Well, as far as the "twiddle" factor, once my ET 2 is set up correctly, it tends to stay set up correctly. My VPI TNT MKIII sits on a VPI TNT stand which is filled with lead shot. The stand of course has spikes that pierce the carpet to the concrete floor below. Because my floor and turntable stand are so stable, my table stays level and so does the arm. Changing LPs is no more a ritual than changing an LP on any other table. My pumps and surge tank are in an adjacent room where they can't be seen or heard.
What I will admit is that setting up an ET-2 is far more of a challenge than conventional pivoted arms and will drive the mechanically challenged to distraction. I just think the rewards are worth the initial work involved. My most recent pivoted arms I used before I went back to the ET-2 are the JMW 9 and JMW 10. I don't miss either one of them.
I like the idea of an air bearing vice mechanical bearings. I love not having anti-skate to deal with as an issue as well as tracing the LP exactly the way it was cut and not just having perfect geometry at two points on the record. That just makes sense to me, and when you hear it, it really makes sense.
I was never attracted to the Souther arm or similiar linear tracking arms because of the mechanical sled nature of the design.
In this wacky hobby, we tend to throw things on the scrap heap and call them obsolete only to rediscover them at a later date and declare them to be state of art many years later. Witness the resurgence in old Garrard and Lenco tables as well as Technics SP-10 tables. I thought I had moved on from my first ET-2 only to decide it was the best arm I had ever had and I needed to obtain another one. I am glad I did. |
Well Raul, I didn't mean to get your dander up. I certainly didn't mean to imply that the ET-2 is the world's finest tonearm. My point to the original post was that I think linear tracking arms have advantages over pivoted arms and that the ET-2 sounds better than any pivoted arm I have owned over the years. And yes, the Denon 103R used to be my cartridge. The 103R replaced a Van den Hul MC2 Special that I owned and paid far more money for than the 103R. I felt that the Denon 103R smoked the Van den Hull in every respect and I got rid of it. I now have a Benz Glider low output cartridge which I am sure is still beneath your lofty standards. However, even though the Benz Glider is overall a better cartridge than the Denon 103R, it does not diminish the fact that the 103R is a great sounding cartridge and another crazy good bargain in this wacky hobby if you have a head amp up to the task. I have made the point before that once your system achieves a certain level of "goodness" that incremental upgrades become a variation upon a theme. I just bought a Mcintosh C2300 preamp. Is it better than my Counterpoint SA-5.1 which has been upgraded by Michael Elliott? Yes, it is better, but I still consider the 5.1 to be an outstanding preamp.
There are far more people that own pivoted tonearms then own linear tracking arms and I would have suspected that those who own pivoted arms would think they are superior to their linear tracking brothers and that is ok.
I am not one who thinks that because something costs more that it must be better than all components of its ilk that cost less. I have been burned too many times over the years and know that you must listen with your ears and not your wallet.
I don't know how much you have to spend on a pivoted tone arm in order to surpass the sound quality of a linear tracking arm like the ET-2 which is a crazy good bargain in this insane hobby. For the here and now, I am hooked. I always reserve the right to become smarter. I bought an ET-2 brand new when it first came out and sold it after years of enjoyment. I went through 3 pivoted arms before I went on the hunt to find another ET-2 in order to get back to the sound quality I used to have. |
Geez Ralph, I didn't know my ET-2 couldn't work. Of course I don't believe it because the ears don't lie. One of these days I will buy a top notch pivoted arm and see if my opinon changes as to whether or not I still think linear tracking arms sound better. The first ET-2 arm I had which I bought brand new many years ago I used with a Van den Hull MC 10 cartridge. I used that cartridge for over 5 years and it still sounded great. One of the things I like about linear tracking arms is that I don't feel the sound quality changes as the arm travels across the record like it does with pivoted arms. The closer you get to the inner grooves with a pivoted arm, the less it sounds like the first couple of songs. I know some of this is attributable to how the grooves are cut on the inner part of the record, but you don't hear the same degree of change with a linear arm. And I attribute that to not having any distortion associated with the tracing error that you have with pivoted arms.
