Tonearm: Well Tempered Lab LTD MK2

"not sure how it would compare to others in the same price range"

My former table was a Spacedeck. The Amadeus made it sound broken.....

thanks guys

I was thinking about Well Tempered Lab LTD MK2 new tonearm only (without wta turntable) as i already have turntable and it's Technics SP10mk2 with massive plinth. I have two tonearms:

Thomas Schick Tonearm (high effective mass for low compliance cartridges)
http://cs624027.vk.me/v624027872/15f45/5eGh-yR6gDI.jpg

Technics EPA-100 Tonearm (22g effective mass with stock shell for mid compliance cartridges).
http://cs616228.vk.me/v616228872/be57/6H7-Ds3fqfw.jpg

I came across Well Tembere Lab LTD MK2 tonearm recently and it's the lightest one (10g effective mass). According to ortofon information (below) tonearm with 10g effective mass is the best match for cartridges with compliance range from 20uN till 30uN.

I believe a compilance meassured @ 10 Hz in Denmark (not at 100Hz). Japanese standard is 100Hz for Zyx which is 12/15 uN compliance, i believe it would be around 24-30uN @ 10Hz in European/USA standard. Right ?

The below diagram illustrates the relationship between cartridge compliance, tonearm mass and the resulting resonance frequency:

http://ortofon.com/images/hifi/article/service/tonearmsresonans_02_web.jpg

Looking at this information i feel that my ZYX cartridge is not matched well with my current tonearms.

Raymonda, It's a pivoted tonearm, right? If it has no bearing, then what does it pivot on? The answer is, it does have a bearing. That "paddle or ball in silicon fluid" constitutes a bearing, for better or worse. Don't be concerned; I am not confused on this issue. You have every right to love it; I don't.

No bearings in the normal application of bearings....they are zero tolerance, too.....so how are they vague? I'm not sure I understand or follow what you are describing.

First, do you concede that there can be no "pivot" without a bearing? If so, then you agree that the construct that permits pivoting is a bearing. I am not sure I understand the meaning of the term "zero tolerance". If it means that every tonearm made is exactly alike with no unit to unit variation, then that's admirable, if it's possible. But the other meaning of that term that comes to my mind is that the bearing has zero space between the two surfaces that must also permit free movement between the two surfaces for the bearing to have acceptably low friction. Hard to visualize that one. In most bearings, the petroleum-based lubricant fills the space between two moving parts. In the case of the WT tonearm, it seems the silicon fluid serves that purpose.

Anyway, none of this matters. You obviously are very happy with your WT tonearm, and that's fine with me. You have a lot of company on your side. My experience with WT tonearms is limited to a WT Reference tonearm mounted on a WT Reference TT that belonged to a dear friend of mine who suffered from dementia prior to his death a few months ago. While he was still able to appreciate music, I helped him on two occasions to mount a cartridge on his WT tonearm. It seemed to me that there was some modest amount of slop in the bearing and that it was over damped. (I would even soften up my statement that it was "vague", in favor of over-damped.) For sure I could see with my own eyes that azimuth was not stable, as the arm tracked from the outside grooves to the inner grooves of an LP. The Reference TT per se is fine, IMO. It is only the tonearm that gave me fits. Moreover, I thought that the sound of the TT was very tipped toward the midrange prominent and always "polite", regardless of the source LP. I attributed this coloration to the excessive damping. All this is IMO, of course.