• The move to the new server is done. There are some software and database maintenance updates in process. This has us passing the hat around to help out. We appreciate any donations. Seriously, even a dollar helps. The payment page may be found here - https://www.audiokarma.org/support.html

HELP - tonearm with no offset, overhang or side thrust.

Yep, that,s true. But that would be like comparing a Mini (old model) to a Ferrari. As the saying goes, you get what you pay for, the wire in my arm costs more than that T/T, would you put a $3000 cartridge on it?

Cheers
 
Last weekend I did a listening tests between two of my arms, one 12'' & the other 8.25'' (i.e. Viv labs 7'' equivalent). They were both set up to a 80mm Nul point line, then moved back -5mm to ensure secure tracking.
I listened to 10 Lp's, 4 Classical, 4 Rocks & Pop & 2 Jazz. I listened to the track that was positioned at the 80mm dia 1st, with my 12'' arm. In most cases this was the last track. I did this to set a benchmark in what would be, the playing position with no tracking distortion. Then I listened to track 1, though all the 10 pieces I could hear any reduction in fidelity & had no tracking issues between the 2 tracks played.

So next I replayed the 80mm track with the 12'' arm & then played the same track with my shorter arm. Again I could not hear any difference and moving to the 1st track with the shorter arm this was again perfect. BUT
As I was repeating this through the 10 LP's, I started to realize that the short arm was giving me just a fraction cleaner base slam.
Why, If one was to be superior, I expected the 12'' arm to be the one. but it was not & there could be a couple of reasons why.

(Just to clarify the Eff Mass of both arms was 24 grams & 22 grams, so effectively no difference. The internal wire & RCA leads identical. The cart an Ortofon MC25FL, re-tipped with M/L & Boron cantilever was swapped over between each arm)

a) As V/Labs advised from its listening panel trials, most listeners preferred their short arm, So do shorter arms produce less interfering resonances.

b) The only difference between the arms (apart from length) was that my 12'' arm had a Magnesium arm wand. Whereas my 8.25'' arm had a Ceramic wand as shown a few weeks ago.

Cheers
 
Shorter is stiffer with resonances at higher frequencies and lower amplitides, but I suspect the ceramic enhances this property further.

These are both unipivot? Is there any damping applied?
 
Hi, Yep they both have the same 1500 cst oil baths in identical arm pillars. I agree that the stiffer ceramic tube will most likely be the main reason. The good thing is for potential users, is that at this length 8.25'' people who what a drop in arm can now be assured that a shorter delivers such a high S/Q.

Cheers
 
Hi,
I wanted to confirm for myself, if the V/Labs arms had individual set up templates for each length or just one. I eventually found the answer & is is just one template for all 3 lengths.

But while searching for that info I also stumbled of a fairly new review of the V/Labs arm from the Stereophile mag (15/04/25), quite a long read, but worth plowing through. A little strange all around as the 1st arm was not set up (if I understand the article correctly) correctly. So that sent two more sample. But the S/Q review is from the 1st arm, go figure,

In case you do not want to labour through the article, unabridged section on arm S/Q


Sound
Multiple variables were at work, so it was difficult to determine what was producing the Viv Lab Rigid Float 9's consistent sound quality. However, the three cartridges all sounded more lush, more full bodied, more richly textured than they do in more traditional tonearms.



https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct...usg=AOvVaw0CVYKzWlkILg6w--okNaL9&opi=89978449


Cheers
 
Hi, now all the mania has settled down a little, I would like to advise on some progress that has been made.
- I have managed to confirm that the Viv labs arm uses the same U/H set up Null point for it's 3 arms.
- With the advise kindly sent from TheoPhile that Baerwald had indeed studied the straight arm concept, following on from the work presented by Tchebechev. That indicated that a straight arm alignment principle would work, providing the length is no less the 15''. I decided to knock one up.

