Straight Tonearm vs. S-Shaped Tonearm

Hello all, I'm new to this site and relatively new to world of turntables and vinyl. I've been doing some reading on this forum and others about different tonearms and styli and have a question which I haven't been able to get a definitive answer to.

Many people seem to believe that s-shaped tonearms are better for record wear, especially with an elliptical stylus, as the tracking error is higher on straight tonearms. The argument I've read is that the increased tracking error combined with the shape of the elliptical stylus will wear records much faster. In fairness I've mainly read this on DJ forums so they may have different concerns from some one who is using the TT only for audiophile purposes.

If this is the case however, why do most modern audiophile tables all come with straight tonearms? Is there any validity to the claim that straight tonearms may be inferior for record wear, and reducing tracking error than s-shaped arms. It seems like many 70's and 80's audiophile tables did have the s-shaped arm.

It's mostly an aesthetic issue. As long as the cartridge has the "traditional" placement , arm shape won't be the deciding factor in TT sound quality. A linear tracking table has a straight arm-be hard to beat a Yamaha PX-2 with a "cool" S-shaped arm. My $.02

Hi,

Audiophile type straight arms are OK in principle. DJ type straight arms are very poorly suited to anything but DJ trickery and are very bad to records. With one of the DJ straight arms, use only spherical styli.

Thanks.

Bri83 said:

Hello all, I'm new to this site and relatively new to world of turntables and vinyl. I've been doing some reading on this forum and others about different tonearms and styli and have a question which I haven't been able to get a definitive answer to.

Many people seem to believe that s-shaped tonearms are better for record wear, especially with an elliptical stylus, as the tracking error is higher on straight tonearms. The argument I've read is that the increased tracking error combined with the shape of the elliptical stylus will wear records much faster. In fairness I've mainly read this on DJ forums so they may have different concerns from some one who is using the TT only for audiophile purposes.

If this is the case however, why do most modern audiophile tables all come with straight tonearms? Is there any validity to the claim that straight tonearms may be inferior for record wear, and reducing tracking error than s-shaped arms. It seems like many 70's and 80's audiophile tables did have the s-shaped arm.

Click to expand...

With a pivoting tonearm, it's only truly tangential at two points and the fact that it's a straight or S shaped arm doesn't matter. A linear tracking arm can be truly tangential only 1/3 of the time, because it's choices are +, 0 and - and the force applied by the groove causes it to move farther in. If the linear tracing system is active, it can respond faster and the arm's movement may be dampened better but it still uses tracking error to cause the arm to correct its position. The headshell's position may make more of a difference than the shape of the arm, IMO.

Regardless, a cartridge is rarely aligned correctly.

I was led to believe that the straight arm has less mass than the s shaped one. It makes sense that the shortest distance from point a to point b is a straight line. I have both straight and s shaped arms and right now I'm using the straights on both my tt's as I seem to prefer the sound better. Course it could always be the cart, the needle, the set up, the table, or the atmospheric pressure for the difference in sound.

Low mass tone arms were all the rage in the late '70's and early '80's. Before that, high mass arms were more prevalent. Today medium mass arms arm more likely to be found on new turntables. Fact is you can get good results out of any well - designed tonearm: low, medium or high mass. Some of the best cartridges made today - the Koetsu line of cartridges come to mind, as well as the Denon DL-103, perform best on higher mass tonearms.

As for tonearm length, longer is believed to be better. S arms were, among other things, an attempt to add length to the tonearm, since most tonearms are limited in length because they need to fit inside the space that is occupied by the turntable when the dust cover is closed. SME is making some very long straight tonearms for their high end turntables - over 233 mm.

I've always thought that its best to avoid the "X is always better" arguments in audio. Good planning and set up are the keys to getting good results from any high quality design.

A properly aligned cart is just that, a properly aligned cart. The arm will have some influence on performance obviously but the shape of that arm will have minimal impact compared to effective mass, effective length and the quality and type of bearings. In most cases mass produced arms have conformed to little more than the fashion of the times when deciding between straight and s shaped.

I don't think it affects the sound quality at all, but it comes down to personal preference.

I much rather prefer the S shaped tonearms; they just have a nicer look and feel to them. I don't like the straight tonearms, because I think they look cheap. Especially if they're made of black plastic.

You can't beat a nice beefy looking shiny silver thick S shaped tonearm in my opinion.

And the extremely low weight, bouncyness of some tonearms does take some getting used to; when you're used to something with a heavier tonearm.

But if it wern't bad for records, I would perfer a really heavy tonearm, like in older record changers.

here is a previous discusion on the topic

I think a straight arm is best, all else being equal. That phrase, "all else being equal", is essential, as a good turntable with an S-shaped arm is much better than a piece of junk table with a straight arm.

KentTeffeteller said:

DJ straight arms

Click to expand...

