Discuss The Viv Lab Rigid Arm

@alan60 I like yourself don't do equations, I have as a result of the route chosen to produce my HiFi System, been able to meet with a few very adept Electronic Engineers and Mechanical Engineers, and as a result of the relationships developed, have immediate access and support to be guided by these Professional Individuals, who have done much work with equations and designing/building as daily practices throughout their careers. 

Additionally, I have a selection Book Marked 'go to' Web Sites, where the necessary info' about analogue replay requirements can be found. There is a substantial amount of info' at hand. I don't seem to have any issues with understanding these, even if infrequently visited, I can also run a few things over with the more learned than myself when needed. 

It really is not difficult today for an individual to present themselves as a Expert, when the Calculators to do needed equations are readily available to all.    

There are those who create math and those that interpret the math created, neither are able to find perfection, but usually the one who creates the math, has a better knowledge of why the math is as it is, maybe like the Viv Lab Designer.

The types create/interpret, are worlds apart, I have learned to stick close to those who do the math and are walking the walk in line with their creative thinking, experience has proven, these types are a pleasure to know. 

I keep well away from the types that are talking the talk, when it comes to advice, these types, are usually flimsy and not well rooted, the story/stories presented has many twists and turns, as the talk is attempted to be proved/disproved.

I have spent time reading the Posts from past years on subjects of interest from a selection of the regular contributors to the Audiogon Analog Forum, and have no doubts that ideas and theories are formed in shifting sand, that reshape over time.

The good reports and positive Vibe on offer from the Viv Lab Arm users reporting on their 'experiences' due to having a 'sat in front of' encounter, has got my curiosity, hence my thoughts leaning toward creating a quite affordable underhung design that can be mounted on a Particular TT in mind, and used as a A/B comparison to a Overhung design using two Cart's of the same Brand and Model with very similar usage life.

This is not too strange as the same TT>Plinth>Cart's is put in place to A/B compare Branded Tonearms against the Tonearm Design I am now using and the Built from Scratch Tonearm. A very open mind will be present and evaluations will be on the qualities discovered to be on offer, not the Design or Geometry Shortcomings, which can be found in most set ups, I have chosen 'Stevenson A' as my poison. 

Dear @alan60 : I’m answering you and will try to help you a little to understand the whole TAE main subject in this VIV underhung tonearm.

 

First you as any one elsedo not needs to know the alignment equations and its meaning or from where those equations came. The main subject it’s not about " open mind " and certainly not about subjectivity alone. The whole main subject is full of objectivity to understand how the cartridge stylus tip rides the LP groove modulations with been main target to pick-up 100% of the recording information ( it’s no way with an analog cartridge/transducer to pick up 100%. ).

To understand all those first we have to understand in which " form/way " comes the groove LP modulations and for that we have to go to the recording proccess and inside it go to yhe cutting machine where the cutter head cuts the recording modulations in full tangential angle. From here and after 1-3 steps comes the LP you have in your hand.

What need we to pick up " 100% " of the groove modulations in the LP and where those groove modulations where cutted in tangential angle/way?

Easy: we need that the cartridge stylus tip rides those LP groove modulations in exactly the same way the cutter head did it and this is in : tangential way and from here came the LT tonearms that does not needs any offset andgle due that the cartridge stylus tip mounted in that kind/shape of tonearm is tangential one. In principle this is the best way to read th LP groove modulations: tangential way where does not exist TAE, well exist but is 0°.

In all pivoted tonearms, no matters what but the pivoted LT designs, the cartridge stylus tip can’t read/ride/track way due that been mounted in a pivoted tonearm always exist a deviation of that ideal 0° TAE.

 

Then what’s the best we can do to minimize to put at minimum all over the LP modulated surface and at the same time puts the developed distortions for that TAE ( tracking/tracing error ) to pick-up all the signal information that can stays nearer to what a tangential tonearm/cartridge can pick-up and nearer to the recording?

Every one has their own targets mine is to pick-up all TRUER information from those LP grooves with minimum developed distotions.

To achieve those we must ( there is no other alternative, a least for now. ) try to align the cartridge mounted in the pivoted tonearm with the minimum off-set angle ( 0°, idealy ) that permit to pick-up maximum TRUE grooves information at minimum developed tracing distortion.

