What is the story on the Zirconia cantilever... JICO SAS/Z N97xE
- Thread starter AudioJag
- Start date
Register to hide this ad
tnsilver
Stereo Puppy
Namiki provides a very interesting comparison of their common cantilevers with some relevant parameters. Unfortunately - "fragility" - isn't one of those published parameters.
They make one specifically relevant comment on Boron cantilevers and mention that due to it's fragility, the tip isn't inserted through a mounting hole drilled through the cant and then fixed with adhesive, it's rather glued to the tip. Boron is the only exception. Namiki is able to put a hole for the tip through the rest of the cantilevers, including for Zirocnia and Sapphire. A pipe cantilever, like with Aluminum and Zirconia could be a tougher formation than straight rods, but it depends on the measurements. Notice the Zirconia cantilver, at least with Namiki, is 1mm shorter than Boron or Sapphire while having roughly the same outer diameter. That creates less of a lever and makes it less fragile by it's own right.
In light of this all, I'd bet on Boron being more fragile than Sapphire and Sapphire being more fragile than Zirconia. In fact, I am getting the impression Zirconia would be the least fragile Namiki piped cantilever after aluminum.
Boron Rod:
OD: φ0.28 ±0.02
L: 6.0 ±0.2
Sapphire Rod:
OD: φ0.3 ±0.02
L: 6.0 ±0.2
Zirconia Pipe:
OD: φ0.3 ±0.02
ID: φ0.2 ±0.02
L: 5.0 ±0.2
They make one specifically relevant comment on Boron cantilevers and mention that due to it's fragility, the tip isn't inserted through a mounting hole drilled through the cant and then fixed with adhesive, it's rather glued to the tip. Boron is the only exception. Namiki is able to put a hole for the tip through the rest of the cantilevers, including for Zirocnia and Sapphire. A pipe cantilever, like with Aluminum and Zirconia could be a tougher formation than straight rods, but it depends on the measurements. Notice the Zirconia cantilver, at least with Namiki, is 1mm shorter than Boron or Sapphire while having roughly the same outer diameter. That creates less of a lever and makes it less fragile by it's own right.
In light of this all, I'd bet on Boron being more fragile than Sapphire and Sapphire being more fragile than Zirconia. In fact, I am getting the impression Zirconia would be the least fragile Namiki piped cantilever after aluminum.
Boron Rod:
OD: φ0.28 ±0.02
L: 6.0 ±0.2
Sapphire Rod:
OD: φ0.3 ±0.02
L: 6.0 ±0.2
Zirconia Pipe:
OD: φ0.3 ±0.02
ID: φ0.2 ±0.02
L: 5.0 ±0.2
cafe latte
Addicted Member
Zirconia is VERY fragile which is why they make it shorter. Next is Sapphire, then last is Born. Zirconia is also very heavy which is why they make the Zirconia a tube further increasing fragility. I looked at stiffness and density of all three and despite the boron being solid it wins weight and stiffness so not really sure why people go Sapphire as I cant see any advantage, running the numbers Boron comes out on top, the Sapphire then Zirconia. It would be a real challenge too retipping Zirconia IMO.Namiki provides a very interesting comparison of their common cantilevers with some relevant parameters. Unfortunately - "fragility" - isn't one of those published parameters.
They make one specifically relevant comment on Boron cantilevers and mention that due to it's fragility, the tip isn't inserted through a mounting hole drilled through the cant and then fixed with adhesive, it's rather glued to the tip. Boron is the only exception. Namiki is able to put a hole for the tip through the rest of the cantilevers, including for Zirocnia and Sapphire. A pipe cantilever, like with Aluminum and Zirconia could be a tougher formation than straight rods, but it depends on the measurements. Notice the Zirconia cantilver, at least with Namiki, is 1mm shorter than Boron or Sapphire while having roughly the same outer diameter. That creates less of a lever and makes it less fragile by it's own right.