As Kent pointed out, "DJ" straight arms are not the same thing as our "audiophile" straight arms. They are shorter in length, designed for scratching work. Many of them aren't long enough to allow the stylus to overhang the spindle - thus the increase in tracking error, and record wear.

An S or straight arm in an appropriate length to setup your cart properly is not the same thing.

I don't own a strait arm, but if its lighter... I would think it would be better.

whell said:

Low mass tone arms were all the rage in the late '70's and early '80's. Before that, high mass arms were more prevalent. Today medium mass arms arm more likely to be found on new turntables. Fact is you can get good results out of any well - designed tonearm: low, medium or high mass. Some of the best cartridges made today - the Koetsu line of cartridges come to mind, as well as the Denon DL-103, perform best on higher mass tonearms.

As for tonearm length, longer is believed to be better. S arms were, among other things, an attempt to add length to the tonearm, since most tonearms are limited in length because they need to fit inside the space that is occupied by the turntable when the dust cover is closed. SME is making some very long straight tonearms for their high end turntables - over 233 mm.

I've always thought that its best to avoid the "X is always better" arguments in audio. Good planning and set up are the keys to getting good results from any high quality design.

Click to expand...

The mass of a tonearm only matters to the cartridge, because the compliance of the cantilever needs to be matched to it. A heavy tonearm and a high-compliance cartridge leads to sub-sonic issues and tracking problems when playing albums that aren't totally flat. A low compliance cantilever on a low mass tonearm often leads to tracking issues and feedback, because the resonant frequency is in the audio range, when it's supposed to be in the 5-7Hz area. For tracking stability and sound quality, compliance and tonearm mass absolutely have to be addressed. If not, the only way it will work and sound good is by coincidence.

wilkes85 said:

I don't think it affects the sound quality at all, but it comes down to personal preference.

I much rather prefer the S shaped tonearms; they just have a nicer look and feel to them. I don't like the straight tonearms, because I think they look cheap. Especially if they're made of black plastic.

You can't beat a nice beefy looking shiny silver thick S shaped tonearm in my opinion.

And the extremely low weight, bouncyness of some tonearms does take some getting used to; when you're used to something with a heavier tonearm.

But if it wern't bad for records, I would perfer a really heavy tonearm, like in older record changers.

Click to expand...

It's not the tonearm that's bouncy, it's the tonearm/cartridge compliance mis-match that causes the arm to bounce. There's no difference, other than magnitude, between the need for proper tone arm mass/compliance and a car's mass/unsprung weight/suspension. If they're wrong, the performance won't be good.

OK, a few factors to consider. DJ arms are "underhung" on many tables. That is the stylus will swing and arc that never intersects the center of the record. This is a design feature to assist in "scratching". They are usually fairly tough, run high tracking force cartridges, and that usually means mass and metal.

Hi-Fi arms are almost always "overhung". That means they swing an arc slightly beyond the center of the LP. The exact overhang distance depends on the geometric design of the center to the arm pivot point. Straight, J or S - they are almost all overhung. It is this geometry that makes a large difference in the wear and mis-tracking issues that are minimized to the point of low concern.

The biggest reason I can see for S arms was that they use universal headshells which mount straight into the end of the tube. To get the right offset angle, the arm was bent in a fashion that allows a straight headsell to line up correctly. J and Straight arms mostly use proprietary headshells, or non at all which require direct cartridge mounting. Therefore, the S arm is the most flexible in terms of cartridge swapping, changing headshell weights, lengths, etc. A feature I use to its utmost

Some straight arm enthusiast are cartridge swappers like me, they just have to fork out more $$ to do it. For instance, the new Denon TT has a dismountable headshell, but it's like $80/ea. That's too steep for me as I usually have about 5 cartridges mounted and ready to swap for any given table.

Using an S arm may incur a slight mass penalty compared to a straight tube, but it's no where near the mass difference that exists between headshells. The lightest shell I have is hydro-formed aluminum basket at 6.2 grams with wires. The heaviest shell I have is almost 18 grams without the add-on weights that can be mounted and is cast aluminum.

I have 20 shells or so that all fall in between. Most cast shells I have used fall between 10 grams and 16 grams. The lightest are made from metal matrix and cost accordingly. Most stamped or hydro-formed shells fall between 7 and 12 grams.

Tube weights may vary by 3~4 grams. Many of the classic vintage tables of yesteryear were shipped with both a straight tube and an S tube like my JVC QL-Y5F. It was up to the user to select whichever style suited them best and install it. If there was a very significant difference in performance, I think they would have installed the superior one to make better specs and advertising one-up-manship. But, since a number of MFGs did it, my suspicion is that it's not the critical factor.

