Discuss The Viv Lab Rigid Arm


I am trying to do my due diligence about this arm. I am just having a hard time getting my head around this idea of zero overhang and no offset. Does this arm really work the way it is reported to do?

neonknight

@lewm, come on Lew you ought to know better than that. None of my cartridges has a significant zenith error. Every last one was fully examine and carefully set up with a very high power USB microscope, and not one of those cheap $60 ones either. Getting to the proper 92 degree VTA can be tricky with asymmetric styluses like the Replicant 100 and Gyger S. It helps to be able to see it in technicolor. I can snap lines and the program will automatically compute the angle.  I set it on a 180 gm record. The amount of error going to 200 or down to 130 is miniscule, a few minutes maybe, Fortunately, The Schroder CB has a fine scale on it's post so once I have it set up I can return to the setting for any of my cartridges instantly without having to set up the microscope. Time to go skiing.

The man who dies with the most tools wins:-)

I love how some anoint themselves as God of all things analog and keeper of how all music must sound.  So glad that we get to chose different interpretations and not have to rely on a solo source to experience the beauty of this hobby. A world with only one conductor is devoid of color and shading.

I tend to side with mijostyn and the 'audio science' side of the debate. In general, I'm curious as to how much of the 'science' side of the debate is truly measurable. Computerized measuring apps have come a long way recently, as has high-resolution spectral display. I'd like to see an arm like the Viv A/B'd against an 'idealized' analog setup or a pure digital source. If the inner groove TAE is truly significant, you could probably even see the distortion on a spectral display in addition to on an oscilliscope. It sounds like the measurements are small enough that it would be extremely dependent on the tight control of everything else measurable.

That said, as I've mentioned, I'm probably going to use the Viv as my secondary arm for 78 RPM sources because it fits on my plinth without having to spend thousands more on an upgraded dual-armed plinth or screw around with my workflow by swapping armboards every time I change cartridges. 2-channel tools can fix the phase errors. I mostly transfer 10" records, too, so I can set the null point to be optimized for 10" records rather than 12" records.

When the equipment is the obsession, and not just a Tool to be used as a means to an end.

The type of personality that encloses itself in, and can't see the end, but only the tools, and technicalities. This type in my experiences with them, has a dysfunction. The obsessing over Microns and Seconds and Radians and what is at a loss if not present in a set up is futile.

Most of what is required, is already put in place and readily available to be utilised with considerable ease.

Tonearm Set Up Dimensions are Found on a Template - The Cartridge Groove Modulation Tracing Geometry is to be found on a Protractor.

There are plenty of solutions to produce accurate speed control.

There is no shortage of ancillaries to get a Tracking Weight and Tracking Angle set in place.

The Math behind it does not matter, as there are clever types who made it, that the required tasks were simplified, being easily achieved by most with a little practice and tuition. Produced designs that are readily available for the above tools, do make life uncomplicated. It is not a Black Art, where caution is needed.

From a certain point of observing, the pursuit of more accuracy than readily available becomes burdening. Specialised Methods with Specialised Equipment is required, and the end product produced, is one that is, as a end product, in a constant state of deterioration, where it is extremely difficult to be continuously reassured the controls put in place are maintained. Even a simple shift in temperature could change the work being meticulously measured to perform a function.

I am quite sure, there are go to devices produced using general production methods that can not be produced with a consistency, where the parts assembled are all equal. Tolerances for a Part will vary.

It is difficult to see how variances of a Tolerance will receive any further benefits from going above and beyond the most regularly used methodologies to create interfaces and a functioning environment.

The costs associated with producing the tightest of tolerances and having a friction free environment is an extremely expensive endeavour. The Works required to create the tolerances and lowest coefficients of friction without a Lubricant used,   is certainly one that is a 'Hands On',  Labour Intensive Operation, which will be a design produced from the most skilled hands.

Take a Branded Product, if there was a product that could adopt a design that has a extremely tight tolerance and the Skill Set was in house to produce the  extremely tolerance at interfaces,  it would be a service that provided a end product that is most likely as the minimum 25% increase in costs, even getting onto 50% above a typical charge. If the service is outsourced the associated costs will certainly come in close to a 50%+ uplift in retail value. Start adding these costs to devices in the $4000 - $15000 price ranges seen at present, and a Customer Base will be quickly lost.

I have a hand honed Bearing assembly in my Tonearm, which is produced to the  tightest of Tolerances and is friction free, the Platter Spindle Bearing is also modified and produced to work with the Tonearm  Bearing, for the most valuable of interfaces.

Along with the above Two Specially produced conditions, the Speed Control of the TT is also a much improved design.

The weak link is when the Cart' is added. The Cart' is not produced with the tolerances needed for the assembly, that will enable the other devices to completely excel.

The usual outcome is that the Cart' being used are showing traits, not usually detected, and recognised as a betterment, which is attributed as a result of the tolerances produced for other parts used in the environment of operation.    

 

My interest in the arm was as a possibility to use my MC2000 cartridge. I have never been able to get an answer of arm mass from anywhere online. I did email the company and no response. So I think i am going to end this line of pursuit. I am fine with my other tonearms and have obtained a Denon PL5 headshell for the MC2000 to be used on a Dynavector DV505. The combination works well, so that is my solution for now.