Discuss The Viv Lab Rigid Arm

@alan60 :

Dear @alan60 : First than all I never posted that you are stupid.

Second was you who posted that I have to have " open mind " and when I read your post decided that maybe and due that you posted " open mind " then you are that way.

After your post I decided to gave you a really wider explanation starting from the LP recording proccess and the play proccess. Now that I re-read it was really wide.

Follows my post that’s not about only theories but facts/clear evidence of what I posted before in other posts about to my surprise your direct answer was and is:

 

 

"" ​​​​ 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. ""

 

Obviously rigth there did not appeared your touted " open mind ".

 

This is my last post to you ( period ) but do it a favor and please read again that post. No pun intented for any gentleman:

 

"""

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. """

 

I posted in this thread twice and many times in other threads: we need try to have and equilibrium between objectivity and subjectivity. Stay only in one of those extremes is just " wrong " and makes no sense to me. Again, no pun intented.

 

Regards and enjoy the MUSIC NOT DISTORTIONS,

R.

@atmasphere 

The problem with the 'mechanical engineering' view is when you define a "goal" or a "standard" then it can easily be seen if that goal is met and an unassailable judgement made.  No consideration is given to the absolute magnitude or the underlying importance of the goal to begin with.    As Lew pointed out above....if vanishingly low distortion is set as the goal then the system with the lowest distortion must always be best.  

modulation on the LP itself will result in the arm not being perfectly in locus above the groove as it should be

what happens when the modulation is so extreme that it is actually considered mistracking?  Is it at all possible that not being 100% rigidly coupled could cause the recovery from  mistracking to be more benign?  Now consider that mistracking is not an all or nothing type of proposition and is constantly happening and I seriously have to question the importance of the rigid coupling anyone demands.  Everyone is allowed their choice of compromise and the choices by Viv Labs and the supporting anecdotal information is really interesting to me.  Productive discussion about the factors involved is helpful to all and it seems at least plausible to me that the lack of rock solid coupling and anti-skate could make say 5° of tracking error on the Viv Labs more sonically benign than a lesser amount of TAE on a 'traditional arm'.  One other thing that strikes me as odd in this all is that if TAE is truly the sole arbiter then why do the shorter underhung arms seem to be preferred? 

dave

 

 

@rauliruegas these are your words.

'The subjectivist, at least gentlemans as alan, are " closed mind " and almost always are entitled to that " stupid "

 

@mijostyn you have stated," I am not your casual audiophile ", whatever that means to you as a means of separating yourself from other audiophiles. 

Also you state " a person who is very interested in and enthusiastic about equipment for playing recorded sound, and its quality: as your interpretation of what is an audiophile or more accurately your selecting wording to suit your only being able to see equipment as the key to experiencing the enjoyment of a musical encounter.

The bottom line is that I have no counter for that, these are your unique perspectives and the route you have chosen.

I myself have come to a place where there are exacting standards, where there is a glaringly obvious difference, is that I don't see these standards as required to enjoy a musical encounter, and certainly will not tell another their selections of equipment is trash and not worthwhile.

There is not one reference to equipment in this thread that will be a failure at creating a musical encounter that can be enjoyed. The thread is filled description to support this. I don't doubt anything based on user experience that is being reported on. 

As said I like the reports so much that the idea of experiencing an underhung Geometry Appeals and is being discussed as a future occurrence.

The OP does not seem to be steered away from the idea either, the investigation of how to purchase is intensifying.

It looks like in this thread the snobbery expressed by the few that are in cahoots is the most non-influencing.

I suppose the thread could take on a new direction, as there are already a host of thoughts expressed about where there are merits to be had using a rigid coupling and what appears to be different takes on a coupling, to the point design is claimed to be non-rigid.

Does a Tonearm Wand/Pivot suspended on a thread/braid, perform better as a rigid coupling than a Tonearm Wand/Pivot supported with a oil flotation.

I recollect quite clearly rejecting other designs and following the Gimbal Tonearm design many years past, after having demonstrations over a period of time of most Tonearm designs.

Out of curiosity, it would be good to be able asses some of the thoughts that can be presented on this subject, as I made my choice subjectively on the preferred SQ, and not on the mechanical differences to be found in the designs.