In light of this all, I'd bet on Boron being more fragile than Sapphire and Sapphire being more fragile than Zirconia. In fact, I am getting the impression Zirconia would be the least fragile Namiki piped cantilever after aluminum.
Boron Rod:
OD: φ0.28 ±0.02
L: 6.0 ±0.2
Sapphire Rod:
OD: φ0.3 ±0.02
L: 6.0 ±0.2
Zirconia Pipe:
OD: φ0.3 ±0.02
ID: φ0.2 ±0.02
L: 5.0 ±0.2
Chris
tnsilver
Stereo Puppy
Oh heck... I just missed it. Namiki actually provides the E Young's Modulus parameter for "stiffness". Way to go Namiki!
Notice E Young's Modulus doesn't measure toughness or fragility - it's the stress to strain relationship, or the amount of force that can be applied to a material before deformation. It measures elastic deformation or in other words, "flexibility". The lower the number - the more elastic the material is so we can project and assume - the less it tends to fracture as a result of applied force.
I guess this is what we really want to know. How likely is our cantilever to snap, break, fracture and become Kaput due to mishandling. Right? Well, it's a tough one b/c the E Young's Modulus doesn't give us a linear relationship to shear or fracture - but it's often close enough for what we're looking for in this case, so let's talk "elastic" instead.
As you can see - Aluminum is most elastic, followed by Zirconia, Rubby, Sapphire, Boron and finally Diamond. Oddly enough the Mohs hardness scale yields the same ranking - but I'm not sure it's the right tool to use in this case.
BTW: The E Young's Modulus numbers are in Gigapascals (GPa). One Pa represent a force of one Newton per square meter but it's convertible to PSI if it makes more sense.
Notice E Young's Modulus doesn't measure toughness or fragility - it's the stress to strain relationship, or the amount of force that can be applied to a material before deformation. It measures elastic deformation or in other words, "flexibility". The lower the number - the more elastic the material is so we can project and assume - the less it tends to fracture as a result of applied force.
I guess this is what we really want to know. How likely is our cantilever to snap, break, fracture and become Kaput due to mishandling. Right? Well, it's a tough one b/c the E Young's Modulus doesn't give us a linear relationship to shear or fracture - but it's often close enough for what we're looking for in this case, so let's talk "elastic" instead.
As you can see - Aluminum is most elastic, followed by Zirconia, Rubby, Sapphire, Boron and finally Diamond. Oddly enough the Mohs hardness scale yields the same ranking - but I'm not sure it's the right tool to use in this case.
BTW: The E Young's Modulus numbers are in Gigapascals (GPa). One Pa represent a force of one Newton per square meter but it's convertible to PSI if it makes more sense.
Last edited:
cafe latte
Addicted Member
Look at the densities..Oh heck... I just missed it. Namiki actually provides the E Young's Modulus parameter for "stiffness". Way to go Namiki!
Notice E Young's Modulus doesn't measure toughness or fragility - it's the stress to strain relationship, or the amount of force that can be applied to a material before deformation. It measures elastic deformation or in other words, "flexibility". The lower the number - the more elastic the material is so we can project and assume - the less it tends to fracture as a result of applied force.
As you can see - Aluminum is most elastic, followed by Zirconia, Rubby, Sapphire, Boron and finally Diamond.
BTW: The numbers are in EDIT: Gigapascals (GPa). One Pa represent a force of one Newton per square meter.
Calculate the length and the weight even take into consideration the hollow Zirconia is not good. Flexibility is not fragility as you said. Boron wins unless we talk diamond and if we look at other factors Zirconia is not good.
Chris
tnsilver
Stereo Puppy
This isn't a question of "good" vs. "bad". This is a specific question about fragility which is an abstract concept. Does "fragile" mean the cantilever is shattered to pieces when dropped on the floor? Does it refer to a shearing force like how hard is cutting a cantilever with a pair of scissors might get? Does it mean the cantilever snaps easily when slightly bent, when the TA slams on the record surface or when the tip accidentally snags on a cloth? Which is it???