And Phil, you talk about linear arms not sounding "grounded" in comparison to pivoted arms. Can you elaborate on what you mean by that? Until I can hear something better in my system, I just can't fault what I am hearing from my arm. The soundstage is wide, deep, and tall. The bottom end is something that has to be heard and if the recording has it, there is tons of air that you hear as both detail from cymbals as well as the air that is being cut by the other instruments. It sounds very much like 15 ips 2 track tapes that I play on my Otari MX-55 through a pair of Ampex 350 preamps. If a pivoted arm can trounce what I am hearing now, that would be very cool.
My experience with pivoted arms is way less than someone like Raul who has 3 turntables and 50 tonearms and 500 cartridges to play with. But then, I don't need 50 tonearms and 500 cartridges. I just need one table, one arm, and one good cartridge. I would drive myself to distraction otherwise and never find time to actually enjoy listening to music. Aside from all of the tables I have owned over the years that came with their own arms like Thorens and a Technics 1600 and too many other tables to list, the only pivoted arms that I have owned have been the Sumiko MMT, Rega RB-300, JMW 9, and JMW 10. Of those arms, the Sumiko MMT was my least favorite arm. I know that none of these arms are state of the art contenders, but the JMW 10 has garnished its share of good reviews. If I was going to be tempted to try another pivoted arm, it would probably be an SME V as I think its engineering and workmanship is superb.
Lastly, Phil-thanks for sharing your story with us. I really enjoyed it. |
Well, ET-2 arms are fairly cheap when they come up for sale. So, for around $500-$700 you can try one out. Make sure you use a surge tank with it and an air filter on the output of the tank that feeds the arm tube. You can build your own surge tank for dirt cheap by going to home depot or Lowes and buying a chunk of PVC pipe and two end caps and two air fittings. If you decide it's not for you, you can always put it back for sale on Audiogon and get your money back. The manual is available for down load on ET's website and Bruce Thigpen will answer all phone calls and help out with any set-up problems. You can't ask for better service than that. |
Syntax, I have no idea what you mean when you say linear tracking arms can't reproduce a "Physical Force." You need to explain what that means.
MikeL's comments are always very interesting because Mike owns so much great gear and therefore has lots of experience with listening to top notch gear. For people to outright dismiss linear tracking arms based on some theoretical shortcoming without listening to what they can do is just nonsense.
And Lewm, I understand your position. I have been fortunate to have my own listening rooms that have adjacent space available where I could park my pumps and surge tank out of sight and sound from my listening room. If I had to have the pumps and tank in my listening room, I would probably be using a pivoted arm instead. |
Well Raul, I own a system that "can play clean in that bass frequency range." My speakers are the Definitive Technology 7000SC which are rated down to 11 Hz. They have a 14" sub in each speaker (with two 14" passive radiators in each speaker)with a built in 1800 watt amp. They certainly plumb the bottom octave cleanly. Mid bass should never be mistaken for the bottom octave (20-40 Hz). Mid bass will not shake your room. I was told that when I switched from the JMW 10 to the ET-2 that I would be giving up bass response. I found the opposite to be true.
I hope that MikeL chimes in here and states whether or not he thinks his linear arm is incapable of reaching into the bottom octave. It's kind of odd to have people tell us that we can't have what we know we hear! |
Dertonarm-Thank you for your very well-reasoned response. You obviously have an abundance of experience with linear tracking arms and therefore it's interesting to hear your viewpoint.
I have heard pros and cons for 12" arms with the cons mainly added resonance as a trade off for the lower distortion. What 10" arms do you recommend?
Mark |
Well Darkmo, I have a purpose-built dedicated audio room. My room is roughly 16' W x 23' D with 9' ceilings. It does have an L shape towards the back of the room where the width opens up another 5' or so. The front half of my room has extensive room treatments with acoustic panels that each are 2' x 4' by 4" thick. My room does bass. As far as room treatments, my next treatment will be for the front half of the ceiling.
I think the argument that some people make that linear tracking arms can't reproduce the bottom end are patently wrong. We can debate that possibly pivoted arms have better bass (maybe deeper with more punch and slam), but not that linear tracking arms are incapable of reproducing bass. I have pointed out low bass before on LPs to others who couldn't hear it until they inserted a sub into their system because the fundamentals I was describing were lower than their main speakers could go without a subwoofer much to their surprise.
