The original SAEC's had too little offset angle! Wonder if the new versions correct this?
roberjerman, What you say was apparently true of one of their lower end tonearms, and I cannot recall the model name. Perhaps Raul or someone else with a detailed knowledge of vintage tonearms will tell us. However, I think the more expensive SAEC tonearms were designed to conform with one of the standard geometries, albeit that may be Stevenson or close to Stevenson, which a lot of alignment gurus do not like, including Raul. Did Fremer mention the preferred alignment? I don’t see it on his site. They’d be best off, obviously, to have built this new tonearm to Baerwald or Lofgren specs.

What I find most interesting is that the price gives us some idea of the answer to that old question: What would this or that well made piece of vintage audio gear have to cost, if it went into production now? The answer as regards an SAEC tonearm is "$8500 to $9500". I would bet that those numbers are at least 8X to 10X the original price of the vintage equivalent. Price does seem high, compared to Invictus' beloved SME V.  SME V is a good comparator, because it too sports a knife-edge bearing and is similar in other ways.
SME V is a good comparator, because it too sports a knife-edge bearing and is similar in other ways.
You gotta be kidding - no knife edge bearings in the SME V's I imported directly from SME all those years ago. If you think there are similarities between an SME V and SAEC then you have no understanding of how tonearms work.


SME V uses state of the art ABEC 7 bearings. 

Prices of the new SAEC are not because that's what it takes to build it today, it's because vinyl made a comeback and they think they can make some quick money.

SME V should destroy them in every imaginable way.
Dear @roberjerman @lewm : The problem is not that " had to little offset angle " but a " crazy " choosed alignment that just did not even/coincide with any standard alignment, not even Stevenson.
The only Stevenson characteristics SAEC models have is that came/comes with 0° tracking error at the most inner groove.

With my SAECs I choosed totally different parameters for each one alignment set up. Truly different to what SAEC recomended because they were wrong.

The tonearm invictus’s link shows the re-born of the 407/23 model that’s a descendent of the 506/30 big brother.

Great looking tonearm with extreme high quality build execution, you can’t ask for more in that regards.

Dover is rigth regarding the kind of bearings used in the SME V but SME used a blended knife bearing ( vertical  movement. ) and gimball in the past that they changed with the SME V.

Regards and enjoy the MUSIC NOT DISTORTIONS,
R.


Dover, I have no understanding of how tonearms work.
@rauliruegas I would be absolutely shocked if you can provide evidence that SME V at some point had a knife edge bearing. This is completely false. But I'll eat my words if proven true.
Good news, but the old 407/23 is that good?

Btw the "23" is the angle. The wrong one was Saec 308 models, and probably 317. 
Earlier SME tonearms were known for the knife-edge bearing.  It was one of their advertising points.  If the SME V does not incorporate a knife-edge bearing, then I stand corrected.  Whether it does or does not is irrelevant to me.  Is it shameful to use a knife-edge bearing?  If so, I never knew that.
Should make the SAEC 407 ( i believe its a 23 as I can use its alignment template) worth a few more bucks. I am getting ready to pull it off and mount a Technics EPA 250.
I paid $1100 for my WE-407/23 about 5 years ago.......and it is an exquisite piece of eye-candy as were all SAEC tonearms (detail).
I also had the WE-308N which certainly had a puzzling geometry (detail).
I now have the WE-8000/ST which is probably the best of them.

As beautifully designed, detailed and machined as these arms were....they are not the 'last word' in tonearm technology being shaded by contemporaries like the FR-64s and even the Micro Seiki MA-505S.

To be asked to pay $8K-9K for a 35 year old design which doesn't have VTA 'on-the-fly' adjustment is an insult IMHO......
@invictus005: https://www.vinylengine.com/library/sme/3009.shtml 

R.
Good work, Raul.  Of course, the SME V may not have continued to use a knife edge bearing.  I'm sure we will be told.

Halcro, I've never owned an SAEC tonearm, but my recollection just from reading on this site, VE, VA, is that the 308N is the one with the confounding geometry that gave a "bad name" to the whole line-up.  I am not sure what I thought about the 407/23, but by all accounts, the 8000/ST was designed for one or another of the 3 major "acceptable" alignments, and is not at all problematic.  But the 8000 is rare and expensive.  Am I correct in these beliefs?
Invictus, No one who seriously examined an SME V would not say that it is a very high quality product, in terms of construction, but just to be accurate, ABEC7 is not the highest possible precision rating.  If that's your fetish, you want ABEC9.
Dear @lewm : "  Is it shameful to use a knife-edge bearing? ", well it's not the best bearing type.