The closest parameter to answer some of these questions is provided by the E Young's Modulus, which is indeed about elasticity - but provides some insights on the tendency of a material to strain under stress.
Namiki did not provide the E Young's Modulus parameter so we can guesstimate the durability/fragility of their cantilever (although deriving it is half way a by-product). They did that because elasticity and density are key properties for the speed in which sound waves travel through a solid. They seem to have a pretty heavy fixation on the subject and what's more interesting, is their non-linear approach to it. They do state that sound transmission speed is overwhelmingly faster with diamond than with other materials, but at the same time they say Zirconia has a charming sound that's different from any other material. Zirconia has the lowest sound transmission speed in their entire arsenal - yet it's there.
It's interesting they can't seem to get over the Boron cantilever fragility and make a comment about not piercing it for the tip mounting. They sure manage to pierce the diamond cantilever - so what does this tell us about "fragility" of Boron vs. Diamond? Does this mean the tendency of a material to crumble when pierced is another aspect of "fragile"? Maybe, but that's above my pay grade.
Namiki doesn't seem to be concerned with the mass of their cantilevers too much - as long as the inertial penalty for it is compensated by other characteristics. They seem to value precision and their ability to process materials up to snuff with their specs more than other aspects. They do, however, make a comment about the relatively high Zirconia mass and about reducing it by using a pipe - so they're surely aware of it. FWIW in mechanical engineering strength to weight ratio is better for a hollow pipe than a solid rod, so there's another reasoning for their choice.
Speak of the devil, I've actually bothered to order the Namiki cantilevers in descending order and I'm wondering if you've bothered to do it your self before suggesting it to others.
Namiki Cantilevers Mass Ranking:
Zirconia is ranking #4 on the mass scale, between the thicker and thinner Aluminum pipe cantilever. Although Namiki doesn't make one, a theoretical Zirconia 6mm pipe cantilever would have the mass of 0.00142538g and still rank #2 after a Ruby rod cantilever.
As per your other assertions about Zirconia - there's no support for them that I can find and I'm inclined to treat them as fallacies. You never bother with fact checking and never backup your assertions. When you're pressed to do so you resort to the lazy layman's default source of online information - Wikipedia, and often contradict your own arguments by not reading what your own referals actually say. That, or you divert the discussion to some trivial aspect of the hobby and derail the discussion, like this "good" vs. "bad" thing. So before you explain to me how a magnetic phono cartridge transforms vibrations to music that I can hear or how Sorbothan damps my noisy music room - I'm telling you right now - I ain't interested. It derails discussions and offends intelligence.
The closest parameter to answer some of these questions is provided by the E Young's Modulus, which is indeed about elasticity - but provides some insights on the tendency of a material to strain under stress.
Namiki did not provide the E Young's Modulus parameter so we can guesstimate the durability/fragility of their cantilever (although deriving it is half way a by-product). They did that because elasticity and density are key properties for the speed in which sound waves travel through a solid. They seem to have a pretty heavy fixation on the subject and what's more interesting, is their non-linear approach to it. They do state that sound transmission speed is overwhelmingly faster with diamond than with other materials, but at the same time they say Zirconia has a charming sound that's different from any other material. Zirconia has the lowest sound transmission speed in their entire arsenal - yet it's there.
It's interesting they can't seem to get over the Boron cantilever fragility and make a comment about not piercing it for the tip mounting. They sure manage to pierce the diamond cantilever - so what does this tell us about "fragility" of Boron vs. Diamond? Does this mean the tendency of a material to crumble when pierced is another aspect of "fragile"? Maybe, but that's above my pay grade.
Namiki doesn't seem to be concerned with the mass of their cantilevers too much - as long as the inertial penalty for it is compensated by other characteristics. They seem to value precision and their ability to process materials up to snuff with their specs more than other aspects. They do, however, make a comment about the relatively high Zirconia mass and about reducing it by using a pipe - so they're surely aware of it. FWIW in mechanical engineering strength to weight ratio is better for a hollow pipe than a solid rod, so there's another reasoning for their choice.
