Why is the price of new tonearms so high

Hello Meister D.
"Musing and watching"...

Some bionic rig!
Über motor, über platter, über bearing, über alles...
Add some, über drive belt/string, über cables, über phono-stage,….

Removed yourself 10/10 from the rest of the analogue world out here it seems. "N'oublie pas que tu vas mourir" :-)

This of course might just explain also some of these divergent findings on arm resonances.
High mass platters and floating bearings have their way with resonances, we know.

In fact, it puts your 'comparative' findings and arguments way out yonder.
Not easy to make much sense of it then, with the rest of most all 'commercial' audio and some bit of 'boutique-audio' components.

"Musing and watching" Hm...

The "final assault" is a combination of magnetic isolation and air cushion - fine tuned and stabilized at 0.5 Hz horizontal and vertical.
The platter isn't heavy - its much more than that.
The bearing is a horizontal force free string drive indeed.
This TT does adress about 6 individual issues no other TT has so far.
And all these are solved.
But its about 500 lbs net weight - not suitable for any rack.......
As you already see from these few figures - not a commercial product at all.

For a very good - no money - air cushion, you may go to the next special bike store and get fluid-filled small size (3 - 5") tires. These do give excellent isolation with very low tuning frequency and work better with all but the most heavy TT's than most of the lower priced professional isolation platforms (the higher priced ones start at US$4000....).

Dear Perrew: +++++ " do you think the Reed can compete with the dynamically balanced tonearms ... " +++++

in theory the dynamically balanced tonearms are a little better ( some advantages. ) that a static balanced one, I agree with Dertonarm in this subject.

But things are not so easy ( theory ) but how good is the design on that precise tonearm mechanism and its execution, IMHO tonearms like: FR, SME, Lustre, Sumiko, Micro Seiki, Dynavector, etc, all but the Micro Seiki MAX add resonances for the topology that use for the dynamically balanced mechanism ( using some kind of spring. ), the Micro Seiki use a different mechanism where the resonances are no-audible but in all the other tonearms those additional tonearm resonances are audible and that's why in the real world ( not theory ) all those tonearms are more neutral running in static way that in dinamically way.

I agree too that if you can't hear the differenes between static/dynamically then there are/is some other trouble in the audio chain that preclude to hear those bad resonances.

Perrew, nothing is perfect in our beloved audio world and what you have on " paper " in a tonearm design not always is achieved in the right way when the tonearm is build and running in our audio systems.
The implementation of a design is what make a difference between different quality performance level in tonearms.
The geometry and all the heory aplicated in a tonearm design is as good as the execution is and as good as the tonearm build materials choosed.

A tonearm design is a complex " task " where exist multiple factors to achieve top quality performance level, the static vs dynamically is only one of those multiple factors and not one that in the today/vintage tonearms makes " the difference " due to that " wrong " implementation.

IMHO we can have very good performance in either design if we know what to do on the design and execution tonearm design.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.

Hello Axel, .... its not my problem if it does not make sense to you or some other people.
You entirely misstake me with someone caring about that ......

I give info as good as I can when honestly asked - whether it finds open minds or not is without my reach.
Whether you can value it or not - whether you or others can "compare" my "findings" and take some input out of them or not - I certainly don't care.
I have no questions - at least not in Audio.

Cheers,
D.

Dear Nandric, the point with all this disagreement about the FR-64s/FR-66s is a matter of timing .....
I am firm in my impression, that anyone who does not like the sound of the FR-64/66 or think it is colored (... this is the ONE single most neutral sounding tonearm-design on this planet - period.) or that he hears the "resonating spring" ( if you really open up a FR-60 tonearm and examine the "spring" you will soon realize, - with some deeper thoughts - that this explanation is totally nonsense - but if you look on the pictures floating on teh net you only see opened FR-housings which are NOT (no longer...) greased as designed. Too many sorcerer's apprentices around..... ) has made errors in set-up ( which is VERY easy, as the FR-60 series requires special geometry set-up and alignment and furthermore most audiophile do not care for nor do know about groove-compliant VTA ), hears missmatch or the flaws of the rest of the system.
He does certainly not hear the FR-tonearm.

I have heard over 160 high-end systems all over the western hemisphere (even in Mexico City...) - the most expensive (and there were several in this line up) far exceeding 2 million US$ retail price value. Anything from super-top-class market components of the very highest caliber and price tag to carefully set-up ultra-fidelity multi horn driver systems of extreme complexity and with "home-brewed" super-smart SET-amplifiers.
I was in Sea Cliff twice and listened to the set-ups there in a very nice private session.
I haven't seen nor heard all, but among these 150+ set-ups there weren't but one hand full of systems which were able to show all the potential of the FR-64s or FR-66s.

You need a good empty highway to appreciate the full potential of an Audi RS8 or a Ferrari - using the next B-road which wasn't serviced since 20 years might not be the right choice for a true evaluation.

But if you only know your local B-road, your experiences and expactations are different.
Fine.

If we go back 25-30 years we would find an almost universal praise in the international audio press regarding the FR-60 tonearm series.
Even the super "hardcore" - no compromise - audiophile analog frontman Mitchell A. Cotter recommended the FR-66s/FR-7 combo ONLY for his B-1 turntable.
In Germany, the US as well as the Far East the FR-60 steel tonearms were THE tonearms for low compliance cartridges and set the standard for this group of high mass tonearms.
Today the focus is very different.
These high moving mass tonearms have almost vanished from the market.
Today's top-flight moving coils call for ( in terms of matching the cartridges compliance..) medium to low mass tonearms.
Aside from K. Sugano ( who isn't among us anymore....) there is/was no cartridge designer who did favour a tonearm out-of-production for his cartridges nor yet would recommend its use.
Thats logic in all ways.
If I were a cartridge designer I would recommend tonearms ONLY which are current production and are readily available.

What cartridge manufacturer with an even remote sense for business would like to embarass todays tonearm-manufacturers by recommending a vintage design only available second hand as the optimum choice for his product ?
Its about as clever as drilling a hole in your kneecap and nailing a spare-rib there....

If Isamu Ikeda (not likely this will happen...... just a theoretical proposition...) would launch on the upcoming Rocky Mountain Audio Fair his new tonearm - and it would look just like the FR-66s and would come with an improved version of the B-60 vta-on-the-fly base - well, the absolu!e sound, Stereophile and all the other magazines would agree in universal praise again.

Why?
Because then it would be a "new and current product" - no longer a vintage tonearm of oldskool physics.....

Has anyone yet given it a thought, why so many seasoned audiophiles with many other - very expensive too - current tonearms at hand and in possesion still do favour the FR-66s........ ?
Is it likely they do so because of marketing hype or to tease other audiophiles?

Oh well......

Cheers,
D.