When I bougth my Sao Win  SMC 10 the cartridge manual has a warning: don't use knife-edge tonearm design type and S.Win told it by very good reasons. Btw, the SMC 10 is a really fine LOMC cartridge.

@neonknight stay away from SAEC tonearms the Technics is way superior tonearm design.

SAEC tonearms are very good looking but that's all. 

I bougth my 3 SAECs because I like it what I saw and in those times I was convinced that were if not the best tonearms out there one of the best.

When I learned through several experiences with other vintage and today tonearms I just sold it.- The worst is the 8000 and if I have to choose between the SAEC line then will be the 407/23 but the Technics 250 is not only way superior to any of the SAECs but is very competitive against any other tonearm.
If I was you I will take/get the 250.

Regards and enjoy the MUSIC NOT DISTORTIONS,
R.
I think the problematic is the Saec Ceramic Headshell which is very expensive, but it’s impossible to twist the cartridge using this particular headshell. It must be a different headshell to make re-alignment with 308N (short) or 308L (long) tonearms. There is a thread on audiogon where verything has been told about those arms long time ago.

this is what @t_bone said long time ago:

Personally, I had always assumed the 23 was for ~23cm length (the way the 506/30 has a ~30cm length). It is true that at 233mm, to get Baerwald alignment, it almost has to be 23 degrees offset angle, but that won’t get you the cart straight in line with the headshell. And there is no way that the 506/30 is going to have a 30-degree offset angle...

I am not sure of your question. You can twist the cart in the headshell on all the SAECarms (and it might make more sense to change the mounting distance too) to bring them to Baerwald. All but the 317 have original mfr geometry specs which are more aggressive than Stevenson alignment as far as I remember.

There is also Saec 308SX version: https://forum.audiogon.com/discussions/saec-308n-vs-308sx 
@lewm : But even the 8000 alignment instructions are wrong. The manufacturer set up parameters are near Lófgren A but not even it.

R.
Dear @chakster : The 300 series is the SAEC entry level. Now the real problem with the ceramic headshell is not its price but that's way resonant.

You don't want to mount any of your cartridges in that SAEC ceramic headshells but the series 300 came with a different build material headshells, not ceramic that's an " exclusive " to the 407/506 and 8000.

R.
more about SAEC, posted by @dertonarm

The WE-8000 is the only SAEC tonearm where the offset of the headshell is correct.The SAEC 506/30 was designed to be used with 10" and singles only. It’s geometry does reflect it. Out of curiosity I have calculated a different alignment for the 506/30 which does suit 12" records MUCH better
.


@chakster : That gentleman is wrong. The offset angle is incorrect, I said in my post to lewm that's near Löfgren A with out even/coincident it.

It's not true that 506 was designed for 10" recordings.

SAEC is a " pain in the ass " regarding alignment.

R.
 
@chakster : Why don't make the alignment calculations through internet? in that way you need not that some body, posts or me convince you about.

Btw, have you interest to buy a SAEC tonearm?


R.
Why is everyone trying to strangle the new baby? It may well be that the new SAEC has been corrected with respect to headshell offset angle and alignment geometry. Why not keep an open mind?

@rauliruegas

Eh I got an SAEC 407 with the SL1000 I bought last year. Its a nice enough arm. I bought the EPA 250 to complete the Technics package. I also have a couple of Acos GST 801 to fill out my vintage arms. FInally, have a 12 inch Riggle String Theory arm on my main table, its fairly decent. I dont find the SEAC to be a bad arm
@rauliruegas 

Btw, have you interest to buy a SAEC tonearm?

I have no intention to buy new 8k tonearm from any manufacturer, i like my Reed 3p "12 tonearm, it's new design, not a 30 years. But i like vintage tonearms as well, regarding vintage tonearms i'm not gonna pay more than 1,5k for any of them. I've learned from many audiogon threads that SAEC with its knife-edge bearings is not the best tonearm. And that's why i asked again is that good or not? Just curiosity, i'm not gonna buy Saec anyway. 

