Discuss The Viv Lab Rigid Arm

The answer is plain. An infinitely long tonearm (or, as my physics mentor used to say with a nod to Newton and Liebnitz, "as near as makes no difference" in a strong Yorkshire accent), with no offset and it's one and only null point set near the label where it is needed most (for the density of musical information per unit length of groove). You know it makes sense, as the seatbelt campaign used to say.

Seriously, we cannot judge this tonearm until we try it. The arguments from its designer are sensible, but are they enough to overcome conventional wisdom? Only listening would tell us. I wish I were in a position to try it out!

Dear @lewm : This is what you and I posted where I’m not talking of " superiority ", I was only asking you:

" Even the "distortions" that you consistently preach against may be worse with the standard pivoted tonearms than with an underhung tonearm . "

I don’t know from where you have that statement with out showing any measurement about. "

Anyway The Yamaha chief engineer said that a sinwg of +,- 10° on tracking error is a small one and inaudible.

First is not small against 1.9° maximum in a 9" conventional pivoted tonearm. Tracing distortions is developed even in tangential tonearms but in pivoted the tracking error contributes in high way to additional tracing distortions generated that some of us can discern when ovbiously you do not according your firt hand experiences:

"  I hear no problem that I can relate to the extreme TAE, with my RS Labs RS-A1. " , fine with me.

Several years ago through the long MM thread I posted my first hand experiences ( i bougth it ) with the RS Labs that I owned for over 2 years ( at least 2 of those years was in its box/closet. ). I bougth it because was something new for me about tonearms ( in that time I owned over 20 tonearms. ) I mounted and followed all the RS Labs instructions but I never been really confortable with and return to its box till years latter some one was urged to get one and my tonearm gone for ever,

R.

And no one wants to talk about "trucking errors"?

No doubt we should all take ourselves less seriously. Especially when language errors are at play.

I hear no problem that I can relate to the extreme TAE, with my RS Labs RS-A1. " , fine with me.

Doesn't the RS Labs RS-A1 have a rotating headshell - therefore its like comparing apples and oranges with the Viv Lab

@dover 

the RS-A1 does indeed have a rotating headshell but what most people do not realize is that it is intended to have the pivot of the headshell directly above the stylus.  Most people view this as a "horse and trailer design" with the pivot ahead of the stylus so it can better follow the groove. This is NOT the intent of the design.  I have a fair amount of experience with this arm and find it to be  a really good sounding easy to set up design.  In trying to measure the tracking abilities the numbers were not representative of the perceived sonics.  I also have a 9" Schröder Reference which I underhung and set of 0° offset and again the perceived sonics of the angular misalignment didn't seem anywhere near the same as a similar error on a traditional overhung tonearm.  It is important to note that in both of the above cases the "design" of the underhung arm had the ability to absorb the energy caused by mistracking.  The cartridge suspension allows for movement in the lateral and the vertical plane but conventional designs go to great lengths to lock everything else in place.  The RS-A1 has the ability to rotate axially along the vertical plane and the Schröder has a floating magnetically damped bearing. I also believe the the the Viv arm also has this ability to allow some form of absorption / damping in a third direction.  If we accept that angular error causes mistracking, it seems entirely plausible that how the arm deals with and recovers from a less than ideal situation could play a large role in the sonic signature of the design.  Simply equating X° of angular error to some rumored distortion percent and calling the playing field level is far too simplistic of an approach.

dave