After reading all of the comments posted, I am tempted to try another pivoted arm higher up on the food chain than I previously owned. I will not sell my ET-2 though unless/until I find something that clearly smokes it. I have been down that road one too many times in the past where you buy something that is supposed to be superior to what you own only to find that you made a mistake and you have to go out and buy what you used to own again to get back to the quality of sound that you once had. |
Raul-you are right. The Audio Technica is one humble looking tone arm. Outright fugly in fact. |
Raul-Does the AT tonearm have provisions for anti-skating? I couldn't see it on the picture.
Does anyone else have any experience with the AT tonearm? |
Anyone know someone who has a Fidelity Research FR 64s for sale? |
Well, after starting this thread and reading everything everyone has written, I have decided to give pivoted arms another shot. After numerous emails with Dertonarm, I have decided to buy a Fidelity Research FR64s tonearm. I know Raul thinks the AT is superior, but based on its low resale value, I decided against it. If for some reason I decide I don't like the FR, I am confident I can get my money back. I am looking forward to all of the parts coming in (I bought the arm, a new TNT armboard from VPI, and a NOS Orsonics headshell). It is my hope that this combo will sound better than my ET-2 in all parameters. If it does, I will gladly sell the ET-2 and be done with linear tracking arms once and for all. Since the arm is coming from Australia, the headshell from Hong Kong, and the armboard from VPI, it will be awhile before everything arrives. It should be interesting and I hope worthwhile. There must be a reason why the FR64s has a cult following and the value continues to climb. |
I am the original poster and I don't think I have "given in" too soon. Rather, I am open to buying and listening to a pivoted tonearm that is considered to be very good if not maybe even great (and of course that is always debatable as well). I have read everyone's arguments for why they think pivoted arms are superior and I am willing to listen again. My last pivoted arm was a JMW 10 arm which is a unipivot design and I was just not a big fan. So now I will go with a Fidelity Research FR64s with a NOS Orsonic headshell and my basically brand new Benz Glider SL. I have numerous tapes I have made of LPs played through my TNT/ET-2 setup recorded at 15 ips 2 track. I will make some new tapes with the new setup and I will have a good basis for comparision besides just memory.
I would like to think that I am open minded and not rigid in my thinking or dogma. If I am rewarded by better sound as a result of this journey, that would be awesome. I am placing my faith in Dertonarm's extensive experience with top-flight linear tracking arms and pivoted arms. I am following his recommendations and we shall see where this leads. I am looking forward to it and certainly don't consider it to be "giving in." As I like to tell people, I always reserve the right to become smarter.
And by the way, even though I used a Van den Hull MC-10 for years on my ET-2 in the past without any problems, I did have a recent issue with a Denon 103R. The cantilver is no longer straight and is now off-center. Whether this was caused by a defect in the 103R or was caused by the ET-2 is open for conjecture. This cartridge has less than 300 hours on it. |
This has been a most interesting thread. I started this thread off by saying that I thought linear tracking arms sounded better than pivoted arms that I had been used to. I still think my humble ET-2 sounds outstanding. However, in the interest of further education, I am going to switch back to a pivoted arm and see how it fares. I am conviced after reading all the posts that it is worth another try. The only dog I have in this fight is that I want the best sounding arm that I can afford. If the Fidelity Research FR64s sounds better than my ET-2, I will be one happy camper. I hope it does and from everything I have read, it should.
For the here and now, I have torn my table down (VPI TNT) in anticipation of the FR64s arriving. I have removed my Benz Glider and have it safely installed back in its box. The ET-2 arm and mounting board have been removed. I took my TNT bearing to my local machinist for a check up. He didn't like the fact that the tolerance between the platter shaft and the bearing bushing was .004". He pressed out the original bushing and machined a new bushing and line bored it so it now has a tolerance of .001". My bearing should now be better than new. I am waiting for the new blank armboard to arrive from VPI as well as the FR64s arm and Orsonics headshell. This should be interesting.