Sadly @dertonarm  is not posting anymore on audiogon, so i can not speak for him about his calculations etc. What i think is that size of the record does matter, especially for professional tonearms, if it was made for radio stations then the main format for new material on vinyl is SINGLES or "7 size first, all promo material for the radiostation released by the labels on singles to promote the best tracks from the LP long time before the LP will be even pressed or available for sale. This is how the industry worked back in the day. Singles with labels like "promo use only or D.J. copy" is typical for any radio archives. One song per side. I believe @dertonarm is right at some point, there could be a dedicated tonearm with dedicated alignment made for professional use for japanese radiostations backs in the 70s. 
@chakster : That tonearm can be used with any LP size as any other tonearm.

As I said I used my SAECs with different alignment parameters than the manufacturer specs. You can do that not only with the SAECS but with any tonearm. Maybe you need to learn a little about. 



Anyway, no big deal.

R.
Dear @neonknight : When I said " stay away from SAECs " I'm not saying is a bad arm but against the 250 seems to me looks as an inferior performer.

Knife-edge tonearm bearing is the exeption and ask you why the 99% of tonearm designers choosed a different bearing design than knife-edge.

As I said the 407/506/8000 are extremely well made with a very high quality excecution, no doubt about and are second to none in this regards but this build quality does not means the tonearm is a " stellar " one because it's not.

@l, I don't think SAEC made any changes because they already had evrything to build it as the original but exist the posibility that they did it. As you said we have to wait. Now, the SAEC problem is not about its choosed alignment parameters, its problem is deeper than that. As you know you can make any kind alignment you choose with any tonearm.l

R.
The real downside of the SAEC tonearms is the ceramic headshell which must be the absolute worst choice of headshell material ever imagined....
Though they still command outrageous prices (if you can find one).....this work of the 'devil' will make every cartridge sound like fingernails being dragged down a classroom blackboard.
If you have a wood-bodied cartridge like the Clearaudio Virtuoso.....you can just about listen without feeling discomfort.

It's easy to eliminate this problem by simply selling the ceramic shell and using a good after-market headshell like the Yamamoto HS-4 Carbon Fiber.
It's easy to twist the cartridge in the headshell to re-set for any geometry one chooses.

Those beliefs are reasonable Lewm...
@rauliruegas  I wonder why our experienced member and collector of the tonearms posted this:  

The SAEC 506/30 was designed to be used with 10" and singles only. It’s geometry does reflect it. 
-Dertonarm   

As far as i know SAEC 506/30 is a professional tonearm, so what i tried to explain is why in the professional industry (radio broadcast) singles ("7 inch vinyl and "12 inch EPs) are more inportant than LPs. 

 



Dear @chakster : "  so what i tried to explain is why in the professional industry (radio broadcast) singles ("7 inch vinyl and "12 inch EPs) are more inportant than LPs. "

whom said is more important?. It's not, for an audiophile LP are the important subject.

Radio stations needs are way different than a home audio system at our  places.  As audiophiles we are looking always for " the best " the best quality performance levels when in a radio station they are looking to other issues: why the Denon 103 for broadcasting? it's a rugged cartridge spherical  stylus tip because they do not needs more quality level they only need that can sounds at decent level and that's all. Sp-10s were designed for broadcasting: they needed fast star up and fast stop too, speed stability, etc. but they did not needs a special plinth to avoid resonances/vibrations as we need in a home system. Different needs that's all.

Broadcasting is not the reference for we audiophiles as in the same manner recording engineers can't be a reference for audiophiles and only if they are true audiophiles we can take it as reference.

R.
@rauliruegas you’re right, but the SAEC 506/30 is a professional tonearm, audiophiles are not a part of the pro industry, professional used to be meant for broadcast in the 80s. In the broadcast industry nobody cares about LPs, singles are made especially for radio deejays and for promotion of the upcoming LP albums. Making professional tonearms SAEC or any other respected manufacturers must take in count the media format of the PRO industry and no wonder that special geometry applied for this specific format of the records (they are smaller than LPs). I think this is what our member (dertonarm) pointed in his comment many years ago.

