A Copernican View of the Turntable System

Don,
It seems as if you know well the pitfalls of 'structural gymnastics' and are learning more 'on the job'...so to speak :^)
I'm impressed and looking forward to further evolutions of your ingenious arm-pod.
Cheers
Henry

I am lucky in that the tonearms I was using when Henry’s thread came about were top mounted ones. This made design of my pod very easy and allowed for all the mass to be in the pod itself – no hollowing out required no extra parts - so to speak. It won’t win any design awards but its purpose is all functional and it is immovable. If you can tap holes for screws and spikes u can make this totally yourself.

All of the hinges, bolts and screws that I adjust for VTF, Azimuth, … are part of the tonearms themselves. This is just one solution and it has made life for me and this part of the hobby a simple and satisfying one.

My latest tonearm the DV-505 was selected because it looked very interesting yes, but it is also a top mount and looks like it was built by Dynavector for a Pod. Its very portable. Its perfect for it. I have been totally intrigued by its design and its ease of setup on both a pod and a plinthed TT using the Dynavector Jig.

Cheers Chris

Hi Chris,
The Dynavector DV-505 (and its later 507 version) has alway enticed me because of its distinctly architectonic appearance?
I have never though, read a really thorough review of its performance vis-a-vis other tonearms?
It would be good to hear your impressions?
I think Lewm also has one of these on hand?
Cheers
Henry

Hi Chris, According to Kessier& Pisha ( Tonarm Geometry and
Setup; Audio,January 1980) some Japanese tonearms were not
optimaly designed .Ie in the sense of 'optimal geometry'.
Dyna DV 505 : the offset angle is 21.500 while the optimal is 22.814; the overhang is 15.000 while the optimal is 17.164.
Lew mentioned some problems with the adjustment of his DV 505 but in the
context of Baerwald, etc. To my mind the 'zero points' are
about our preference regading the question where on the
LP radius we want the least distortion. But I will gladly let
the (possible) technical implication to Dertonarm, Halcro, Raul and others.

Regards,

Yes. Love my DV505 so much that I have two of them. And then on top of that a dear friend (my longest term audiophile friend) gave me his DV501 last year. The DV501 was introduced shortly after the DV505. It is very like the 505 except that it lacks a few doodads, so it could be marketed for a lower price. DV501 uses counter-weight balance instead of dynamic balance, lacks the little spring-loaded resonance-reducing gizmo that is tucked up under the horizontally pivoting part of the 505 and 507. Some liked it better than the DV505. I preferred DV505 to 507 because the 505 can be surface-mounted; you don't have to drill a hole in your armboard or plinth to accommodate a vertical shaft that goes below the top surface of one or the other. When I built my early slate plinths, I decided to limit myself to surface-mount tonearms so as not to have to implement removable arm boards. The fully developed Mk3 plinth does have a removable slate or alu armboard, however, can use any tonearm of 10 or more inches effective length.