what happens. If you hear nothing wrong either your system or your head does not image.

For purposes of discovery, I’m curious what the result would be with a spherical/conical styli without skating forces acting upon it ? ? ?

As the saying goes, “maybe we’re measuring the wrong thing” if the numbers don’t justify the sonic results.

Is it possible that an established priority of setup parameters could be threatened  &/or reshuffled?