Two arms that spark my interest:Tri-Planar and the Reed.The Reed comes in 3 lengths.
8 responses Add your response
Dear Sonofjim: IMHO I think there is no best answer on it but tests and try different options.
I don't have experience with your mono Dyna but with its " brother " the XV-1 that is a different one on that compliance figure.
The EPA 500 could be a better match and you always can add some kind of weight at the headshell.
Btw, do you already try it in the EPA-500?
Now, as important is the tonearm/cartridge resonance frequency as important is that the cartridge " likes " the tonearm ( a very complex interrelationship. ).
This tonearm is very good and with its removable headshell give you great versatility to match your Dyna ( other option could be the Dyna 507 tonearm), don't worry because its low price:
Regards and enjoy the music,
No, I haven't had a chance to try it on the EPA 500 yet because the table for it won't be ready for a while. That may be a good first step though.
I also wonder about the Ikeda 12 inch which I think you may also have. I can't find an effective mass on that arm and I don't know if the company even exists at this point. Would it be a good choice for a low compliance cartridge such as this?
The Tri-Planar works well with the stereo xv-1s(I heard it in Thom Mackris's system). But the stereo cartridge is a little closer to mid compliance at 10. I'm not sure the Tri-Planar would be heavy enough for the mono at 6. The Reed is another option to consider if I can find the specs on it.
Thanks for your contributions,
Dear Kent: Yes the Ikeda could work, I'm not sure if Ikeda company is working or not.
If I was you I will buy that Audio Technica tonearm that is extremely good tonearm, better that what you think and has a very fair price.
In the other side you still can test the cartridge through the EPA-500.
As I posted there is no precise answer to match in precise way your cartridge because it is not only important the resonance subject but the overall reaction of the cartridge to the tonearm: even if other person with that cartridge give his advise you have to take in count that the audio system and audio priorities of that person could be different to yours.
You can try with that AT for a low price ( almost nothing to lose ) because what happen if you put big K dollars in a tonearm that can't help for the cartridge can show its best, who can tell you ( for sure ) that the Reed, the Triplanar or even the Ikeda are the ones to go.
I try several cartridges ( low, medium and high compliance ones. ) in the AT tonearm with different headshells and almost always perform really good. Don't dismiss because its humble appearance and price.
Regrads and enjoy the music,
Think about a FR-64s.
I tried a lot of cartridges with this Arm and all showed a top performance. Good Design, no big secrets in Set up and it really "guides" a cartridge. This Arm is grossly underpriced/underrated and you will always find another buyer who wants it (in good condition, don't buy from deaf DIY's)
Thanks for the input. Initially, I'll try this with the low compliance adapted EPA 500 wand since I have already bought that. If it's adequate, it will be the best low cost solution. The dynamic damping built into the wand may make this a good match even with the resonance at 11.4hz. As Raul said, resonance may not tell the whole story.
Well, I overlooked the weight tolerances of the a501L wand and it turns out the XV-1s mono is way too heavy at 12.6gms. Recently I found the EPA 250 which does accomidate a 12.5gm cartridge with the auxillary weight. It also handles low compliance(6 cu). However, the VTF in that setup is rated at 1-2 grams and the XV-1s mono needs 2.3-3.2 or so. The original headshell for this arm was 7.5 gms. If I buy a headshell that is 1-1.5 gms heavier it should allow more VTF to be applied. Would this be an acceptable and safe plan even if the arm doesn't completely balance or should I be looking for a lighter weight cartridge to work with this system?