Dear Dertonarm: The Guillermo and I main target on our tonearm design is not mainly what MS, Technics and others did it in their designs to give the user/customer own tonearm facilities to match cartridge/tonearm resonance frequency, this is important but I learn that there are other more critical factors down there that affect the quality performance level.
As you point out our main target is that through " perfect mechanic-dynamic " each cartridge you mount in our tonearm can shows at its best like in almost no any other tonearm and this is our meaning of " universal tonearm ".
It is a very hard challenge for any one that want to design a tonearm. Are there trade-offs to achieve that target?, certainly are and Guillermo and I really analize each one of them and its influence ( what we are " loosing " in change of what. ) on playback quality performance level, even if a customer could detect something because those trade-offs.
Design a tonearm with our main target is a deep learning in something that appear very simple: a tonearm design is no rocket to Pluton!, but when you understand that that tonearm is only a 1/2-half product and you need to add the cartridge ( that fussy and multifacetic cartridge along several and different cartridges!!!. ) ) in the " equation " design then that simple tonearm design converts in something more a lot more complex.
It is not only our each one skills to design it but the way we use those skills where the time consuming on tests/voicing is higher than I could imagine at first but a extreme necessity to confirm if we are just " there ".
These tests take me and still take not only several hours for cartridges set up but to listening. I have to develop a process that make me not only more " easy " to find out/detect the differences but that asure me those differences were real because are these differences the ones that tell you if the " light " is still off or you already switch: ON!.
We are ( I think. ) at the finish part/step/stage of our tonearm design and we hope to share it to all of you in the next months ( 2011. ).
Anyway an interesting project full of several learning subjects and full of fun.
Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
As you point out our main target is that through " perfect mechanic-dynamic " each cartridge you mount in our tonearm can shows at its best like in almost no any other tonearm and this is our meaning of " universal tonearm ".
It is a very hard challenge for any one that want to design a tonearm. Are there trade-offs to achieve that target?, certainly are and Guillermo and I really analize each one of them and its influence ( what we are " loosing " in change of what. ) on playback quality performance level, even if a customer could detect something because those trade-offs.
Design a tonearm with our main target is a deep learning in something that appear very simple: a tonearm design is no rocket to Pluton!, but when you understand that that tonearm is only a 1/2-half product and you need to add the cartridge ( that fussy and multifacetic cartridge along several and different cartridges!!!. ) ) in the " equation " design then that simple tonearm design converts in something more a lot more complex.
It is not only our each one skills to design it but the way we use those skills where the time consuming on tests/voicing is higher than I could imagine at first but a extreme necessity to confirm if we are just " there ".
These tests take me and still take not only several hours for cartridges set up but to listening. I have to develop a process that make me not only more " easy " to find out/detect the differences but that asure me those differences were real because are these differences the ones that tell you if the " light " is still off or you already switch: ON!.
We are ( I think. ) at the finish part/step/stage of our tonearm design and we hope to share it to all of you in the next months ( 2011. ).
Anyway an interesting project full of several learning subjects and full of fun.
Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.