The Arm/Cartridge Matching Myth

The general opinion is, that it is fine when the result is between 8-12.
It is overrated and I don't give much for it. Today you have different materials in the Arms (Steel, Aluminum, Wood, Titan etc. etc.). There are also different Tonearm geometries out there, some have less distortions at the beginning, some more in the inner grooves, most audiophiles think, when they buy an "Arm" then it is done perfect in every way but I think, that's the mistake of their audiophile life. Did no one ask why some arms are straight and some not? And why? (the straight ones are cheeper to make and need no knowledge...) and what the arch angle is good for? .....
These materials all have different resonances. Next, you have different kind of bearings (from construction and from design). these differences can be huge.Or, is the Arm a rigid design or not, what's with the energy transfer?
How fast is this one? Does it even exist, or does the Arm save it to a momentum and starts to vibrate on its own and reflects this back into the tracking process...long story short: does it allow fast transient transmission?
Back to life
I have (and had) combinations which have been between 9.7 -10.0- 10.4
Nearly super (from that Theory) but I was amazed that some carts performed MUCH better in Arms where the "calculation" showed different datas.
This calculation is more or less a help but after all I don't give a dime for it. A good designed tonearm is much more important.
I wrote several times about that when I made my comparisons with my Arms and Datas and the result was always the same, the best quality Arms worked best with a lot of cartridges at superior level.
And other Arms only with a few ones.
Btw. Cartridge Design does not stop with compliance. Their reaction with a tonearm can be totally different, but you will never read something about that. The best cartridge is a sold cartridge and based on that you will also find the general "recommendation" about loading: 100 Ω 47kΩ :-)
Example: Lyra Titan / Olympos are superior from sonics in top Arms only (energy transfer via Headshell into the Arm), when used in Arms with cheap bearings or bad geometry you get an analytical sound which is not a pleasure to listen to.
But let's not forget: All has to go through a Phonostage and that one can change the results also. Or, even more audible, internal turntable vibrations (Bearing, Belt, Motor(s), Platter, Suspension ...), in my personal opinion, I think, they degrade the possible maximum from sonics more than anything else.

Thanks Professor (Timeltel)...😘
You more than anyone knows how long I have struggled with this apparent dichotomy....❓👀
It's good to see you back here after so long...✋👀

And thank you for those Links...👏 I haven't yet finished them...
There was a lot of intelligent thinking about vinyl way back then in the States....although most of the writers seem to have oodles of warped and off-centre records that they play with...😰❓The days before record clamps...😊❓

Regards
Henry

Henry, Its more than being about warped records, if you read inbetween the lines of Kirkus's post above- if the effective mass is incorrect, you can actually have the stylus jump out of the groove of a perfectly flat, concentric LP.

An excellent example is a Grado on a Graham 2.2- does the well-known 'Grado dance' shortly before exiting stage left (IOW, jumps out of the groove).

The other issue is you won't be able to get the cartridge to track complex material correctly. So its a big deal and not just about warp.

So Zavato, with clarification from Rodman and Timeltel it was the Disctracker, sold by Discwasher Inc.

Now in addition to the info in links offered by Timeltel we have cartridges with "damping" brushes such as Shure, Stanton, Pickering, etc. (although they may have had other intents as well). And the Townshend Rock attempted something similar with a silicone filled trough and a paddle extending from the headshell.

A number of arm manufacturers address damping with some fluid around the bearing, or immersed in it such as Well Tempered. Then SME and KAB offered external damping troughs at the bearing end of the arm rather than the cartridge end.

So over the years many attempts to attack the resonance issue. But if anyone of these had proved successful wouldn't nearly all arms offer that today?

10-14-14: Halcro
As anyone with ‘feedback’ problems knows…..with the stylus stationary on the record, as you turn up the volume you will suddenly hear a deep and progressively louder continuous ‘drone’ emanating from your speakers…🔊
This (I suspect) is the Resonant Frequency of your tonearm/cartridge combination being excited by the harmonics of the structure-borne floor....

One thing puzzles me and perhaps Kirkus or Al can help here……😃
The ‘feedback’ on the stationary stylus increases when the volume is turned up….but I thought this is amplified AFTER the cartridge in the preamp stage….❓

The continuous drone you are referring to results from a feedback loop breaking into oscillation, at a low frequency. A feedback loop by definition involves a closed loop, which is to say a continuous path from input to output and back to input.

In the situation to which you are referring, some fraction of the acoustic output of the speaker is ultimately finding its way back to the cartridge. That acoustical/mechanical path from speaker to cartridge forms part of the loop, which is completed by the electrical pathway through the audio system. The volume control setting affects the gain of that electrical pathway, of course.

The gain that is necessary to set the loop into oscillation at a susceptible frequency can exist anywhere in that loop. Susceptibility depends, in addition to the gains that exist within the loop, on the phase shift and frequency response characteristics of what is in the loop, including any resonances which may exist.

Best regards,
-- Al