Why are modern arms so ugly?


OK.......you're going to say it's subjective and you really looove the look of modern tonearms?
But the great tonearms of the Golden Age are genuinely beautiful in the way that most Ferraris are generally agreed to be beautiful.
Look at the Fidelity Research FR-64s and FR-66s? Look at the SAEC 308 series and the SAEC 407/23? Look at the Micro Seiki MA-505? Even the still audacious Dynavector DV-505/507?
But as an architect who's lifetime has revolved around aesthetics.......I am genuinely offended by the design of most modern arms. And don't give me the old chestnut....'Form follows Function' as a rational for ugliness. These current 'monsters' will never become 'Classics' no matter how many 'rave reviews' they might temporarily assemble.
128x128halcro
There's little question that such user-friendly functions can improve the sonic performance of an arm in the areas they're designed to address. For example, VTA/SRA on-the-fly makes it possible to optimize those parameters very quickly and the results are clearly audible (at least to me).

Notwithstanding that, there is probably also a sonic penalty from hanging additional bits off the arm. Every piece of material is a potential resonance trap that may color the arm and/or raise its sound floor.

It's a two-edged sword, no simple answers.
I have seen nice images of the new DaVinci Masters Reference Virtu tonearm with a flexible SME shell. Not ugly at all !

best @ fun only
Tbg........the Ikeda IT-407CR1.
Are you saying this is a 'beautiful' modern arm or are you using it as an example of my Thread?
It's not the ugliest arm IMO that's for sure......but compared to the original FR-66s by the same designer over 30 years ago......I know which one I prefer visually :-)
I had a FR-66 and thought it was okay. I guess I'm just taken by the close tolerance machining of the Ikeda and, of course, the sound.