Rabco SL-8E Tone Arm

Atmasphere, yes I get that and I dont think there was any difference in deflection on eccentric records between a conventional arm and the ET ( with the dampening applied). The amount of deflection will vary depending on the horizontal compliance of each cartridge. The Dynavector arms use the same electromagnetic horizontal damping to counter the high horizontal mass in their biaxial design.
Possibly a case here for low compliance cartridges if we assume many records are off centre.

all technical things aside these arms when setup + working like they did when new... play music period! most others can only dream of...top to bottom they are excellent IMO...I have several including a highly modified balsa wood armwand one that has censor switch instead of the mechanical one...

Lawrence
Musical Arts

New to this group, but since there is a current thread going on the SL8E, I'll ask if there is any indication of transistor issues in these? Once, I replaced the caps inside the battery box and things were good for a while. Now, even though both motors operate when "tested" the tracking motor doesn't move. I just replaced those caps again, and don't see anything too obvious. Any thought or recommendations? Thanks...

Hi Lewm,
I'm guessing on the Dynavector, but I would assume that although the Dynavector has a high mass in the vertical plain, because it is a balanced beam, ie the counterweight at the back balances the arm to zero, then they have added electromagnetic damping to minimise excessive overshoot of movement on eccentric records. One thing I know, their argument for high horizontal mass/biaxial design is that the inertia of the heavy beam provides better bass as you have alluded, so I guess the damping may be an extension of this thinking.
Certainly on the ET I have to turn the volume down when the e/m damping is applied, which is quite astonishing to think that excessive lateral movement can affect the audible or dynamic output to that degree.