Maybe SAEC 506/30 consumers in the 80s were not the hi-fi enthusiasts (private individuals), but the professional broadcast studios (special market) ?

For example here is Technics SL1000 MKII P ("P" = Professional)
There is a build-in balanced preamp Technics SH-10U
professional version of the EPA-100 tonearm (EPA-100P) or even the best EPA-100mkII as an option.

The cabinet is definitely not the best, but the whole concept reminds me EMT turntables, i think they are highly regarded among the audiophiles and price for them reflect it pretty well. Same about Denon broadcast decks.
Dear @chakster : Professional or pro industry works with " tools " according to its needs. Technics, Denon, EMT, etc figthed for that market and that's why appeared the SP10s or the DP100M with built-in phonopreamp/speaker. Before these models and along other names that market was extremely competitive due the grow up of that market all over the world not only in Japan.

The pro-model manufacturers wanted to take as many  costumers as they can with more atractive items for that partuicular kind of customers where they need it  trusty/confident items with the capacity to works 24 hours seven day a week year after year with very low maintenance. All these means high build quality but they were not looking for the penultimate accuracy in the frequency response or cartridge tracking habilities or to be truer to the recording.

No one of them used top cartridge models as : Accuphase AC-2 or  Audio Note IO or Audio Technica AT1000. Tonearms as the own Technics EPA 500 or Audio craft or Micro Seiki.

SAEC tonearms are very good looking tonearms that were builded with very high quality excecution but never been and never be a top tonearm design because that bearing type in the audiophile market where pro-industry does not belongs. Forgeret about but if you want to really know on the 506 then buy one and finish your " story " where you made a no-sense conclusions.

Better than that please do it a favor and due that you listen mainly to 7" size recordings then take this alignment parameters for your 64FX tonearm that will give you the lower tracking error with the lower distortion levels for a 7" recordings :

 P2S: 238.55mm   ; offset angle: 15.294° ; overhang: 8.45mm

the alignment is Löfgren A ( Stevenson gives no single advantage even with this special alignment. ) dedicated for that size recording and only as an example the tmaximum racking error goes down from: 1.9°-2.1° to only 0.36° that's outstanding and then way lower tracking distortion levels.

I hope your tonearm permits to mount it and mount the cartridge exactly with those parameters.

Good luck,
R.




All in all honesty guys, all of these old Technics, Denons, EMTs, etc. are clunkers. Some of you are very passionate about them and that inspired me to try a few for myself. They’re just barely okay. Modern turntables such as Michell and SME and many others are significantly better.
@rauliruegas 

Better than that please do it a favor and due that you listen mainly to 7" size recordings then take this alignment parameters for your 64FX tonearm that will give you the lower tracking error with the lower distortion levels for a 7" recordings :

 P2S: 238.55mm  ; offset angle: 15.294° ; overhang: 8.45mm

the alignment is Löfgren A ( Stevenson gives no single advantage even with this special alignment. ) dedicated for that size recording and only as an example the tmaximum racking error goes down from: 1.9°-2.1° to only 0.36° that's outstanding and then way lower tracking distortion levels.

Thanks, maybe i'll try it. 
At my home listening sessions i'm 90% with LPs as you lazy guys, so i can relax and listen to the full side of LP. But when i'm playin out or abroad i'm with my vintage original 45s (from the 60s and 70s). 

I'm curious about those professional japanese tonearms, some of them are very expensive and very rare. In theory i'd like to know for sure why did they used special alignments. I can't believe they were "stupid", because Baerwald alignment is very old and very well known even in japan. I'm trying to understand the special needs those pro manufacturers served for the consumers (broadcast studios etc) at that time. Hope we will find the truth.     

@chakster If Fox Moulder wasn't able to find the truth, then what chance do we have?
Invictus, Please be specific.  What Technics/Denon/EMT turntables, exactly, did you "try"?  What was the context?  On what grounds would you say that the Michell and the SME turntables are "modern"?  Neither brand has changed their product line much in probably 25 years, or more.  Are you really saying that you don't like turntables that are not belt-driven?  If so, say so.

You are entitled to your own particular set of preferences, as are all the rest of us. What upsets me is your consistent need to denigrate that which you have not chosen to love; in your case, it's anything not made by SME.  It's OK to be in love with SME.  Just know that the rest of us have had our own experiences which have led us to different conclusions regarding equipment we've chosen to live with long term.