What is nearest to 0°: 1° or 10°? ovbiously that 1° that puts me nearer to what in true is in the recording when 10° puts me not only away from the recording but at that angle or near that angle the pick up information is " untruer ". Here I’m not talking if we like what we listen/hear or not but I’m talking of what really happens down there.

 

Things are that in 1938 a gentleman Proff. Lófgren ( latter on other researchers/engineers. ) found out the solution to all those I posted here and his calculations ( that you do not needs to understand or to be a mathematrics guy. ) was and is the Standard in the analog industry and is knowed as Löfgren alignment where you only needs the rigth protractor to fix the off-set angle and overhang solution/solved by that Löfgren tonearm/cartridge alignment.

Normally and due that that kind of alignment solution have two null points normally in tonearms of over 10" ( maybe even lower EL ) the tracking error due to the off-set angle is mantained at around 1° +,- 0.3° 90% of the time.

 

That’s the way to start TRUER to the recording.

 

VIV comes with no off-set angle and with a TAE of around 10° and due that only exist one null point the TAE 90% of the time is truly nearr to those 10° and this means that the angle of the cartridge stylus tip is way off in the VIV tonearm and is if off how can pick up TRUER information from the groove modulations? just can’t do it.

The Löfgren Industry Standar is the way to go.

I know that you and other VIV owners are really happy and I’m not against you. What I’m telling you is try to understand of what you are listeing that’s really different of what the gentlemans that use Löfgren are listening.

Yes, our hobby is about MUSIC enjoyment but exist a quality gradation for that enjoyment and I know that @mijostyn as me likes to have that MUSIC enjoyment inside the higher quality gradation we/he can.

 

Regards and enjoy the MUSIC NOT DISTORTIONS,

R.

@rauliruegas ​​​​ sorry but I am not interested in nor do I want to understand all the theories. All that interests me is the music and how it sounds to my ears, and to me I enjoy what the Viv Labs brings to my system.

And as much as I publicly denigrate unbelievable tweaks and hacks, if something is not easily measured, our own ears have to decide. We remember, most of us, that ears are affected by psychoacoustics. And even if you can't measure the effect of a device, it can be shown to be effective in a double blind trial.

This tonearm pitches one source of distortion, tracking error, against another, anti-skating force. It should be relatively easy to come to some kind of consensus as to which of those factors hurts the sound we hear most. Should we not be testing that in a double blind fashion?

Raul, You wrote, "VIV comes with no off-set angle and with a TAE of around 10° and due that only exist one null point the TAE 90% of the time is truly nearr to those 10°..." That’s just not true at all. Only at the extremes of the arc the tonearm makes across the surface of the LP would the TAE reach its max error of 10 degrees. And please may I remind you for the second time that the "10 degrees" data point comes from the Yamaha engineer in reference to the Yamaha underhung tonearm mounted on their GT5000. For the Viv or any other underhung tonearm, the TAE would be zero at the single null point, which you can choose to place anywhere on the playing surface when you choose where to mount the tonearm. As the arm moves toward its single null point, TAE is gradually and pretty near linearly decreasing from its max at the outermost grooves to zero. Once the stylus moves past the null point, then TAE gradually increases to whatever its max value (now in negative degrees, because the angle is opposite in direction) at the run-out groove. I don’t recommend it, but I think the Viv comes in assorted lengths out to at least 11 inches and maybe to 14 inches, where the max TAE values would be way lower than 10 degrees. So if TAE is such a problem, one might consider the longer versions.

Earlier, I asked you to cite the reference you quoted in your post describing the logic of conventional tonearm geometry. Can you do that, please? If so, thanks a lot for your effort in doing that research.

Dogberry, TAE is not per se a "distortion". It’s a geometrical error; we know that distortion arises therefrom, but how much and of what quality and what consequence to our SQ, that is up for debate.  For example, if we perseverate over TAE, then what can we also do about errors in zenith.  A stylus that is not exactly symmetrically mounted on the cantilever can add up to +/-5% to TAE and can also eliminate null points, unless one accounts for it.