Are linear tracking arms better than pivoted arms?

Dear Nilthepill, ++++++Another plus, IME, for linear arms ( that hasn't been talked about) is that they are able to track more readily than the pivot arms in case of playing a record with very low freq content (examples- techno music- Deepchord, Pole, Luciano, Patha du Prince,etc). This may be unique to my set ups. Let others chime in here.+++++
.... in your IME, but then you should give a listen indeed to some decent set-up (they even do not have to be set-up perfectly to show off) Graham P2, Triplanar or FR6Xs pivot tonearms.
Your personal impressions might very well change direction by 180°.
I for one did listen on the very same turntable with the very same cartridges, cable and all other periphery identical.
Especially in the very low level the linear trackers are no match for the very best pivot designs in terms of speed, inner details, maximum dynamics and tight, hard punch. Most linear trackers du built up a big, fat but soft and not really low bass which might sound fascinating with certain set-ups, but not if your woofers go really down and not if the set-up is able to provide air, freshness and color, speed and minute detail in the lower registers.

Still fascinating for me to watch the ignorance of the simple and obvious mechanical model and the resulting issues.
It is still IMEs and IMHOs, personal dislikes and choosing side by ownership. I had them - almost all. The day a linear tracker shows up which does address the obvious issues of the mechanical model, I am in the first group to buy it. And I will do so before any "sound report" or sonic description by anybody. Simply because it can be seen in the mere design of a linear tracking tonearm, whether it will perform up to the promise of the concept or not.
But by now I finally realize that I am only spoiling the party here.
Tonarm design is mechanics (static and dynamic) and geometry only.
Here is a lot of the old conflict between religious want-to-believe and cruel, yet plain, scientific research and description.

03-14-10: Dertonarm
But by now I finally realize that I am only spoiling the party here.

Not at all, I think most of us(even linear-arm owners) see your contribution as refreshing, insightful, and highly educational. Nor do I think anyone disagrees with your mechanical and physical description of the forces at work within the two discussed tonearm designs.

I think some disagreement may stem from your patent rejection of the subjective listening experiences of others while offering up your own as law.

Compare these responses of yours:

03-10-10: Dertonarm
Individual - yet subjective empirical... - audiophile impressions versus mechanical laws.....

03-11-10: Dertonarm
You are referring to days long gone by while using a phrase abused today. However - long term subjective observations are always subjective.
Logic - isn't it ?

With this statement:

03-14-10: Dertonarm
Most linear trackers du built up a big, fat but soft and not really low bass which might sound fascinating with certain set-ups, but not if your woofers go really down and not if the set-up is able to provide air, freshness and color, speed and minute detail in the lower registers.

As of yet, we've had no convincing(non-subjective) proof that properly set up, modern, linear-tracking tonearms actually:
a) cause premature or excessive cartridge wear/damage,
b) cause increased distortion due to excessive lateral force to the cantilever/motor assembly.

I have no doubt you PERCEIVE a pivot's greater "speed, inner details, maximum dynamics and tight, hard punch...air, freshness and color, speed and minute detail in the lower registers" versus linear tonearms "big, fat but soft and not really low bass" in your(or all) systems, but as you so succinctly said above

long term subjective observations are always subjective.
Logic - isn't it ?

Now, if you have frequency response and waterfall decay charts or the response by the two(or more) different tonearm setups in your room with the same cartridge, that's an entirely different ball of wax, altogether.

Regardless, I hope you will continue to participate in this thread, as your responses are the type that help elevate such discussions above the subjective "tit for tat" so often found on forums.

I have sent an email to Jonathan Carr(of Lyra design fame) inviting him to offer his insight into cartridge design criterion and tolerances. Perhaps his insight can help illuminate other aspects of this discussion we've yet to delve into and clear up some others. I would love to hear from some other cart designers, too.

Hi Dertonarm,

Thank you for mentioning Mr. Carr's contributions to AudiogoN...I'll review them. I'm fascinated by the discussion of free body diagrams and force vectors that are germane to this topic :-)

Somewhat off topic, but I'm rather curious...have you listened to analogue reel-to-reel masters (or close to them)? The sound is/has the potential to be exquisite and the experience - revelatory!

Vbr,
Sam

03-14-10: C1ferrari
Somewhat off topic, but I'm rather curious...have you listened to analogue reel-to-reel masters (or close to them)? The sound is/has the potential to be exquisite and the experience - revelatory!

There are a few threads here in Audiogon's Analog forum dedicated to Reel To Reel playback"
1. Why Not Bring Back Analog, Reel to Reel Tape
2. Tape Project Tapes

And, Albert Porter who has participated in this thread has a discussion of his Ampex 351 Project

Do a search of the Analog forum for "reel to reel", there are a lot threads.

D-Mo,

Thanks, I've actually posted to 2/3 threads! I think Albert has his Studer A810 back in rotation and hope he gets it revved-up for my next visit!

Now, back to your regularly scheduled programming...just playin' :-)

Vbr,
Sam