Yesterday I had it finished & mounted my Dyna 10 x 5 on it, yes at that length it is a little harder to mount everything, but we got there.
Results, utterly stunning, sound stage is immense, extending well beyond the speaker sides & portraying a slightly forward vocal with real depth to the music. Bass, well bass was to die for going really deep & solid, not fading off.
I set the U/H Null point for this test at 90mm, so roughly half way across the LP, depending on how full it is. The arm & cart tracked across (so far al least every disk I had the time to play.

Obviously this is not an arm everybody will have the room to actually use, in fact I am using it in my 2nd workshop system, as I will have to do some serious moving around to fit it on my main listening room T/T shelf.


Cheers
 

Attachments

  • 0923251744_HDR~4.jpg
    0923251744_HDR~4.jpg
    80.7 KB · Views: 16
Given that Baerwald stipulated at least 15 inches: Why not try a 30 incher?
 
Hi, well yes, someone on DIYaudio at this moment is currently doing a 24'' arm.
I have in the past done a 16'' arm using carbon fiber tapered tube & bass was flappy. To fix that I had to add a oil bath similar to the one used on the old SME arm.

This one is 15.5'', made from Magnesium & fortunately does not suffer from a flappy bass, bass is superb.

When the wire is fully ''burnt in'' I plan to do a comparison with my short 8.25'' arm. Will be interesting, but the sound produced by both is a class above what I was getting was using Lof B, or any of the standard alignment curves..

Cheers
 
Hi Sleiven, Welcome to the blog, I take it that you have not heard an U/H arm.
Suggest you head over to your local Yamaha store (no affiliation), take some of your favorite LP's & listen. Then when you have managed to get your jaw off of floor, there is plenty of info around about buying/building one.

if this is a, in your words ''silly design concept'' then I take it you think people exploring this concept are simple or idiots. if that is the case, why have some many got rave reviews from the audio press.

Do you think that one of the most revered reviewers Michael Fremer from Stereophile mag (again no affiliation) is an idiot as well, after he wrote the following about the Viv labs arm (again, again no affiliation). Analog Corner No228.

''Assuming the tonearm's sound is a result of its geometry and not its "floating" technology, are the other four arms producing additive sonic effects due to skating issues? My take is that the Rigid Float—either because of its underhung geometry, or its non-grounded bearing system, or both—has a singularly smooth, lush sound that some listeners will instantly crave. Those folks should drop a ViV Lab Rigid Float into their system ASAP and find out for themselves.''
Cheers
 
Hi, Now carrying on with normal business. One of the guys over at Lenco Heaven, Malcolm, has calculated the tracking errors for my 15.5 inch arm, set to a 90mm Null point & they were 4.33 deg's inner 60mm and 7.19 deg's outer 140mm. I believe V/labs uses 93mm.

However Baerwald quoted from Tchebychev's calculations on 15'' straight arms. He stated ''For these conditions the actual tracking error become about 4.5 deg's at the inner and 10.3deg's (we do not know what the outer distance is as they did not have LP's back then) at the outer groove for transcription turntables.''

So the actual result is less than was originally therorised and each figure can be changed by a few degrees depending on what Null point measurement you use.

Cheers
 
tabarddn51 said:
Hi Sleiven, Welcome to the blog, I take it that you have not heard an U/H arm.
Suggest you head over to your local Yamaha store (no affiliation), take some of your favorite LP's & listen. Then when you have managed to get your jaw off of floor, there is plenty of info around about buying/building one.

if this is a, in your words ''silly design concept'' then I take it you think people exploring this concept are simple or idiots. if that is the case, why have some many got rave reviews from the audio press.

Do you think that one of the most revered reviewers Michael Fremer from Stereophile mag (again no affiliation) is an idiot as well, after he wrote the following about the Viv labs arm (again, again no affiliation). Analog Corner No228.