FWIW, I have referred to my TNT as a MKIII but I know now that is not true after studying some pictures of the TNT evolution. I believe it is an original TNT that had new corner feet installed like the TNT III. I had previously removed the two extra pulleys from the T-bar and snapped in covers from VPI to cover the two holes that were drilled in the plinth. I have replaced the motor with the 300 RPM version and I have a new SDS that I bought to replace the PLC. |
Frogman, I agree that the ET-2 sounds outstanding which is sort of what prompted me to start this thread (and I do think I had mine set up correctly which is no easy task). However, as I said previously, Dertonarm has inspired me to give pivoted arms another chance. I have bought the arm and headshell he recommended and I am looking forward to working with Dertonarm to maximize the potential by careful setup. I have a "record" of what my ET-2 sounded like as I have recorded numerous 15 ips 2 track tapes that sound outstanding (or so I think). I will be able to compare the sound between the two set ups and I look forward to it. I will be quite happy if the FR64s is the winner and won't look back if it is. In the meantime, my ET-2 isn't going anywhere.
And Dertonarm-the post office tried to deliver the FR64s yesterday, but I was at work. I signed the release paper so I should have it tomorrow. The headshell has been sent from Hong Kong. It will be ironic if the piece that takes the longest to get here is the blank arm board from VPI which is in NJ. I was hoping to be up and running by this weekend, but I doubt that will happen due to VPI. |
If I have read all of the responses correctly, the "argument" is that the physics associated with a high mass air bearing tone arm causes more stress on the cartridge stylus/suspension than does a properly set up pivoted arm. This problem is excaberated by warped records. The counter-argument is that people who have long term experience with a cartridge used in an air bearing arm that has shown no visible symptoms of damage may not believe that the theoretical problem exists. As I said once before, I used a Van den Hul MC 10 for around 5 years in my ET-2 and I saw no problems with it. Recently, I bought a new Denon 103R and it did develop a problem in my ET-2. The cantilever is now canted off-center. What I don't know is if the cartridge suspension was defective and this would have happened regardless or if the ET-2 caused this. I know that Bruce Thigpen advises using a high-compliance cartridge in the ET-2 which I thought ran counter to an earlier argument. The 103R is a low compliance cartridge. The other argument in favor of pivoted arms versus linear tracking arms is that pivoted arms have deeper/punchier bass.
I just received my new Stereophile rag last night which contains a review of the latest Walker table and arm written by JV with an interview of the Walker principles. JV used my same arguments that I started this thread with to explain why linear tracking arms are better than pivoted arms. It was also interesting that JV poised the question to Loyd Walker about pivoted arms having better bass than linear tracking arms and Loyd's answer was something to the effect that pivoted arms appear to have better bass because their bearings are chattering!
I think Dertonarm's argument is that you can't defy the laws of physics and because you don't see any apparent damage to your cartridge doesn't mean that it is not being stressed and therefore shouldn't be a concern. The flip side to this argument is that well, if I can't see it, it obviously doesn't exist.
Personally, I love the sound of the ET-2 and I wasn't convinced it could get much better in the arm world. For me, the ET-2 set up properly exhibits a master tape type sound which frankly I love. However, unless you have been exposed to something better than what you have, it is easy to delude yourself and think nothing can be better.
As I said before, Dertonarm has convinced me that there may be more in the grooves than I am hearing with the linear tracking arm and I am intrigued enough to give pivoted arms another shot. If it truly sounds better than my ET-2, I will be a happy man regardless of the additional benefits of less stress on my cartridge stylus/suspension. I hope to be up and running with my FR64s this weekend if my armboard is finished in time. Everything else is ready and waiting.
If someone here is an ME and can show through physics that Dertonarm is incorrect in stating that there is more force applied on a cartridge when installed on an air bearing linear tracking arms due to its high horizontal mass dragging the cartridge across the record, please speak up. Otherwise, those who don't believe it are basing their argument on how long they have owned their cartridge and the fact that they don't see/hear anything wrong with it after long-term use rather than denying that the laws of physics apply as Dentonarm has explained.
