VPI 3D tonearm

HW bashing is just plain silly. OK, got that out of the way.

I heard the 3D arm in a VERY fine system that I know very well. It is mounted on a Classic 4, and that rig replaced a Forsell Reference; same cartridge (Koetsu). The owner does not want to deal with the complexity of the Forsell. Obviously, it is almost impossible to seperate the sonic change wrought by the arm from that of the table; and that of the particular synergy of each pairing. Having said, here are my impressions:

Tonally, low resonant signature is most certainly a characteristic of the sound that I heard. There is a striking reduction in the audibility of those narrow (and not so narrow) frequency bands that seem highlighted in relation to the rest of the frequency spectrum, and that results in sound that seems extremely well organized tonally. Soundstaging is VERY stable and precise; and perhaps as a result of the tonal evenness and purity (maybe), the soundstage is smaller front-to-back as well as left-right with smaller individual images; but, all extremely well organized. Overall, the sound is leaner with less weight.

But, and for me, this is a big "but". While the smaller soundstage does not bother me, the tonal aspects of the new sound do to a degree. I find there to be a sameness of timbre and tonal character to every lp played, with a subtle tonal politeness that I respected but didn't excite me. I don't understand this, since reduction in resonance should allow the differences in recordings to be more obvious, not less so. Live music is not always polite, it can and should sound downright nasty sometimes. Dynamic politeness is intrinsically linked to tonal quality, and particularly in the case of a turntable where speed stability is so important. Speed stability with the Classic 3 is first rate, but in spite of this the sound, for me, did not have quite the dynamic get-up-and-go and sheer explosiveness that I remember with the Forsell. Is it the table, the arm? I don't know. Very fine sound, but once again, system context is the key. Personally, I would not assume that reducing "resonant signature" in one component will necessarily yield sound that is closer to "real" without seriously considering system context.

Hi Frogman.....Thanks for your evaluation of the 3D arm. I still have not received mine (4 weeks since I placed the order) . I am also perplexed why the same quality of sound should appear in all your recordings. It would seem that the arm, or something else would cast its resonance signature on all you're listening. If indeed the arm is not resonant, something else must be. When I get my arm, I will test its resonance.....according to Harry, it almost doesn't exist. We'll see. If your Koetsu is one of their stone bodied models....I do suppose you had the appropriate counterweight...?? The idea is to get it as close to the pivot as possible...200 grm counterweight? That one is not normally shipped with the arm. The arm comes with either Discovery or Valhalla...which one is yours, and did you give it a chance to work in.

Hi Stringreen,

The system that I heard the 3D arm in is not mine, but that of an acquaintance whose system I have heard many times. The arm cabling I believe is Discovery and it probably is not fully broken in yet; this could very well have been partly responsible for what I heard.The Koetsu is a wood bodied one. I may have overstated the issue of sameness
of sound but it was a perplexing observation. As I said, the sound was very fine, but I was comparing it to the Forsell table which is known for explosive dynamics. I would expect you will be very pleased with the arm. Keep us posted.

Stringreen, Why would you say categorically that the idea is to get the counter-wt as close as possible to the pivot? The square of its distance from the pivot affects effective mass. The stone-body Koetsu might benefit from a high effective mass. Most report that it does; for example it is said to perform wonderfully in the very heavy FR66S. Granted, for other reasons, a large pivot to counter-wt distance is not the optimal way to gain effective mass.

Lewn....When the counterweight is away from the pivot, and the arm/cartridge is negotiating a warp, the counterweight "wants to" continue in the direction it was thrown, thereby disturbing the tracking of the cartridge. When the counterweight is near the pivot point, it doesn't move as much and disturbs the cartridge much less.....letting it do its job as best as it can....making better music. The idea is to get the heaviest counterweight as close to the pivot as you can for best performance.