Speak of the devil, I've actually bothered to order the Namiki cantilevers in descending order and I'm wondering if you've bothered to do it your self before suggesting it to others.
Namiki Cantilevers Mass Ranking:
- Ruby rod: φ0.3mm, length 5.5mm, volume: 0.0003888 cm³, density 4.0g/cm³ => mass: 0.0015552g
- Sapphire rod: φ0.3mm, length 6mm, volume: 0.0003534 cm³, density 3.97g/cm³ => mass: 0.001402998g
- Aluminum thick pipe: φ0.6mm/φ0.5mm, length: 6mm, volume: 0.0005184 cm³, density 2.41g/cm³ => mass: 0.001249344g
- Zirconia pipe: φ0.3mm/φ0.2mm, length 5mm, volume: 0.00019635 cm³, density 6.05g/cm³ => mass: 0.0011879175g
- Aluminum thin pipe: φ0.5mm/φ0.4mm, length: 6mm, volume: 0.0004241 cm³, density 2.41g/cm³ => mass: 0.001022081g
- Boron rod: φ0.28mm, length 6mm, volume: 0.00036945cm³, density 2.41g/cm³ => mass: 0.0008903745g
- Diamond rod: φ0.22mm, length 5mm, volume: 0.00019007cm³, density 3.5g/cm³ => mass: 0.000665245g
Zirconia is ranking #4 on the mass scale, between the thicker and thinner Aluminum pipe cantilever. Although Namiki doesn't make one, a theoretical Zirconia 6mm pipe cantilever would have the mass of 0.00142538g and still rank #2 after a Ruby rod cantilever.
As per your other assertions about Zirconia - there's no support for them that I can find and I'm inclined to treat them as fallacies. You never bother with fact checking and never backup your assertions. When you're pressed to do so you resort to the lazy layman's default source of online information - Wikipedia, and often contradict your own arguments by not reading what your own referals actually say. That, or you divert the discussion to some trivial aspect of the hobby and derail the discussion, like this "good" vs. "bad" thing. So before you explain to me how a magnetic phono cartridge transforms vibrations to music that I can hear or how Sorbothan damps my noisy music room - I'm telling you right now - I ain't interested. It derails discussions and offends intelligence.
AudioJag
Active Member
Tom and Chris.... I thank both of you for such incredible attention to detail.... I don't know if my question is really answered though...
I have been using the following and love all three: Shure V15 w/jico SAS/Boron ; Denon DL160 w/saffire line contact ; SoundSmith Boheme w/ruby line contact.
I tend to like the Shure and SAS/boron the most.... Though all three are terrific sounding on my system.
So maybe what I'm gathering is that the Zirconia may be a little more fragile than the above due to the "pipe" quality..... and may not be worth spending the additional funds for Zirconia over Boron.....
I have been using the following and love all three: Shure V15 w/jico SAS/Boron ; Denon DL160 w/saffire line contact ; SoundSmith Boheme w/ruby line contact.
I tend to like the Shure and SAS/boron the most.... Though all three are terrific sounding on my system.
So maybe what I'm gathering is that the Zirconia may be a little more fragile than the above due to the "pipe" quality..... and may not be worth spending the additional funds for Zirconia over Boron.....
AudioJag
Active Member
Thanks Tom..... I'll fahgettabout the Zirconia.....
cafe latte
Addicted Member
Your mass ranking goes fro heavy to light and demonstrates clearly what does not make sense re peoples infatuation with ruby and Sapphire. Both break easily, a heavy landing or any such error and they break. Retipping them is a nightmare. Zirconia is lighter simply as shorter and they also make shorter as it breaks so easily. Simple aluminium re moving mass (very important) with thin wall beat all of these and is cheap. Boron is stiffer, not easily broken, it can crack when drilled but otherwise is perfect for cantilevers. Diamond wins but not by much, and it is very easy to damage too so really the Boron is the better cantilever, yes slightly more moving mass, but only slightly and far tougher so less likely to break in a accident.
Chris
