Question on FR 66s

Syntax, dont you think the effective mass of the tonearm also plays an important role on the sonics given the compliance of the cartridges ? Is it good to use a cartridge with compliance of 15 on a tonearm with 30gram effective mass ?

Thanks, Syntax and all for information. FR manual and vinyl engine also gave 295 as P2S distance. I just recalled some discussions that some people recommended 296mm. Same go for FR 64 where FR spec and what was discussed in agon was also slightly different. However, for some reason when I tried searching old threads, I could not find that specific thread anymore regarding published spec vs what's some people experieces have been. Was it dertoarm who discussed that? By the way, Micro Seiki fixed armboard only allowed me the mount FR 64s with P2S distance that is the same as FR's published spec so I never did try the alternative P2S.

Now I have both FR64s and FR66s, FR64s on Micro Seiki SX-777 Air, FR66s on TW as SX-777 Air won't take FR 66s as far as I know.

Koetsu will go on FR66s for now. FR64s with a bit less effective mass probably would play better with my other relatively high mass medium compliance as far as resonance is concerned. For Air Tight PC-1 supreme, resonance would be high 7 almost 8Hz with FR-66s, I think that should also be ok.

Right now I use Oyaide carbon fiber headshell with its silver lead. I heard a lot of good things regarding Orsonic headshell as well and I have been thinking of trying that. Otherwise, I have FR headshell, Koetsu headshell(which has only 3 fixed distance I could not use it with FR to mount anything that would get me the right overhang with any protractors that I have) and a phasetech (most were all hand me down from a friend who collects way too many things).

Keep your FR-64 S. To my mind the FR-66s is overpriced but not better. Anyway for the carts you own te FR-64s is as good. I use the Kiseki blue Goldspot as well as the Benz LP s and the Magic Diamond with my FR-64 s. I also prefer the Bearwald geometry: 231,5 mm distance pivot to spindle.

Pani,
in the case of the FR-66s you may neglect the compliance issue. We made many tests with nearly all available MC carts, MI carts and new as well older MM designs on the FR-66s. No problem at all. It is the most universal arm ever built.

Pani,
I think there is no general rule for compliance, effective mass of tonearm and superior sonic result. The formula for that is only a formula but you have different Arm materials (steel, titan, wood, aluminum for example) all have totally different energy transfer abilities, you have Unipivot arms, dynamically balanced Designs and so on...and you have different Arm geometries which are also responsible for superior or inferior tracking ability ...
To make a very long story short, you can all strip down to the abilities of the Designer. You will find endless examples for top sounding combinations which are not a 10 in the 8-12 formula range and you will find mediocre sounding combinations which are a 9.9 in the calculation.

FR-64s
the alternative P2S is 231,5mm

I think that thread was deleted based on aggressive posting from a mexican member which had a lot of personal attacks when I remember right.