Why are modern arms so ugly?

BTW Halcro, the Dynavector arm you mention has always looked ugly to me, I used to wonder who would want to own such a thing. (I'm talking about looks, I acknowledge that this is a fine sounding arm). Seriously, compare that monstrosity to the elegant Sumiko MDC800.

Perhaps fortunately, beauty is a very subjective thing.

Agree, Al, arms have that precision instrument appearance.
I love the Dino 246 precedent of the 308.
And the '66 427 Cobra SC.
Sorry a little off topic.

Best,

Dave

Rockitman,
thought so too. when I was looking at the Continuum Cobra usually on images or at fairs I thought it is a funny creature. When you have installed this arm and you look on your turntable this arm has some powerful elegance. It is a design piece!

best & fun only

one of the simplest and most elegant designs is the SAEC WE 8000, and one of the best in musical affairs.

best & fun only

Form should follow design if function is the core.
The better tonearms (some not all...) of yesterday (make this "yesterday" 2-3 decades +) were designed by engineers.
Most of todays components in top flight audio is designed by dedicated audiophiles who evolved from customer to professional designer.
And there is nothing wrong about that.
But we see in many tonearms individual concepts of design which does not follow function but personal aesthetics.
This may appeal to some, but in most cases it is not form-follows-function in the original sense of the phrase.
But then - as mentioned before by others - "beauty" ( in industrial, mechanical designs ) is always and only in the eye of the beholder and rarely, if ever, finds universal praise.
The infamous WAF was no issue in tonearm design in the 1970s/80s.
Most of them were pretty raw industrial designs with little to no optical gimmick.
Hard to sell today.
Our society has changed.
The outlook is very important today.
Thus make-up and posing are more important to underline any given USP.