Cost no object tonearm for DL-103

Dear Pani: +++++ " the formidable Fidelity Research FR-64S... " +++++

formidable for whom, the FR tonearms are the ones with higher self generated distortions out there. That some people are unaware of those tonearm generated distortions or that they like that kind of distortions does not means the arm is " formidable ", certainly it is not: I own it and only stay with to compare how a tonearm has not to performs.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.

Dear Mosin: Good that you like it as likes to other persons.

I owned a FR66 and own a FR64.

Problem with the FR tonearms is that are all metal NON-DAMPED balanced designs.

Trough my experiences the worst self resonance/vibrations tonearm/headshell build material is metal or a blend of it.

A tonearm must " fight " against stylus/cantilever and cartridge body generated vibrations/resonances ( at microscopic level between the TT mat/platter and LP/stylus-cantilever. ) that one way or the other needs to be damped and at the same time that the tonearm/headshell can stop/disappears the feedback of those cartridge/LP generated resonances/vibrations: this can't do it by the all metal NON-DAMPED FR design and not only that but due to those microscopic cartridge/LP resonances the tonearm wand and bearing is exited with creating additional resonances/vibrations/distortions that degrade the cartridge signal as in no other tonearms. Again, problem is that the FR are a NON-DAMPED design.

Additional the FR balanced design kind of operation has its own " ringing "/noise " to operate in balanced way with out no single kind of dampening that could stop those " vibrations "/distortions.

That's what the FR owners are hearing and what you heard.

That, as some of you, like it what are hearing does not means in any way that those very high distortions disappeared just because you like it: NO you are hearing those distortions and this is what you like it, period.

Now, not one but two times a gentleman that knows a lot more that any one of us, because he is a cartridge designer, he ( I assume. ) tested his cartridges with almost any kind of vintage/today tonearms and he knows exactly how each tonearm affect the cartridge signal, well he posted ( when some one asked. ) that the FR is not a tonearm he prefered and even posted that the Ikeda tonearm are a little better than the FR ( even that comes from same designer. ). I agree with him about.

The FR subject ( as any other in audio ) is not what we like but what is wrong or right. Yes, that " wonderful " you used in your post or what ever adjective you can give to those tonearms are weighted with " tons " of distortions that you are unaware of..

As with TT a tonearm needs dampening even at higher level that in a TT. This is not science is only common sense.

Yes, I know that you like it: so what?, is wrong what you like it or you like it higher distortions and nothing wrong with that because is what fullfil your cup of tea.

IMHO and trying to help to other audiophiles we all have the responsability to understand what is happening " down there " ( in any audio subject ) before we can " spread " " marvelous information " that could contaminate the learning proccess of any audiophile precluding the " right " to grow up each audiophile has. Misinformation only stop each one growing up proccess and life is to short to stay " stopped ".

The spreaded information of this specific tonearm was made for sellers to take money from us that were unaware of the facts because our ignorance level on that specific subject was really high.

Some already learned by first hand experiences.

Btw, you can ask your self : why a tonearm needs " damp " by design?, I'm sure you can find out the answer in a few minutes.

Mosin, vibrations/resonances/feedback/generated noise are the Music/sound ENEMY in all audio alternatives but especially on analog. We need: TT, cartridges, tonearms and the like with the right " dosis " of dampening to be nearest to the recording.

Am I against the FR tonearms?, certainly not what I'm is in favor of MUSIC and against anything that can degrade it in the way those tonearm does. Tha's all.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.

Problem is that some persons never learn or don't want to learn for whatever reason.

IMHO from the point of view of cartridge/LP needs the FR tonearms maybe are the worst ones to achieve those cartridge needs, as a fact can't achieve it.

The main subject is not if we like the huge FR distortions but if helps to be nearer to the recording and certainly it can´t do it but the other way around: puts us far away from the recording.

For any one interested on the importance of tonearm damping please read the TAS ( 234. ) Ortofon TA-110 review. Certainly Ortofon is an expert on cartridges as JC and their knowledge level is way superior in that regards that any one of us.

Makes no sense to spread misinformation with out precise foundation. At the end of the day what H. is saying is that tonearms ddoes not needs any kind of damping ( the FR has none. ): go figure!?!?!?.

I repeat, the subject is not what we like but what the LP reproduction needs and at tonearm level it needs damping.

Btw, as longer a FR tonearm as worst the distortion levels.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.

as longer in: length. So, the 66 is worst than the 64.

R.

Dear Pani: Today exist several tonearms that can works fine with the cartridges you name mit and many more but if you want a vintage one my advise is that look for the Lustre GST-801.

This tonearm design was and is " light years " a head the FR in every single tonearm parameter/characterisitc design and even for today top designs a challenger for.

IMHO the Lustre along the Technics EPA-100MK2 are one of the best ever designed pivot tonearm and performs according. These people really knew how design a tonearm to achieve the cartridge/LP needs and they did it with full success.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.

Dear Ldvalve: Unfortunatelly exist dishonest sellers of that FR tonearm and is unfortunate for the buyers that paid very high prices : 3.5K to 6K big dollars for a tonearm that in reality honor no more than 800.00.

In the other side, I forgot the AT 1503 that I own and have mounted in my system. Very good performer and way better that the 66/64.
As you said the AT tonearm is an underrated one.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.

Dear Pani: The Epa-100 MK1 is very good too aand recpmendable. You can't go wrong with these Technics tonearms anmd can be sure you own a top performer designed for the cartridge needs.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.

Dear Clio09: what a beautiful " arsenal " you own. I hope you can have time to share in the MM/MI thread your experiences about. Thank's.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.

Dear Pani: Many of us take audio decisions at " blind ", we trust on reviewers/dealers/manufacturers/$eller$ or non-informed " audiophiles and that's why we grow up extremly slow and doing mistakes after more mistakes and we have to pay for each one of those mistakes : not onloy money but the most important part our no-return TIME.

Here we are talking of tonearms and you posted " formidable 64 " and you posted that because is what you learned reading non-informed owners or dishonest sellers.

Take a look on the Koshin Denki Lustre GST-801 design that speaks for it self. You can attest that even today exist no single tonearm with that kind of knowledge level on what a cartridge/LP needs characteristics and the build quality is second to none too:

http://www.vinylengine.com/library/acos/lustre-gst-801.shtml

check the " report and the manual. Btw, Sumiko was the seller in those old times.

Now, if we speak of Technics this are " big big words ". Technics is part of the electronics biggest japanese group: Matushita-Panasonic.

Did you know that the motors in the Micro Seiki TTs came from Technics?, did you know that the DD motors used on the recording proccess ( cut machines. ) came from Technics? did you know that one of the best ever cartridges designs came from Techynics: EPC 100C MK4? did you " hear " about the Technics SP10s? and of course the Technics EPA 100 and 500 tonearm designs.

These people at Technics not only have the desire to build first rate analog items but any kind of resources: enginnering, research, tools, money and knowledge level that no single man can be surrounded for design.

I think that if today Technics or Koshin " revive " and decide to design a today TT, tonearm or cartridge maybe could outbeat/perform almost any other competitor and not because the today manufacturers are not good but because the kind of resources they have on hand. Maybe at lower prices too.
And all that in favor of MUSIC and we music lovers and audiophiles.

Check the EPA-100:

http://www.vinylengine.com/library/technics/epa-100.shtml

In audio ignorance and misinformation is what we all have to improve. We have to be informed: well informed, with true unbiased information.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.

Happy Thank's Given Day!!! for USA citizens.

Dear Clio09: Appreciated.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.

Pani: I think I forgot:

http://www.vinylengine.com/library/technics/epa-100.shtml

Compare both tonearms: Lustre and Technics with that " formidable " one.
R.