And finally, I can tell you that if the FR64s doesn't sound better than my ET-2, I won't hesitate to reinstall it to gain back the quality I had before I tore it down in anticpation of the FR64s. I will take my chances and hope it doesn't screw up my new Benz Glider SL if I lose the magic I had when I used the ET-2. Honestly, I am rooting for the new set up because we always want to improve our systems after we spend large sums of money-not take a step backwards. |
Darkmo-I did say that I had a new 103R that had a stylus off-center after using it for a short time in the ET-2. What I don't know is what caused it. |
As far as evidence against theory, evidence achieved through carefully controlled experiments is always preferred. In reality, I don't know of an easy way to do this. Would you run two "identical" cartridges for a predetermined number of hours with one being installed in a linear tracking arm and the other in a pivoted arm and after said hours are up, would you then examine/meaure each cartridge for changes to the suspension and cantilever alignment? I can see lots of variables creeping in here that could affect the outcome. The reality is I don't know how practical this experiment would be.
As far as cartridge manufacturers giving us any meaningful info on this debate, I am old enough to be cynical enough to think that we couldn't depend on it. Aside from the issues that manufacturers may have no idea what type of tonearm was tracking their cartridge before it was sent back for a rebuild, politics and money are pervasive in everything. Even if it was true, I don't know that cartridge manufacturers would tell you that using a linear tracking arm will shorten the life of your cartridge. Not only do they have to worry about lost sales to potential linear tracking arm customers, they would also most likely incur the wrath of linear tracking tonearm manufacturers. |
I have finally assembled all of the pieces for my conversion from the ET-2 to the Fidelity Research FR64s. The FR64s I bought was in beautiful condition with the original box and all parts and templates. I had a new armboard made for my TNT and had the hole cut for the FR64s at 231.5mm as recommended by Dertonarm instead of the 230mm recommended by the factory. I bought the AQ LeoPard tonearm cable that Dertonarm recommended as well. I originally thought it would not fit in the FR64s but I was just being too timid as it was a tight fit, but fit it did. I did listen for several days with the stock cable and I thought it was pretty good until I installed the LeoPard. The LeoPard simply passes more information through it. I am still tweaking the arm so I am not ready to talk about its sonic virtues in comparison with the ET-2 yet. I just want everyone to know that it is installed and I am getting close. I can tell you that my thoughts on how good the ET-2 sounds have not changed-it is a damn nice sounding tonearm. There is one aspect of the ET-2 that I don't miss and that is the fact that it does not have a true ground. No matter what cables you use and how you fiddle with them, you can never completely eliminate some amount of hum (at least I can't). The ET-2 manual tells you to install a ground wire to one of the ground lugs on the tonearm RCA connector and then run it to the ground connector on your preamp. I don't see that as being any different than the ground you get from the cable itself when it is connected to the tonearm and preamp. Now with the FR64s, I have no hum which is a great thing.
I think there is great potential here, and I will have more to say when I am confident that I have everything dialed in. I am still messing with VTA and I am thinking of changing my loading from 1K to a lower value. |
I disagree with both Syntaz and Frogman. I hardly believe there is "no hope" left for High End audio. And Frogman, I think you have the subjectivist argument reversed. I think there are far too many people who will believe anything versus people who only believe what measurements tell them. What we need is a balance of art and science and we do have companies that are trying to achieve that balance.
It is my opinion that pretty much everyone who is involved in the design/manufacturing of high-end gear is standing on the shoulders of giants. When you look at the wealth of knowledge that existed in tube electronics just in this country alone over 60 years ago it is humbling. When you realize how many companies are basically just recycling old schematics into "new" products, it makes you appreciate the great engineers of the past and what they have given us.
I find it interesting that we are seeing a revival in very old gear that was cast aside in our march to progress. Witness the Garrard 301 and the Thorens TD124 and even the much newer Technics SP 10 family. SPU cartridges are still being made. Some people never stopped listening to horns and SETs. If someone could find a way to manufacture R2R tapes at a reasonable cost, there would be a much bigger boom in that market than the tiny rumble we are seeing now.
I know some people will argue this point, but I think the most progress that is being made today in the high-end is not with electronics, tonearms, turntables, etc. The most progress is being made with speakers and their enclosures. There is far more science being brought to bear on speaker design today and there already existed a vast body of knowledge. |
