Dear Mepearson: It is obvious that you start the thread to tell that you are for the linear tracking tonearms.
There are several threads on this tonearm subject where you can find a lot of opinions about, many of them similar of what the people posted here. I don't want to go on by my self other that point out this:
IMHO the first " conditions " to make the kind of statement that you posted and that truly could help are: to own a full range/high resolution audio system where you can discern even on tiny differences and second to own/owned/borrowed the best of both " worlds " , with out that that statement is a little " poor " statement with no real foundation due to your audio system limitations and limited pivot tonearms you tested in your system.
Btw, I owned that ET-2 and if you want to know I'm for the pivot tonearms, no doubt about.
Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul. |
Dear Mt10425: Please don't take my post in the way you take it.
He states that the ET-2 beats every single pivot tonearm he owned and reading on the Agon I think that his latest pivot tonearms comes from VPI that are far a way from be a great pivoted one, it is not only that as unipivot type design comes with more " problems " than the best non-unipivot ones but that I think is not a reference arm. Reading through Agon I find that the latest reference to what cartridges he own was a 103R that is almost reference of nothing too.
Everybody has the right ( like you say ) to enjoy what we have and the right to post everything we want but if you come here and tell me that the ET-2 beats any single pivoted tonearm I own/owned/heard then it is my right to questioning about and that's was what I try to do: NOT to denigrate nothing but trying to put things in perspective for all of us, I try to help nothing more.
I don't read a thread/post and give an opinion till I put things in perpestive for me, I like to know of what in reallity we are talking about.
What I post/posted I made it with all respect to any one, I don't have any single reason to offend any one.
Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul. |
Dear Mepearson: +++++ " linear arm is incapable of reaching into the bottom octave. " +++++
I never posted that, please re-read my post. Btw, I already heard the Rockport too.
+++++ " It's kind of odd to have people tell us that we can't have what we know we hear! " +++++
like in almost every place on audio: there are different range level for quality performance, I know very well Definitive Technology and for what is surrounded it: that's not the quality level performance I'm talking about.
I don't like to continue with what you posted because this is leaving me ( push me. ) to analyze more in deep what you are hearing and I don't want to do it, at least not in your thread.
Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul. |
Dear friends: IMHO trying to achieve a precise conclusion of which type of tonearm is better with out take in count how that tonearm is " surrounded " in the analog chain and in especial with which cartridge(s) is almost useless.
The theory behind that a linear tracking/tangential tonearm is better than a pivoted one is IMHO only that: theory, nothing more. A theory can be usefull when we are talking on perfect " stages " but the analog recording process along the reproduction process through our analog rigs are far away from be perfect.
There are cartridges that could perform better in a linear tonearm than in a pivoted one as there are cartridges that performs better in a pivoted one than in a tangential one.
Could this means that either tonearm design is better than the other?, certainly not only tell us that that cartridges performs better in that tonearm because that tonearm makes a better cartridge matching than the other tonearm design.
Now, through my own experiences ( in my system. ) and through experiences ( many ) in other audio systems I never heard/find any single linear tracking tonearm set up where the low bass ( not low mid bass. ) had/has the tightness , fullness, definition and truest that have in a good pivoted one. Btw, I always think that the mechanical " grounded " on a pivot design is very important part for its performance in this frequency range.
This alone characteristic where IMHO the pivot tonearms are superior makes a difference: this bass range frequency is the foundation of the music and it is here where tiny differences makes the difference of course if we own a system that can play clean in that bass frequency range.
The process/mechanism/relationship to reproduce LP's is really complex and to take a sole characteristic in a stand alone link ( the tonearm ) is IMHO a very simple and " un-true " way to seriously analize the subject.
I respect to all those people that " die for " the linear tracking tonearms but many of them ( Walker, Rockport and the like ) have it because they don't have any other choice with those TT's, the linear tracking tonearm is part of the TT package. It is not possible on that TT's to mount a pivot tonearm and make a true comparison.
Anyway like many other subjects in high end audio always will be different opinions about that one way or the other could help to understand more in deep each one audio subject.
Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul. |
Dear Mepearson: This " humble " Audio Technica 10" tonearm is a winner and IMHO better than the vintage Technics and Fidelity Research ( that I own. ), it competes with any pivoted tonearm out there. Btw, I'm using it and is a current model:
http://www.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/cls.pl?anlgtnrm&1270496166&/Audio-Technica-1503-Mark-III-l
if you want it new you can find it here:
http://www.audiocubes2.com/brand/Audio-Technica/product/Audio-Technica_AT-1503_IIIa_Transcription_Universal_Tone_Arm.html
Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul. |
Dear darkmoebius: Agree with you. There I'm talking more on bass quality than bass quantity: an important difference.
regards and enjoy the music,
Raul. |
Dear Mepearson: I don't understand why you follow posting that I think the argument that some people make that linear tracking arms can't reproduce the bottom end are patently wrong. " ++++
no one including me posted that, what some of us posted is that the pivot tonearms are better in that critical frequency range.
Btw, that AT tonearm is one of the best " keep secrets ", I can't see how you can have a better performer at almost any price, higly recommended for any one that could think that your today tonearm is one of the best out there.
Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul. |
Dear Mepearson: Yes it does. You can see it here:
http://www.vinylengine.com/library/audio-technica/at-
1503.shtml
I don't think many " audiophiles "/high end own it
because this tonearm are an almost unknow item for the
" audiophiles ", what a normal audiophile knows is
normal tonearms: Triplanar, Graham, SME, etc, etc.
Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul. |
Dear Mepearson: http://www.vinylengine.com/library/audio-technica/at-1503.shtml
Regards and enjoy the music,
raul. |
Dear Dertonarm: Like you I agree ( I posted several times. ) that the cero tracking error advantage on linear trackers in this imperfect analog world could means almost nothing against the less than 2° error in pivot tonearms design.
Till today I always support a pivot tonearm over a linear tracker at least for the better bass quality performance that btw Atmasphere, you and me point out through the thread.
Now, no one and I'm reffering to M. Lavigne, F. Crowder, Atmasphere or A. Porter deny if there exist more cartridge stylus/cantilever/suspension stress through a linear tracker than a pivot design, otherwise they give cartridge names, how many years and which linear tracking tonearms where they don't detect any cartridge quality performance problem cause by that " stress " we are talking about.
The argument that you posted where you say that over the long run/time we can't aware of that cartridge quality performance degradation due that is at minimum day after day and we can't detect it is no clear argument at all because you have to take in count too the normal cartridge deterioration because of time even in a pivot tonearm.
How I can see all this controversy, some one posted here: ++++ " Theory is mere speculation. " +++++
yes till you prove it and you know this.
The controversy could comes because the theory and common sense tell me that that " stress " exist what that theory can't explain ( because your model is only a part of the whole model neccesary to prove it. ) is how exactly shows it self through the cartridge life: after three months ( in hours. ), after one year, after 3 years, how change the cartridge frequency response due not only because the normal over time cartridge degradation but in specific for that additional " stress ", how change the cartridge crosstalk between channels, how the suspension/cantilever behavior/stylus shape changes due only for that additional " stress ", which is the impact with different cantilever size, with different stylus shape, with different cartridge compliance values, with different LP recording velocities, with different room temperature, etc, etc
IMHO I think you don't have answers ( and I don't asking for. ) and I don't know any one that could have the precise theoretical answers and even if they have ( in theory ) this is only half the " true " because you have to prove it ( the other half ) through a controled experiment/tests in real time. Very complex for say the least!
In the other side those gentleman has an answer ( Dertonarm, it is not only one person but more than that. Are they all wrong? could happen that they speak between each other before they posted?: no Sir I don't even imagine that! ) that they can prove it through its subjective/empirical experienced/knowledge each one has.
So, the " stress " exist: how affect the cartridge quality
performance over time?, who knows!!!
Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul. |
Dear friends: Some way or the other IMHO all of you have reason, better yet part of reason.
The subject is very " conflictive "/controversial but very interesting and a learnning one.
It is no doubt that attend to hear/heard live music events ( with acoustic instruments or amplified. ) to any kind of music always help to understand the whole " thing ".
All we know that today is absolutely impossible to recreate/copy bis a bis what a live event offer to the recording microphones and I repeat: to the recording microphones and not what we heard/hear at our seat position on that music live event that is " different ". More than that: what the recording enginnering/producer want we hear.
IMHO less and less over the years the people/audiophiles ( noy you but the 98% of the audio people. ) are more in focus with the system hardware than with live music events and their comparisons are more between hardware vs hardware than software/music.
In the other side and due that the high end audio is a " commercial $$$$$ legitim activity " and as part of human activities the majority of the products that the audio industry offer to us are mainly " commercial " products where its first target is to make money ( nothing wrong with that ) sometimes taking advantage of a poor know how on the majority of the customers.
Exist in this audio industry the designers/manufacturers where their first targets are and have an intimate link with the Music and what this realy means and with top quality product performance looking for the best for the knowledge customers, unfortunately you can count these kind of designers/manufacturers with almost the fingers of your hands.
Many of us already posted in different threads what we are posting this time, can we agree?, I think that we did in the main part of the subject: the high end audio industry establishment where we belongs must change and seek/look for an evolution in benefit of the whole audio industry.
IMHO all us that belongs ( some way or the other. All the majorities. ) to the audio high end establishment have a responsability on those changes on that evolution and IMHO we have in our each " area/place/land where we move " to take action to make " things happen ".
It is not enough that we just " talk " about in this and other forums but to make something about to change our today " attitude " and share a new attitude to the whole audio industry.
From this point of view ( that could be wrong. ) every one on the high end audio industry must to change to " evolution ": designers/manufacturers, professional reviewers and audio magazines, audio retailers/dealers, we customers, audio forums, recording industry, record manufacturers and record retailers, etc, etc.
The majority of our audio establishment needs IMHO a set of new audio standards/rules.
An easy task?, certainly not. The problem is not when we can " finish " it but when all the audio industry can/could start/begin with, how the whole audio industry could agree on new standards, how the customers needs could be matched by the audio industry.
I think that we have a lot of questions about and maybe no sure/precise answers to amalgamate the different " sectors " and targets in the audio industry.
If all of us want that " things " improve and be better and goes faster than today I think that we customers that some way or the other " mantain " with money the whole industry have a main role on that " evolution " and we have to accept and take action according to that main role.
Talk and speak between us helps almost nothing.
Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul. |
Dear Samujohn: +++++ " So what would you like to see us/them do? " +++++
well, one answer is clear in these last 10-15 posts: that audiophiles/Agoner's at leat AGREE. Everyone of us have different opinions, some of those opinions are way different where some of those opinions are more similar than differents.
Obviously that in a forum like this there are at least one reason from at the end we don't get an unanimous opinion: almost every one want to win, normaly these forums are to find out the winner and the loosers, IMHO we need some kind of mature about where the important subject be not who has the reason or whom is wrong but how we can get a more or les unanimous conclusions and I see it very complicated because every body wants to win!
Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul. |
Dear " Cilantro " friends: Here in México is everyday eating " exercise ".
The Cilantro herb we use in almost all kind of food: soup, rice, beans, salsa ( sauce ), salad even tea.
The cilantro flavor is different in USA than in México even in different regions in México its flavor is a little different.
Its use is not only as " spice " but as a healt natural agent.
Like many other herbs its active ingredients are benefitcial to our healt but in moderate dosis.
Regards and enjoy the musiuc,
Raul. |
Dear " Cilantro " friends: One of the tipical Mexican sauces is this one: red tomatoes, cilantro, onion and chile jalapeño or habanero, all in raw status and tiny cut/nibble with salt as you taste it, name it: " pico de gallo " sauce ( beak's cock. ): just delicious with beef and tortilla.
Regards and enjoy the music,
raul. |
