What defines a good tonearm

Seems to me that it is no better example of the Red Herring fallacies, that Atmasphere linked, than Dan_ed.

WSe are talking here on tonearm bearing not if the Talea performs better than a triplanar or not.

Well, we can't be surprised coming from a Talea dealer.

regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.

Dear Hiho and other unipivot advocates: Some of you name it the " very low friction " in vertical/horizontal planes the unipivots have as an advantage but till today no one of you ( including the dealer ) posted any low friction spec/figure on any unipivot tonearm.

I posted those 4mgrs. as bearing friction for that EPA100MK2 ( and other Technics models. ), so it could be interesting for all of us to know these 4mgrs bearing friction compares against those " very low bearing friction " unipivot specs.

I hope some of you could help about and come with that unipivot advantage spec/measure.

regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.

i had the Triplaner VII in my system on 3 different tt's over three years compared directly with the Reed 2A, Schroeder Ref SQ, Reed 2P, and then the Talea 1 and Talea 2. each tt had 2 arm boards and although i used multiple different cartridges mainly i used 2 A90's and the Allnic H3000 with 2 identcal inputs for direct comparisons.

i liked the Triplaner better overall than the Schroeder Ref SQ. simply more energetic and once optimized, more detailed. the Triplaner is an excellent arm, although it took quite a few different tweaks and multiple sessions to get it to sing.

a couple other local friends also used the Triplaner and thought highly of it.

the Reed 2A came along and bettered the Triplaner head to head on a couple of different cartridges. more detail, more space, more solid images, more precision. the Reed 2P even slightly better. then the Talea 1 went further and the Talea 2 even better.

all this time i had the Rockport sitting there as a constant reference. and i had multiple phono stages.

other friends have had the same experience.

which is not to say that the Triplaner is not an excellent tonearm. but; it has been passed by in overall performance by others. not sure how long it's been since the basic Triplaner design has been seriously tweaked, but performance does inevitably move forward.

disclosure; i'm not a dealer for any of these arms.

Dan_ed is right, whether he is a dealer or not.

Dear Mike: The subject with Dan is not if he is correct or not the point is that that is not what we are under discussion.

Anyway, every one can post whatever he want.

regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.

Dear friends: Well seems that there are not precise measures on an unipivot bearing friction level. I wonder from where came that " very low bearing friction ", I think we need this date.

In the mid-time could be interesting that we can think in a unipivot bearing characteristic as " similar " to a tip-toe/cone feet and what it happen around, here we can read about:

http://www.soundstage.com/maxdb/maxdb200207.htm

so seems that this kind of unipivot bearing is a distortion focus in many ways. I know that some of us like some kind of distortions but IMHO I think that lowering distortions or at least not adding more helps to be truer to the recording.

Of course that Lewm is not " buying " nothing but through his experiences he noted a " signature " that I call: distortions.

Yes, it is true that there is no perfect tonearm yet but if we follow analyzing unipivots IMHO this type of bearing design is " surrounded " by higher and more ( different ) distortions that a fix bearing design.

That some of us likes to live with those higher distortions means only that : that likes higher distortions but not that is a better bearing type design and some of us here are talking not on what we like ( as Mike. ) but what is wrong/worst or not through a bearing tonearm type design.

I wonder why some of you can't for a " second " try to be objective or think on objective terms? why can't take-off the subjective " cap " ?.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.