People often get upset with Raul for his very frank opinions, but at least Raul always provides specific reasons to support his assertions, which often leads to lively and interesting, if heated, discussion. Furthermore, his taste is far more catholic brand-wise than yours. Your puffery leads nowhere.
@lewm What can I say, I’m an SME fanboy. But I won’t apologize. They make incredibly competent products.

Since 2000, I probably listened to, set up, had access to, or owned close to 100 turntables. Most recently I’ve owned the brand new Technics SL1200G. I don’t have anything against direct drive, but very often the belt driven turntables are better.

If I had to pick my favorite direct drive, it would be either the Goldmund Studio, or Studietto.
Dear @chakster : You are a losted/lost case and explain why and why I several times told you that you have a lot to learn because in many critical audio analog and audiophile subjects you are a roockie but as you are a roockie on those subjects you only insist and till today even with facts/evidence you just did not learn.

In the other side, a few weeks ago when for the 10th or 100th time we were discusiing why Stevenson A alignment is a stupid one to use it and I posted to forgot that kind of alignment that only gives way higher distortions and you were emphatic and said that you mainly listen to 7" size recordings and that’s why you need it Stevenson. Down there I proved to you that even with 7" recordings Stevenson has higher distortions than either Löfgren alignments.

Because you were emphatic on what you mainly listen ( 7" size recordings. ) and as always trying to help I took my time to give the " best " alignment for it with the lower distortion levels and you posted here that " mainly listen to LPs ". ! ? ? ? ? !!!!!

Obviously that I’m to stupid to try help ( that's always my attitude behind each single word in my posts to any gentleman here and elsewhere. ) to untrusty and ignorant gentlemans like you. Period.

Do the best you do that's sale audio items because that's what you really are a seller and please don't push to hard because I can put a warning direct to agon for they " talk " with you about.

I never answer to any stupid people in the forums. Till today I have you as an ignorant roockie and near that border.

R.
Depends on which tonearm @rauliruegas
I have 4 tonearms, actually 3 are connected right now.
No problem with LPs i can listen with Baerwald on Reed 3p "12
My record collection is 50% 45s and 50% LPs

My Sony PUA-7 has its own alignment and its own SONY protractor.

Maybe i will experiment with Luxman TA-1 tonearm with high compliance cartridge for 7’inch only.

At the moment my new FR-64fx with FR-7f is on the "warm-up" in my system with its original alignment, i just replaced tube gear to solid state and everything changed, so i need time to get used to this sound, before i will make any changes!

I know your opinion that Stevenson is "stupid" and all japanese tonearm manufacturers are "stupid" too, but i want to know WHY did they used what they used! And i think we need more information, more opinions.

And yes, i want to learn things and i have time to learn things in this hobby, i am 41



Invictus, Thank you for your civil response to my perhaps intemperate questions.  Funnily enough, I would rank those Goldmund turntables as among the worst, most over-rated DD turntables I have ever heard, starting with their very badly implemented suspension systems.  And their drive systems don't compete for engineering sophistication with the best Denon and Technics vintage DDs, in my opinion.  I have yet to hear the 1200G, but the 1200G and the 10R both incorporate coreless motors. I have found that I tend to prefer DDs driven by a coreless motor, too. Among vintage DDs, this includes the Kenwood L07D and the Victor TT101. (There are more, Including the Yamaha 2000GT, but I haven't heard them.)  Oddly enough, just based on what I know about SME turntables, I imagine that the SME design philosophy results in a turntable that has many of the qualities I like about DD turntables.  If you found that you prefer the SME to the 1200G, that is a good head to head comparison, except, assuming you own one of the better SMEs, the cost is 2-3X that of the 1200G.

Fremer, who wrote the paragraph you or someone else cited critiquing the servo system used in DD turntables, more recently went on to write a glowing review of the SP10R, calling it one of the best turntables he has ever heard and also showing graphically that it was the most speed stable turntable he has ever measured.  Somehow, he forgot to complain about the servo mechanism in that review.  (Or, without checking the review, perhaps the spiel about the servo system was built into the SP10R review.) But negative reference to the servo system in DD turntables is a common device used by those who want to sell belt-drive or who have a pre-determined bias of some kind.  DD turntables CAN have a coloration, which I think is much more due to either EMI emanating from the motor or to motor cogging. (Hence perhaps the reason that coreless motors seem to impart a more "continuous" and musical sound.)  I think it's important to shield the cartridge from EMI, and the shielding effect may be the major reason why a lot of people swear by copper platter mats, etc. 

And finally, nearly all modern belt-drive turntables are nowadays using a drive system that incorporates a feedback system to maintain speed stability.  Witness the recent popularity of the Phoenix Engineering products in the US.  How ironic is that?  If the belt is at all compliant, this could in theory play havoc with speed stability, because if the drive system "sees" that the platter is slow (for example), it will signal a correction.  The resulting torque bump from the motor will partly be used up in stretching the belt before the platter speed can respond. And etc. This back and forth is potentially worse than DD, because of belt compliance, if indeed there is any problem at all with DD in this regard.
@rauliruegas 

Sp-10s were designed for broadcasting: they needed fast star up and fast stop too, speed stability, etc. but they did not needs a special plinth to avoid resonances/vibrations as we need in a home system.

I wonder about your own learning curve, Raul
Several years ago you'be been fighting with a'gon members regarding your idea that "naked fashion" (no plinth at all) SP-10mkII is better than any plinth. Do you remember? 

You goal was to add AT-616 pneumatic insulators under the Sp-10mkII, just like i did last month on this photo of SAEC mat (if anyone would like to see what i'm talking about). 

Now you're talking about "a special plinth to avoid resonances/vibrations", could you explain? The AT-616 pneumatic insulators is there to avoid vibrations and to level turntable in its "naked fashion" style. 

In many cases on this forum you're controversial to yourself, your own statements (from 5 year ago for example) regarding cartridges, tonearms, plinth etc is often completely different to your current statements. Which make me think that all your current statements about vintage analog equipmentn will mean nothing in the next 5 years.  
Just to add that SP10s used in broadcasting were usually seated into a very massive counter-top (for want of a better word to describe a broadcast booth).  They weren't just sitting on top.

Raul and I had this argument long ago.  I believe DDs need a massive plinth in order to counter the torque exerted during platter rotation. What the plinth needs to be made of is yet another bone of contention. Raul had one experience with a granite plinth.  I don't care for granite, and apparently neither did he. We agreed to disagree on this subject (or at least I agreed to disagree), and I don't mean to stir the pot again.
@chakster : Even that's useless to " talk " with you I want to comment:

"  My Sony PUA-7 has its own alignment and its own SONY protractor. "

followed by:

"  And yes, i want to learn things and i have time to learn things in this hobby, i am 41. "

that you w"ant to learn " does not imply that you will learn because you showed not one time but several times that you just did not.

First than all we have to have the rigth mind/attitude to learn where common sense on each one of us plays the main critical role. You have not neither the rigth attitude and your common sense is far away to be a true " decent " common sense.

I gave you enough evidencefacts why that Sony protractor is not for the stand alone tonearm and you insist in using it as  the Stevenson A alignment because you need more evidences coming from opinions . Are you waiting for a post by Mr. Stevenson?

You are not ready to learn and because you are not and even that you are 41 old I can tell you that 100 years can't be enough for a gentleman like you.

As I said: you are a losted case. Nothing to do for help you. Remmeber that " stupidity border ", please stop your self and don't cross-over. You still are in time to return.

R.
Dear @lewm : You know that I'm a proponent od DD TTs but this not means that I can't say that BD designs are not really bad because works fine. As a fact I still use my Acoustic Signature BDs.

Now, the SME 30 is a serious BD design and I think way better that what you could think. I had experiences with both the 20 and 30, very good units.

What I totally disagree with invictus is that the SME V is the best tonearm out there because certainly it's not, I owned and compare it against the best of the best. Yes, can beats the SAECs but this does not means is a " formidable " tonearm, is a good one and that's all. Now, this is what he like it more and from this fact he is rigth: is the best for him but not for other audiophiles with different experiences about.

Regards and enjoy the MUSIC NOT DISTORTIONS,
R.


Dear rudeliruegas @rauliruegas

Wow, you have apparently no shame when insulting anyone who questions, or has an alternate viewpoint to your own.

It would seem that you are once again regressing to a position of "absolute" knowledge when it comes to all things tone arms. And that, once again, we, who enjoy music, are incapable of listening to a device and make our own assertions as to what we find pleasing. There is an inherent, and immeasurable complexity to the rather magical process of moving music from a vinyl platter to the listeners ears.

Apparently, according to you (aside from your historical contradictions which have been outlined here @chakster - someone you seem to take pleasure in berating) you have an absolute knowledge and understanding of all things vinyl related, including mathematics. These things are the foundation upon which all of your beliefs and thoughts are built. Given the history of your posts, a more than valid case could be made to back this up.

Couple of newsflashes for you.

Thoughts are not facts, and beliefs are not truths.

(Especially when it comes down to your "holier than though" lambasting of anyone who might suggest that something other than the Holy Grails of information translation from a vinyl record have anything to offer or contribute to the conversation at all)

Here is the thing, a VERY primary thing that I fear may have passed you by in all of your dissertations.

Music, live or reproduced, is not about math. It is about ART...

The translation of, in its most basic form, a straight line to a curve is at all levels a mathematical problem. Calculus and Algebra at their finest.

I will say it again, this is not about math, its about ART. This is not about the changing of a straight line to a curve, its about the emotional resonance of a systems ability to convey a response from the listener.

This is where I paraphrase you - taking some creative license here - "I have neither the time nor interest in trying to educate someone who clearly is lacking in some very basic fundamental understanding of a medium..."

I am not writing this to try to educate you, as that is obviously a lost cause. Rather, it is an attempt to cleanse myself of the disgust I feel when reading your vitriol.

But I digress...

As you have outlined to @invictus005 as to the validity of his beliefs surrounding the SME V, you are once again the harbinger of all knowledge - which is in your "mind" math based. You know, what works and what doesn’t. What sounds good and what doesn’t. Math is the solution to this.

Wasn’t there something called... what was it again??? Oh, right, the Inquisition!!! That’s it! Where there was a dogmatic system forced onto a public. I know, based in religion, not "math", but the thing is, dogma is dogma...

You have, in a previous post, made you myopic attitudes quite clear as you have lambasted the SAT tonearm because it doesn’t facilitate your "math". And, you have done so without having ever heard it.

That is, as close to a definition of narrow-mindedness that I think I could ever reference. Commenting as to the function of something without ever having tried it.

"I don’t like eggs"

"Have you ever tried them?"

"No, but I don’t like eggs because they are yucky"

Dumb right?

So, in closing, I shall quote British Prime Minister Benjamin Disreali responding to Sir William Gladstone.

"A sophistical rhetorician, inebriated with the exuberance of his own verbosity, and gifted with an egotistical imagination that who can at all times command an interminable and inconsistent series of arguments to malign an opponent and glorify himself"

You can swap out "verbosity" (as this is something you clearly lack and I wouldn’t want to be chastised for unfairly, or inaccurately criticizing you) with "Mathematical Knowledge"...

P

PS - Did you read your own signature? "Regards and enjoy the MUSIC NOT DISTORTIONS" Do you actually know what that means?




@rauliruegas

Are you waiting for a post by Mr. Stevenson?

That would be nice, or from anyone else on the same subject.
You don’t have to repead your statement, i have already switched between Baerwald and Stevenson alignments several times with some of my arms over the years. I don't have paranoia about distortion level. My question was not exactly adressed to you personally, it was not exactly about my own gear, the question was about Japanese manufacturers and you can’t speak for them, because you don’t know what to say about their theoretical point of view, you’re talking from the practical point of view. I appreciate your advices, but your posts became very rude, next time you will say anything personal i will stop communicate with you forever. What you need to learn is a good manners on public forums, strange that at your age you didn’t learned this yet, believe me this is more important than alignments of tonearms or anything that you posted. Respect community members and they will respect you. As i pointed earlier, you’re contradicted to yourself in several post on differen subjects i audio if we will read old posts and new posts. Ok, nevermind.
@rauliruegas What are some tonearms that you think are better than SME V?
Dear @invictus005: In a fast response and with some of the ones I had and have first hand experiences. Other than mine: Kuzma 4point, Triplanar, GST-801, EPA 100MK2 or MS MAX282.