''Assuming the tonearm's sound is a result of its geometry and not its "floating" technology, are the other four arms producing additive sonic effects due to skating issues? My take is that the Rigid Float—either because of its underhung geometry, or its non-grounded bearing system, or both—has a singularly smooth, lush sound that some listeners will instantly crave. Those folks should drop a ViV Lab Rigid Float into their system ASAP and find out for themselves.''
Cheers
Click to expand...
RE: Fremer?
Wasn't he the one who could tell if a recording was digital after a thousandth of a second and was left with his pants down after the so-called MoFi scandal??? It turned out that the recordings he praised as the epic of analog were actually digital!
 
tabarddn51 said:
Suggest you head over to your local Yamaha store (no affiliation), take some of your favorite LP's & listen.
Click to expand...
Yep, makes sense - every Yamaha store, local or intergalactic, has the exact same gear (the lenght or the position of the tonearm, aside) and acoustics as one finds at home.

tabarddn51 said:
...if this is a, in your words ''silly design concept'' then I take it you think people exploring this concept are simple or idiots.
Click to expand...
On the contrary! Throwing bold claims, like:
tabarddn51 said:
Then when you have managed to get your jaw off of floor...
Click to expand...
around and the try-it-yourself mantra on the other hand...!


Why is it impossible to provide recordings of different settings, so folks can experience what you do?! I simply don't get it - I guess I'm the idiot.


RE: Fremer? part II
Wasn't he the one who could tell a difference between cables as well? And then this:

1759994471169.png

- https://www.stereophile.com/content/analog-corner-315-electrical-cure
-

This renders any reviews (in his house), prior to the upgrade, worthless. He better should have remained silent about it.
 
Fremer Part III
He also tried to back out of the MoFi scandal with embarrassing excuses and got entangled in his own failed attempts to justify himself, but there was evidence, in black and white in Stereophile, of what he had claimed about his alleged ability of hearing and it was hardly in his favor, rather the opposite.
This renders any reviews (in or outside his house),in the past or in the future, worthless!:p (IMHO)
Cheers
 
Last edited:
borchee said:
Yep, makes sense - every Yamaha store, local or intergalactic, has the exact same gear (the lenght or the position of the tonearm, aside) and acoustics as one finds at home.
Click to expand...
I believe useful comparisons can be made in a dealer's showroom. Before buying a Linn turntable, I took my own Thorens to the shop so I could hear both in the same room and with the same gear. I originally bought the TD146 because my Thorens dealer couldn't demonstrate that a more expensive model sounded better; six months later, a comparative audition at another store had me saving up for an LP12.

I don't know that an in-home audition is terribly important for turntables; probably more so for speakers. Besides, in the decades I owned an LP12, my home changed four times, and I had three changes in both amplification and speakers. But whether at a hi-fi shop or using any of my various listening rooms and associated equipment, the Linn would still sound better than the Thorens I owned.
 
OP claims a jaw-droping difference/improvement with underhang. He manufactures tonarms. He has exactly the tools (a standalone tonearm wit the possibility to rotate the cartridge to set the offset angle) to make a side by side comparison of different "-hangs". It can't get any better than this...yet...he doesn't have a ripping device...he doesn't want to record anything...the digital files loose bits and bytes when copied and/or transfered, ya know!...a plethora of downright "silly" excuses

1760445752120.png

Nothing but lukewarm air!
 
zwuttoo said:
RE: Fremer?
Wasn't he the one who could tell if a recording was digital after a thousandth of a second and was left with his pants down after the so-called MoFi scandal??? It turned out that the recordings he praised as the epic of analog were actually digital!
Click to expand...
The MoFi problem was simple. Sony Music won't let their original master tapes out of their facilities. MoFi had two choices. Master from a safety copy tape MoFi provided, or do their DSD transfer. The former added a generation of tape (and would be labeled Mobile Fidelity Sound Lab). The latter DSD transfer was labeled "Original Master Recording". I would have disclosed the use of DSD honestly. But you can master great records from a well made 1-1 safety copy tape one generation down from the original masters.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom