I have followed this thread from the beginning. I find the concept of underhung arms intriguing because it goes against most all of the established phono playback geometry that many of us have long accepted, yet those who’ve heard such arms report results that conflict with expectations.
Someday, I hope to hear such an arm and decide for myself. I hope others do the same, rather than yield to the dogmatic theorists who don’t need to listen to know what something sounds like, and don’t want you to listen, either.
mijostyn
What people think they hear is essentially meaningless.
|
... In reality the issue is not " dogmatic theorists " but common sense founded in the Löfgren theory where he proved through scientific equation calculations ...
The dogamtic theorists are those who understand such geometry - such as you and @mijostyn - and then assume without listening what the net sonic affect will be of those arms that defy it.
Don’t get me wrong - I’m all for pivoted arms with "proper" offset and I have no plans to change from my SME V anytime soon, if ever. But I’ve been around audio too long to dismiss a product based solely on paper specs.
As for the Viv in particular, I have other issues with it, the greatest being its mount, not its underhung geometry. But I haven’t heard it so unlike some of the armchair theorists here, I can’t pass judgment on it.
|
All I can say is that people are entitled to like what they want but then they are not true audiophiles.
An amazing remark. The claim is apparently that the only true audiophiles are those who like what @mijostyn likes, and who change their minds when @mijostyn changes his. Most odd.
|
mijostyn
Cleeds would be talking about me.
As a frustrated intellectual he is unable to discuss the relevant issues regarding this arm as he is unable to understand them. He is also unaware of and unable to understand my real motive
Ad hominem argument - the laziest of logical fallacies. You’re not fooling anyone here.
|
But for sure the people here which never had an hand on this great tonearme are bashing it because it not pays attention to "regulations and facts" and for them... the earth is still flat! ;-)
There are some people here who enjoy making grand proclamations and pronouncements. Many take a rather odd pride in this behavior, some peppering their remarks with comments such as, "I’m not polite," "I’m not politically correct" or my favorite: "I’m brutally honest" when what they really mean is, "I enjoy being brutal." They’ll often bolster their comments by claiming certain professional qualifications. Some have established YouTube channels they promote in hopes to monetize their "expertise." One of the logic-challenged ones you’re arguing with here claims to be a physician.
What these sorts have in common, as you note, is a lack of experience. Their hubris has convinced them that their intellect can overcome that deficiency and, to an extent, they are right: Knowledge and wisdom can help you avoid mistakes that otherwise would teach you the lessons of experience. But the truth they don’t want to acknowledge is v-e-r-y simple:
There is no substitute for experience.
That’s why I’ve avoided commenting on this arm. I understand as well as anyone here its unusual geometry and the measurable distortion that can result, but I won’t discount the reports of those who’ve actually seen and heard it. Without actually correlating expectations with actual results, the Viv’s critics have added nothing of value to this conversation. But their "contributions" make them feel very important, and that feeling is what they seek. It’s why they’re here.
|
lewm
All I know is that the RS LABS RSA1 tonearm violates every “commandment” of modern design ... And yet it works. By comparison, the Viv makes much more overall sense.
Crazy, isn't it? I think there are actually many examples of things in audio that at first glance (or even second, or third glances) wouldn't seem to work. I find it incredible the fidelity we can get from an LP today. I understand the mathematic fundamentals behind digital audio, for example (Fourier, Shannon/Nyquist), yet intuitively it still seems impossible to me.
What interests me about these underhung arms is exactly that - the geometry is contrary to what we've all "learned' is best practice, yet reports from those who've heard it are very favorable. That's worthy of further investigation because it suggests there's something in the current set of accepted best design practices that's either being overlooked, or over- or undervalued. Identifying those underlying factors could lead to better pickup arm designs of every kind, including conventional pivoted overhung arms.
There are people who lack a natural curiosity about the way the world works. For them, there is security and safety in books and policies and theories. But real discoveries - by which I mean both the great ones that change mankind and the small ones that can yield the greatest joy - are usually found in the real world through experience.
|
... Is the experience of connecting what measurements we can make with what we hear helpful?
Exactly, and that has been my point in this thread. To make real progress, we need to correlate measurements with what we hear. I think that should be true in all aspects of audio equipment design - not just pickup arms. Obviously others are willing to dispense with the listening part.
|
lewm
I do not view this discussion as a debate where there could ever be a true "winner". I champion the idea of an underhung tonearm as a novel idea that deserves some thought and attention.
Those are my thoughts exactly. Unfortunately, there are some users here who very much treat discussions as a battle where the adversary must be annihilated. They make absolute pronouncements, and then attack any person or product that conflicts with their personal gospel. It stifles conversation.
I have heard an RS Labs RS-A1 tonearm, because I own one. The fact that it does so many things directly against convention (besides the fact it’s underhung) and yet still sounds very good first started me thinking whether we should question some of our tonearm gospels. And I am still at that point.
Me too, but I’m a curious guy by nature. Even though I have no plans to change from the SME V arm I’ve enjoyed for decades and have never heard an underhung arm, I’d jump at the chance. It would be interesting to discover if I could hear any correlation between the sound and the unusual geometry.
|
I do not think it is possible to set up an underhung tonearm so as to achieve two null points on the surface of an LP, no matter what you do with the headshell offset angle.
I think you are correct. That's the whole raison d'être for overhang and offset, no?
|
lewm
... if you take as gospel the emphatic declarations that this tonearm and others like it cannot possibly work because of excessive TAE or whatever else, then the result of my listening tests should have been disastrous, on the negative side. This is decidedly not the case. In fact, I find myself listening to the Viv/ZYX most of the time ...
This is exactly why I've been following this thread so closely. Other listeners have shared similar results, and of course it's all confounding if all we do is look at the "negatives" of this arm: high tracking angle error and a separate pod mount that would seem to allow more error still. That suggests that when it comes to LP playback, we don't know everything about correlating pickup arm geometry with sonic results. And if that's true, where else in audio might we be making decisions based on flawed or incomplete assumptions?
I still hope to hear a Viv arm someday. Until then, I'll rely on others to tell me how it sounds.
|
No pod! Pod is an option if you can’t fit it on the plinth surface ...
Understood. But if the arm isn't rigidly attached to the chassis - which, depending on the turntable, isn't necessarily the plinth - it is essentially affixed like a pod.
|
... the arm is heavily weighted, at least 2 lbs, so that when you sit it on a plinth surface that is in turn well coupled to the platter bearing, then there is a sort of coupling.
But that isn't the case with a suspended subchassis turntable, such as a Sota Sapphire. What you'd call the "plinth" is physically isolated from the platter and bearing, so a Viv arm on that plinth would also be decoupled from the platter and bearing.
Many other well regarded conventional pivoted tonearms are designed to sit on top of the plinth; these do not require a hole for a vertical shaft ...
They sit atop the plinth when the turntable is designed for that. For something such as the suspended subchassis Sota that I mentioned, they can be affixed to the subchassis. Not so the Viv.
Again, the Viv apparently excels notwithstanding these apparent limitations. I'm not disputing that at all.
|
Red herring. I am not using a spring-suspended TT.
Again, understood. I’m talking about the arm in general and remember, I’m one of the guys who isn’t questioning your assessment of this arm.
... if you are saying that you use a SOTA or other spring-suspended TT ...
Nope. From what I’ve read about the Viv arm, it would be no problem putting it on my VPI TNT. I’m just talking about the arm generally.
I know you will say it’s not bolted down and therefore won’t make you happy
Good grief. You obviously haven’t been reading the favorable comments I’ve been making about both this arm and the users such as you that refuse to allow specs and stereotypes to cloud their judgment.
@lewm, I will leave the last word for you. I'm done with this thread, where even positive comments are subject to attack.
|