I never said the V is not a good arm because it's and with a quality level build excecution second to none.

The issue is that on tonearms does not exist " the best " as you pointed out several times refering to the V. I owned several SME tonearms because it gained a trusty reputation on its quality levels so I'm not against SME and neither against its TTs.

Regards and enjoy the MUSIC NOT DISTORTIONS,
R.
@chakster : """  Several years ago you'be been fighting with a'gon members regarding your idea that "naked fashion" (no plinth at all) SP-10mkII is better than any plinth. Do you remember? ......................................................
Now you're talking about "a special plinth to avoid resonances/vibrations", could you explain? ..............................................................................
In many cases on this forum you're controversial to yourself, your own statements (from 5 year ago for example) regarding cartridges, tonearms, plinth etc is often completely different to your current statements. "


As I said " no common sense at all ". 100% of audiophile TTs comes with a plinth a very special plinth to avoid resonances/vibrations or at least put at minimum and why is this: because those resonances/vibrations degrades in severe ways our home audio system listen experiences.
Our needs in that regards is a lot more critical than in radio stations where even the frequency response where it works is truly limited and surrounded of several kind of developed and induced " noises " that the radio listeners just do not cares about.

Exist no controversy or a contradiction when tears ago I posted that the best plinth is no plinth and that the best performance in the SP-10s came with the TT in naked fashion  and still think in that way because the SP10s plinths are a " mess " of plinth.

One thing is to make reference on a specific TT model and other way different to refer to all TTs in the market.

"""  Which make me think that all your current statements about vintage analog equipmentn will mean nothing in the next 5 years.   """


Nothing wrong with that because I'm not like you or other gentlemans that are " sticky " in many ways.

When any one is day by day learning then we can confirm ( again and again. ) our audio believes/experiences or that learning day by day can makes we time to time amend our " mistakes " our way of thinking in some specific regards.
We have the rigth to " learn " and not to stay witing for " dead ", we have to be and to have a very active role in our each one audio picture/movie.


Stevenson: "   the question was about Japanese manufacturers and you can’t speak for them, because you don’t know what to say about their theoretical point of view, .... "

then why don't ask them?. I did it with no sense answers because ignorance.

About pro-industry: why don't ask them?  why? in this case I never did it because I did not and do not need it. 


Obviously you already cross " that " border so you don't need to post:

"  i will stop communicate with you foreve ..""

because I already posted my attitude when some one cross over " that " border .


R.










Who cares about any version of SP10 and all those ridiculous plinths? There are many better current turntables on the market, with proper plinths. If anyone wants to experience that Technics sound, there's a 1200G available all day any day. And it doesn't require some lumberyard plinth. It comes with its own heavy aluminum dampened plinth! All of these SP10s should be put out of their misery.
@invictus005
Don’t forget that audiogon members experienced that Technics reference sound for 20-30 years or even longer. The SP-10 mkIII was one of the ultimate Direct Drive ever made for decades. The best plinth makers offered an amazing plinth for SP-10mkII and mkIII over the years. Some users are fine with the origina Obsidian plinth too. The EPA-100 mkII Boron-Titanium is still one of the best tonearms ever made.

Second hand Technics EPA-100 and SP-10mkII has the best value today and they are still great, no matter what you personally think about it. There is no comparison between SP-10mkIII and SP-10R made yet, only at the Technics factory. But there is already a lot of speculations about it.

Until 2017 there was no SL1200G, GR, GAE
... and until summer 2018 there is no SP10R, SP1000R on the market!

I agree that SP-10R is what we should think about, but not the SL1200G, you will see them for sale used on audiogon when the SP-10R will be released! Technics reference series does not looks like an old SL1200 with new motor and new plinth, the reference is SP-10R and SP-10 mkIII is next to it.  

There are many vintage DD on the market with a proper plinth, one of them is Luxman PD-444 in aluminum plinth with armboards for almost any tonearms. Victor TT-101 is another coreless DD. Why should the owner of the great classic DDs should care about SL1200G which is not even reference Technics? We will see when the hype is over.

SP-10R is the target for serious audiophiles, but it’s 14 000 UK Pounds, while the SP-10mkIII is much cheaper.