Schroder sq and the new talea

Yes, programming...

But I don't see sheep as objects, they are not rock-things; love me, love my sheep, love the Earth...most of my final interests, before I quit reading, were in radical ecology and the co-evolution between human and non-human consciousness. BTW, I did my post-doc graduate work at LSE - a bastion of Marxism, or so it believes of itself, at least back then (before the City took over...) - so I'm not sure how far the Euro-centric assumptions go. One has to be careful about those things. Aristotle might have cautioned on this (if he could ever stop categorizing on his way towards looking for essenses; like a mouse running through the holes in the cheese looking for the cheese.).

Nandric, I'm curious. What area of physics do/did you work in? You mention particle/wave physics, so I thought maybe there. Cosmology too? BTW, have you guys found that graviton yet? :0)

And, hey, what about my Graham? Cough it up!

M-

Dear Nandric, man's status as "featherless biped" is not accidental. It is a result of biological reaction to environmental conditions in the time line. The pressure to survive by change. As thus it is a - preliminary ... but status quo - result of evolution.
It freed two of our legs from carrying our body to become finally hands which enabled us to shape the world and move to the top of the food chain.
The apparently missing "feathers" are no loss ( yes, we can't fly just by the abilities of our body, but maybe the birds aren't all that happy about their ability either - who knows ...) - flying is pretty boring and the hands can do so much more.
Aristoteles' inherent quality ( there I go again...) or essence of objects still rules my view of the world.
As concerning the sheep .... well it is the matter of the sheep. In other words - it is the sheep's responsibility and solely right to judge, quantify or qualify itself. Quid pro quo - as we claim that right for us, it is only fair to assign it to the sheep too.

Asa, given the price you are going to pay for the Phantom 2, you simply can't loose. So I just would give it a try and take your chance for a direct first hand experience and comparison of the 2.0 and Phantom 2 on your table, with your cartridge and your set-up.
If it doesn't work out for you in your set-up, - just resell the Phantom 2 and put a few hundred $ in your pocket next to the gained experience and knowledge.
Whatever other people tell you about their experience is always a result of their preferences, their set-up, their individual reception, their taste in music AND sound. These are not transferable in any way and unless you do not know the other person really well and are familiar with their taste and set-up, their recommendations are for you just empty balloons.
Regards,
D.

Dear Asa, my post regarding your Graham issue should went through moderator approval too, but let me briefly address "Euro-centric" assumptions.
I still believe that the US of A and western Europe do share the same heir. We are both walking comfortable on the bones and thoughts which started off in hellenistic Greece and carried on through the ages into humanism and enlightenment. There is not so much difference. The difference is in the way it is judged and handled today - which reflects the respective society.

BTW - to my knowledge the Particle Accelerator is serviced right now and will be back in action this winter.

"Once all demands are identified the design will determine itself...it is the approach of an engineer."

Dertonarm, I don't think so. If it does then you should name your tonearm Athena-- born directly from the forehead of Zeus. Since an LP is far removed from a virgin uncut master and tracking is diametric from cutting, there is really little more than force of analogy to suggest that the engineering process will be self-determined by a complete understanding of the physics embedded in an LP. I see the engineering process in this instance more as a series of differential equations that are fitted to a problem and tested at boundary conditions. The solution is revealed through an iterative process.

The diversity that we see among tonearm designs stems largely from each designer's particular assumption about which variables are key determinants. An illustration is captured in the recent thread on 12" tonearms, in which a Bob Graham citation suggests that there is a necessary trade-off between the tracing advantage of a long arm and the disadvantage of increased wand resonance and mass. IIRC Graham conceded that the 12" Phantom option was driven mostly by market considerations. If your "blue book" can build a pivot arm without any such compromises then I will be at RMAF 2011 to celebrate.