Are linear tracking arms better than pivoted arms?

Both linear track and pivot arms have their advantages, just like any two good technologies in high end audio that get compared in the forums here.

I've owned a lot of both types, the first linear tracker for me was the Rabco back in early 1970s. Since then I've had the ET with various pumps, the Versa Dynamics, Air Tangent 10B and Walker Proscenium Black Diamond. There are good and bad about all these, just as there are good and bad with pivot arms.

I currently own only pivot arms, I have four of them right now. I'm happy with the performance they provide but every time I see a photo of the Kuzma or the Rockport linear tracker I get the itch to try one again.

Guess you can put me in the "I like both" camp.

I swapped out a Linn LP12 for the Mitsubishi LT-30 I currently use. Without question, they are different animals. My LT-30 is far easier to set up than a pivoted table. Although my table has had a few upgrades (WBT connectors, extra damping, upgraded caps-transistors-tonearm wire) for higher torque speed control and overall cleaner sound, I hesitate ever going back to pivoted. I have a pivoted as a backup. To each their own.

Have had both too. I used a Souther for quite some time, then went to a JMW 10.5. Both are kinda fiddly. Initial setup on a Souther takes some time, lots of patience and good eyes. The Souther "arm" mount adjusts both azimuth and overhang so moving one can take the other off if you are not careful. Some screaming usually involved. Set up well, the Souther can provide Master tape quality of sound with right cartridge.

My Souther needs some updates though, the pickup wire is old and it could use the upgraded mounting base with standoffs. Clearaudio wants too much money for parts though.

I like the JWM, its pretty easy to deal with. They make setup quite easy with the mounting provided mounting jig. I haven't looked back and when properly setup tracking distortion is hardly noticeable on inner grooves.

Mepearson,

Linear trackers are specifically designed to address the theoretical shortcoming that you raised. They also, by eliminating the offset angle, eliminate skating forces. But, they raise their own set of problems, both theoretical and real.

The short arm tube can be an advantage, in terms of vertical weight, but it also means much higher sensitivity to changes in record thickness as far as VTA is concerned (short arm swings in a greater arc for any given change in height).

Most linear tracking arms have significantly higher mass in the horizontal plain than regular pivoting arms. This mass makes compatibility with the compliance of specific cartridges a bigger concern. Also because of this mass, and because linear arms are not relying on the mechanical advantage (lever/fulcrum) of a pivot, it actually takes more force to move the arm into the correct position as the stylus spirals toward the center of the record. This greater force may mean HIGHER degrees of deflection of the cantilever, hence more instantaneous error, in terms of deviation from true tangency, than a conventional arm (I have heard this argument made by some arm manufacturers).

Hence, even the supposed theoretical advantage of such arms are in dispute. That said, I've heard really nice performance from Walkers, Clearaudio, Kuzma, etc. arms. On the rare instances when my Mapenoll arm was not binding (bad arm pump), it too performed quite well. I currently stick with a Basis Vector arm, because of the very good performance and ease of use, though some tangential arms are tempting. The Kuzma, in particular, looks extremely well built and comes with high quality arm tubing, pumps, air reserve chambers, etc. I bet that is a far cry from the Mapenoll, in terms of reliable performance.