My advise is to use the style that meets your needs and manage the mass in other ways

highfigh said:

The mass of a tonearm only matters to the cartridge, because the compliance of the cantilever needs to be matched to it. A heavy tonearm and a high-compliance cartridge leads to sub-sonic issues and tracking problems when playing albums that aren't totally flat. A low compliance cantilever on a low mass tonearm often leads to tracking issues and feedback, because the resonant frequency is in the audio range, when it's supposed to be in the 5-7Hz area. For tracking stability and sound quality, compliance and tonearm mass absolutely have to be addressed. If not, the only way it will work and sound good is by coincidence.

Click to expand...

correct! excellent explanation!

It wasn’t a beautification project and the need to blow money that S and J-arms were invented for turntables. It was mysterious physics, magic, and a will to create better music for cartridges- but not in the way we would normally think.

For tonearms, longer is better. They have less vertical and horizontal tracking error like a car with a long wheelbase so in record warps we ride without jerking, more accuracy. With slower and less vertical and horizontal pivot bearing movements, they are quieter and have more dynamic range. And they are more forgiving of alignment errors. But if they are made too long then they have extra weight, flexing, and low resonance problems. In the microscopic world, it means a lot.




S and J-arms are straight arms in disguise with an additional benefit. Stretch the S-arm and we see it is longer. Clever engineers took the straight arms then bent them to fit smaller boxes. But there is more.

Bent arms are more energetic in sound. Tonearms are small but influential organ pipes. Think of a muffler pipe; a long and straight pipe flexing and has low resonance, a burbling sound. Look under a car with a factory system and we see the pipe bends making it stronger and the sound is spread to higher and wider frequency range. Tonearms follow the same physics. Properly designed, angled at the right point to control resonance, and with the right materials, well designed arms can give a happy boost to the midrange. Drooping audio waves can be boosted by opposing lifted audio waves to make a neutral sound. Since many cartridges have a droop in the midrange, this is a happy mating. A bend or two can make tonearms passive amplifiers. Clever engineers.

Extra weight? Yes, but short arms are choppy rides. In longer arms, the combination of the cantilever, a heavier, movement resistant, tonearms and exceptional bearings makes a very smooth ride much like a shock absorber tonearm using a leaf spring cartridge. The arms are beauties to watch as the cantilever does the work and the tonearm floats.

Why did we go to short straight arms? We know they are easy to design and cost much less to make. Lower cost, lower price, expands the market to consumers who could not afford, or want, the best. One bend is costly but two? Wow, and both must be precise, perfect. Straight arms can be mass produced; there are no precise bends to worry about, less of a chance of defects, and faster assembly line manufacturing. Bean counters and profit motivated do not mind if we forget what we learned in physics classes.

Bent arms have many advantages.

Quest said:

It wasn’t a beautification project and the need to blow money that S and J-arms were invented for turntables. It was mysterious physics, magic, and a will to create better music for cartridges- but not in the way we would normally think.

For tonearms, longer is better. They have less vertical and horizontal tracking error like a car with a long wheelbase so in record warps we ride without jerking, more accuracy. With slower and less vertical and horizontal pivot bearing movements, they are quieter and have more dynamic range. And they are more forgiving of alignment errors. But if they are made too long then they have extra weight, flexing, and low resonance problems. In the microscopic world, it means a lot.

S and J-arms are straight arms in disguise with an additional benefit. Stretch the S-arm and we see it is longer. Clever engineers took the straight arms then bent them to fit smaller boxes. But there is more.

Bent arms are more energetic in sound. Tonearms are small but influential organ pipes. Think of a muffler pipe; a long and straight pipe flexing and has low resonance, a burbling sound. Look under a car with a factory system and we see the pipe bends making it stronger and the sound is spread to higher and wider frequency range. Tonearms follow the same physics. Properly designed, angled at the right point to control resonance, and with the right materials, well designed arms can give a happy boost to the midrange. Drooping audio waves can be boosted by opposing lifted audio waves to make a neutral sound. Since many cartridges have a droop in the midrange, this is a happy mating. A bend or two can make tonearms passive amplifiers. Clever engineers.

Extra weight? Yes, but short arms are choppy rides. In longer arms, the combination of the cantilever, a heavier, movement resistant, tonearms and exceptional bearings makes a very smooth ride much like a shock absorber tonearm using a leaf spring cartridge. The arms are beauties to watch as the cantilever does the work and the tonearm floats.

Why did we go to short straight arms? We know they are easy to design and cost much less to make. Lower cost, lower price, expands the market to consumers who could not afford, or want, the best. One bend is costly but two? Wow, and both must be precise, perfect. Straight arms can be mass produced; there are no precise bends to worry about, less of a chance of defects, and faster assembly line manufacturing. Bean counters and profit motivated do not mind if we forget what we learned in physics classes.

Bent arms have many advantages.

Click to expand...

Howcome, then, that the best straight arms are better sounding than the best ever S- or J-arms?

"dolph"

Very few, if any high end arms are bent.