Why are modern arms so ugly?

Surely you jest Doug,

Who am I to go against the recommendations of the arm manufacturer? I use the lines to get a ball park for level, ie parallel to the LP surface of an average weight LP, then I listen and do some VTA adjustment. It's similar to balancing the arm during set up before you apply the estimated range for VTF on the SME V. Then I listen and adjust VTF and VTA again and then again until it sounds right. I follow the recommendations of the cartridge and arm manufacturers for the initial set up and THEN start the fine tuning by ear. My Air Tight manual also suggests to start with the top of the cartridge level putting the SRA in a range, and then adjust by ear. I, for one, was never "tempted" to set the arm level and then forget it. For those who are, those lines are helpful. You, and I to perhaps a lesser degree, will fine tune everything by ear. And that is how it should be for most of us.

I still think it would be more difficult to set up without the lines printed on the armtube. That tapered tube would be tough to set parallel to the record surface. Otherwise, I don't know how one would start the process.

One could try to set VTF without first roughly balancing the arm to neutral but I would not want to risk setting my stylus on a guage to read 6 grams. I want to at least first start in a ballpark. My eyes certainly are not good enough to get a ballpark 92 degree SRA and my fingers are not good enough to estimate what 2 grams feels like.

Either I'm missing something, or you are having some fun with me. This thread needs some humor injected in it.

I still rather strongly think the arm would be more beautiful without the lines, especially the 12" version, but you are the first to even acknowledge that suggestion, though you haven't commented on my point. What say you?

Looking at my SME V tonight, I noticed for the first time, or at least was conscience of it for the first time, that the printed horizontal lines are only on one side - the outside. That's quite obvious, but I never made a note of this before. The inside of the arm does look better IMO. Now enough of highjacking this thread. The SME V is a thirty year old design. Hardly "modern".

Peter,

I'm having fun but I'm also serious about the futility of that line. It is in fact a distraction that misleads the unwary, as you demonstrated when you wrote, "I still think it would be more difficult to set up without the lines printed on the armtube. That tapered tube would be tough to set parallel to the record surface".

Who cares? Do we play records with an armtube? Adjust what matters. Ignore the rest.

We play records with a stylus, so as you noted the ideal method for visually estimating SRA is to set the stylus with a magnifier. That's quite the bother however and as fine tuning must follow by ear I agree it's rarely worth the fuss.

The next closest thing to adjusting the stylus is to adjust the cartridge body. This is actually easier than levelling an armtube and arguably more effective. Just make the cartridge level to the record surface (or tail-up/down if that's what a particular cartridge prefers). Where the armtube ends up is irrelevant.

Who am I to go against the recommendations of the arm manufacturer?

You're Peter, I'm Doug, both thinking audiophiles who trust their own judgement and learn thereby. :)

With regard to pertinance, as the SME's line is pointless at best or a distraction at worst it is technically offensive, which makes it aesthetically offensive in a technical device. So I agree with you - the arm would look better without it!

Doug

Doug,
I don't disagree that it looks naff, but what is your point?
You said

Who cares? Do we play records with an armtube? Adjust what matters. Ignore the rest.
We play records with a stylus, so as you noted the ideal method for visually estimating SRA is to set the stylus with a magnifier. That's quite the bother however and as fine tuning must follow by ear I agree it's rarely worth the fuss.

So, what do you do?
Whack the arm on any old how? Then start fussing?
The point is to get a basis for adjustment. What's wrong with that? What exactly do you use as a basis for adjustment with other arms? Maybe the edges of arms with parallel tubes? What's the difference?

I have no axe to grind but I detect that you dislike SME for some reason, which, as I am curious, is a reason for my intrusion.

John,

Your questions suggest that I failed to communicate my point. Let's begin with an area of agreement, namely, that we're seeking a reasonable basis for VTA/SRA adjustment.

Next, let's ask ourselves exactly what we're adjusting:
- what is VTA? The angle of the cantilever relative to the record surface (stated roughly for simplicity).
- what is SRA? The angle of the stylus contact surfaces to the record surface.
We note that neither definition references or even assumes the existence of an armtube. If an armtube is not required for the existence of a parameter it may not be the most sensible basis for adjusting that parameter.

Proof: VTA/SRA exist and ought to be adjusted even when a cartridge is mounted on a tonearm that has no armtube at all, e. g., the Clearaudio Souther. We always should and in this case we must choose something other than armtube angle as our basis for VTA/SRA adjustment, preferably something more directly related to VTA/SRA.

Similarly, when adjusting zenith angle do we look at the armtube? Do we care if it's tapered or parallel? No. We look at the cartridge and cantilever because that's what we're adjusting. The same principle applies to VTA/SRA adjustment. Our basis for adjustment should be the cartridge/stylus. The angle of the armtube is a consequence of, not a basis for all these adjustments.

Whether I like or dislike SME is irrelevant. I use the same VTA/SRA basis with all tonearms because it's not a tonearm adjustment. It's a cartridge/stylus adjustment.