Discuss The Viv Lab Rigid Arm

@dogberry I am suggesting there is a obvious difference of how the Mechanical Interfaces function on the 'Viv' design, in comparison to other more conventional designs.

It also seems from the literature, materials chosen have a secondary contribution, as energy produced is specifically transferred into the material for dissipation.

I am not suggesting the material selected is solely responsible, but the difference as a Mechanical Interfaces function, which is not Typical as a Interface, can be producing a change to the sonic, that has a noticeable attraction to the end user.   

I found a video on Youtube that shows the pivot mechanism in action, totally removed from the shroud that otherwise makes it impossible to see it. The problem is there is only one view and no narrative. Just go to Youtube and search on "Viv Float tonearm", and you can find the video. The arm wand appears to be mounted on a rectangular platform that floats on the magnetic oil bath. Lateral motion of the platform appears to be prohibited by a raised lip around the edges of the circular oil bath. This physical arrangement conforms to my findings with pulling, pushing, or twisting the arm wand; it’s quite stable and quite low in friction. (I also found a video of an interview (in Japanese) with the designer, Akimoto-san.  It seems that ultra-low friction was a major design goal.  He does not say anything about geometry.) But to me, that is all beside the point. The point for me is the underhung geometry. Of course, it is impossible to separate the two oddities of this tonearm when assessing its sonic virtues.

Perhaps for you and other gentlemans that could think like you

It was a question, not an opinion.

Your question came with out facts/why’s

Questions, honestly asked, tend to do so.

you " touch " almost all other in a bad way.

Careful. It is apparent you are not an English speaker, and you don't understand what you have just intimated!

You might be surprised to hear that I do understand analog reproduction is complicated. I'd be grateful if you weren't so condescending in your assumptions that you know better than anyone else. You might even try to answer my question, directly. Is tracking angle error a worse thing to hear than the effects of anti-skate? None of us can have an opinion, if we are honest, unless we have compared an underhung tonearm with a conventional one. That was my point. I cannot answer it, so I asked. Likely you cannot either, in which case please avoid insulting me.

@pindac Was that a 'yes' or a 'no' to my question to you - that you referred to the floating oil bearing? Mysterious "Mechanical Interfaces function" isn't quite explicit.

@dogberry I have not suggested any of the Mechanical Interfaces on the 'Viv' are 'Mysterious' but only not 'Typical'. In my case I know quite a lot about the concept and once expressed and interest in producing a robust version of the 'Viv' Floating Pivot.

I am treading carefully, as the subject can kick off another how the Math to prove your point  scenario. There is no shortage of 'across forum threads', that cover damping, where Oil usage to control energy transferal within a TA are discussed.

Designs for Tonearms using a Oil Reservoir at a Mechanical Interface, range from the commonly (most likely because Big Brand Names use it) seen and typical Rear End Trough and Paddle, Oil Floating Pivot ( Lesser Seen ), Encapsulated Oil Floating Pivot (maybe only the 'Viv'), Headshell Oil Damping (very rare).

In my Travels and meeting with other Audio Enthusiasts I have been able to be demo'd Oil Floating Pivot Designs. On a few occasions I have been demo'd these on a 'same system' in comparison to same model TT's (Not Same Cart' or Plinthed). From recollection the finished design was inspiring and was able to create good discussion with the producer, from a recollection of the sonic, there was not a presentation I could become attracted to, and the ideas I once had about producing a 12" Floating Pivot TA were quenched.

Now @lewm has pointed out there is a info discovered that leans toward the suggestion, the design was born with the intent to create a 'ultra low friction'. This leaves me much more convinced, there is more than just Geometry being responsible for the positive impression being made. 

If ultra low friction is an achieved mechanical property. As a result of my most recent TA experiences, I am confident in my claiming that audibly, there are substantial sonic benefits to be had when this condition is achieved, it is knowing about this condition and the audibly sonic benefits experienced, that encouraged me to have the use of my TA's (that as models have a lot of supporters) Superseded.

To achieve ultra low friction on a conventional TA Design requires many man hours to produce the condition. I am also of the understanding (through receiving demo's) it is the employing the follow up treatments, that substantially emphasise the sonic qualities that can be achieved through the preparation work.

Maybe the 'Viv' Designer has found a way achieve a reasonably affordable TA that boasts an 'ultra low friction', with a methodology that does not require excessive man hours, or excessive costings to achieve the objective?

On this matter, for those who are not knowing, the experience has to be had, just as @lewm has ventured into, (Nothing Ventured - Nothing Gained).