First, many thanks to sirspeedy for the typing upgrade. 15 paragraphs in two posts, wow! Seriously, your always valuable content is much easier to read. Go ahead, blush!
Remote control VTA, wouldn't that be nifty? It really doesn't take much time on a TriPlanar or JMW though. Once you know the right setting for a record you can dial it in while the TT is spinning up. Real time loss is virtually zero. It's not so good on a Graham 2.2 because the arm height adjustment lacks adequate resolution.
Back to topic. It's not surprising that damping acts differently on a Graham vs. your friend's AirTangent (or my TriPlanar). Their damping devices are so different mechanically that you wouldn't expect similar sonic effects.
I'm not surprised your AirTangent friend prefers no damping. We don't use it on the TriPlanar either. The damping troughs on these arms are well away from the pivot point, which means the greatest effect of damping is to present resistance to lateral arm movement in response to cantilever deflections. This resistance must feed back to the cartridge and affect the way the cantilever acts in the suspension. The sonic effects seem detrimental IME and apparently in your friend's also.
OTOH, the damping on a Graham 2.2, Basis Vector and other unipivots is concentrated at the pivot point. Depending on the size of the bearing surfaces, it has a negligible effect on lateral arm motion. What it does is dampen arm and bearing resonances at certain frequencies. The damping on an AirTangent or TriPlanar does not dampen resonances very much because the fluid is not in contact with the arm very much, nor with the bearing at all.
With an Airy 3 on Cello's Graham 2.2, a little too much damping started to kill the HF's. Backing it off by even a pinhead made the highs zippy and immediately killed some of the bass. We could not find a happy medium with that combination in his (strongly dynamic) system (in a bright room).
With an Airy 2 the sweet zone for damping was sufficiently broad that we had room to tune it, a pinhead or two this way or that, without feeling like we were giving up anything. We achieved full dynamics with no loss of HF control, full bass without bloat. This was a happier setup, again possibly due the overall characteristics of his system and room.
Remote control VTA, wouldn't that be nifty? It really doesn't take much time on a TriPlanar or JMW though. Once you know the right setting for a record you can dial it in while the TT is spinning up. Real time loss is virtually zero. It's not so good on a Graham 2.2 because the arm height adjustment lacks adequate resolution.
Back to topic. It's not surprising that damping acts differently on a Graham vs. your friend's AirTangent (or my TriPlanar). Their damping devices are so different mechanically that you wouldn't expect similar sonic effects.
I'm not surprised your AirTangent friend prefers no damping. We don't use it on the TriPlanar either. The damping troughs on these arms are well away from the pivot point, which means the greatest effect of damping is to present resistance to lateral arm movement in response to cantilever deflections. This resistance must feed back to the cartridge and affect the way the cantilever acts in the suspension. The sonic effects seem detrimental IME and apparently in your friend's also.
OTOH, the damping on a Graham 2.2, Basis Vector and other unipivots is concentrated at the pivot point. Depending on the size of the bearing surfaces, it has a negligible effect on lateral arm motion. What it does is dampen arm and bearing resonances at certain frequencies. The damping on an AirTangent or TriPlanar does not dampen resonances very much because the fluid is not in contact with the arm very much, nor with the bearing at all.
With an Airy 3 on Cello's Graham 2.2, a little too much damping started to kill the HF's. Backing it off by even a pinhead made the highs zippy and immediately killed some of the bass. We could not find a happy medium with that combination in his (strongly dynamic) system (in a bright room).
With an Airy 2 the sweet zone for damping was sufficiently broad that we had room to tune it, a pinhead or two this way or that, without feeling like we were giving up anything. We achieved full dynamics with no loss of HF control, full bass without bloat. This was a happier setup, again possibly due the overall characteristics of his system and room.