Fidelity Research FR-64 vs. FR-54

Lew, I'm sure Ikeda likes his newer designs better.  J. Carr apparently does too, and he is a pretty smart dude. I have never heard Ikeda say anything negative about his older arms, however, and the newer Ikeda arms are a refinement of the FR arms.  As far as resonant properties, I have a hard time believing that the cartridge can cause resonance in the armtube above 100 hz - there is just too much compliance in the cartridge attachment to the headshell and the headshell attachment to the arm through the collet.

I am keenly aware of low compliance cartridges pushing the arm around at low frequencies, however.  This is the biggest source of thin, tinny sound.  IMHO, uni-pivots just don't work well with low compliance cartridges for this reason - the cartridge can and does rock the arm back and forth in azimuth at low frequencies. What the FR arms have going for them is high mass and beefy, outstanding bearings that don't give.  They have essentially no freedom of movement in azimuth.  The bearings in the Ikeda arms are even beefier.  That is why they work well with Koetsu's, Miyajima's and Ortofon SPU's.  These arms don't allow the cartridge to push back and cancel half the bass in the groove.

BTW, I have an MDC-800 (The Arm) on a SOTA Sapphire and an FR-64fx on a tricked out VPI HW-19 Mk. IV.  I tried my Miyajima Shilabe (low compliance) on my SOTA setup first and wasn't impressed with the bass, (which this cartridge is known for).  I then switched it to an FR headshell and tried it on the VPI HW-19 Mk. IV.  It had better bass than my Ortofon Synergy SPU, (aka the Rach 3 ball-buster !), on the same arm and table.  

The MDC-800 has outstanding bearings, so I reasoned that I needed more arm mass and inertia about the cartridge.  I added 3 grams of weight to the cartridge end of the MDC-800, remounted the Shilabe to the arm and tried again.  This time it matched the VPI set-up for bass.  The weight increased the moving mass of the MDC-800 from ~13 grams to over 16 grams, and it made a huge difference in sound.  You can't stress cartridge / tonearm matching too highly.  Many high end cartridges and tonearms are just plain incompatible and can cause endless frustration and head-scratching for many, many vinylistas !!

Dear @lewm / @dcbingaman : J.C does not like FR/SAEC or Ikeda tonearms mainly because its overall resonances that does not helps to the MUSIC real enjoyment.

I owned and own the FR and the Ikeda 407  that's the long one similar to the 66. This one is a " little/tiny " less bad than the FRs but that's all.

As a cartridge designer ( mainly. ) JC must have and try almost any vintage or today tonearms and TTs and even he was co-designer of a SS dual mono Phono StageHe needs to test  his top cartridge models with different analog rig alternatives, this is part of his cartridge voicing.

Here is what JC posted literally in this forum about:


""" 

Otherwise the "fx" or "fc" variants are far more friendly to use. By the time Ikeda did the IT-345 and IT-407, he had gained a much better awareness of resonance control as compared to his FR days.
 

And as Raoul suggested, I use the Warren Gehl armwrap, which is far more effective than heatshrink. It dampens the resonances of the armtube by compressing it radially, and works on a similar principle to how you play harmonics on a bass or guitar.

The armwrap's radial compression of the armtube makes the 64S and 66S operate a bit more like Ikeda's later arm designs like the IT-245 and IT-407, although these added interference damping by force-fitting multiple concentric tubes of various materials together.

FWIW, from the resonance-control point of view, Ikeda's personal favorite among his own designs is the IT-345, which I believe has a three-way concentric armtube structure. The person who's been building these arms for the past 20-odd years is of the same opinion.   """"

The ones that likes Ikeda tonearms are the Ikeda builders/designers! ! ! 

It can't be the other way around, they put on sale those tonearms but  it's not JC whom likes those disastrous tonearms.

No, I don't have any more the 407. People like me have the rigth to learn.

Btw, @dcbingaman , your Sota combination was a Sota classic on those times along the ET tonearm too. The arm is a good arm that Fletcher imroved over the original Swiss one design.

The cartridge/tonearm intrinsicall relationship for a " perfect sound is complex for say the least where are in play to many parameters at the same time that when you improve/up-grade some of one this could affect in positive ways to other parameters involved but could affect in negative ways with other relatioship parameters. 

At the end what I'm looking here is to achieve the lower distortions ( any kind. ) I can and a non-damped tonearm is out of that target and I know it because I still have one FR and I have it only to test ( if need it. ) how the cartridge signal must not be reproduced and that's all.

Regards and enjoy the MUSIC,

R.

Raul,
 Good to hear from you.  No arguments with your and Mr. Carr's observations, but I have just not experienced any resonant problems with my FR-64fx with any of the cartridges I've used it with, (Ortofon SPU, Shelter, Miyajima, Koetsu, Clearaudio MM).  I like it because it is the best removable headshell arm I have personally encountered.  I have not personally used a steel FR-64S, so I don't know if they act the same as the anodized aluminum FR-64fx, and I would guess the anodizing does provided some level of self-damping, so there could be a difference.

 I love the SOTA Sapphire / MDC-800 combination.  It works pretty well with everything I've tried on it, but the arm does benefit from a more headshell mass for some low compliance cartridges like the Miyajimas.

  I'm not real crazy about many newer "affordable" turntables, BTW.  Too many shortcuts on suspension and hardware for my tastes.  It's better to by a classic and rebuild it.  SOTA's factory-rebuilt Sapphires etc. are BARGAINS.

  My point it all this is that cartridges and tonearms have a complex and finicky relationship with each other which very few folks really understand (including, unfortunately, most of today's dealers).  You really need to find someone to help you match the cartridge you like to the tonearm it will work with, or you're in for a lot of frustration.  There is no universal tonearm that works well with everything, despite a lot of design effort in this area.

Raul,

BTW, I also have a Mission Mechanic tonearm, (the one GB Tools built after the Zeta Black VdH), on a Denon DP-75 direct drive in a custom birch plywood / black acrylic plinth.  This tonearm is like a Zeta on steroids !!  Sounds pretty good for an old tonearm and turntable.  I can't imagine what it would cost to replicate this thing from scratch today.  I'll send you some photos if you are interested.

dc, Raul owns or owned a DP75; there’s not much he hasn’t played with at one time or another. I own a DP80 which I’ve mounted in a slate plinth with a Triplanar tonearm. So far as I have been able to determine, DP75 = DP80. This is a wonderful combination that I never use, unfortunately, because my other four turntables take precedence. It’s ridiculously good, compared to what else you can buy for similar market value. When it was in regular use, I did prefer it to a Technics SP10 Mk2, also in a slate plinth that was nearly identical to the one housing the DP80, in terms of dimensions and mass (65 lbs).

After my last post, I started thinking more about the "lack of damping" of the FR64S/66S. It occurs to me that the pivot bearing does incorporate some sort of damping action; the lubricant captured in its bearing gets viscous after prolonged periods of disuse, which suggests to me that even when warm it has a damping action. Also, we seem to be assuming that the stainless steel arm tube is completely empty save for the wiring. I don’t know that it doesn’t incorporate any sort of "stuffing" that might also contribute to damping. These two points, if valid, would take some of the air out of Raul’s and J Carr’s criticisms. This is not to say that their dislike of the tonearm is not also valid. I only suggest that we are making an assumption about cause and effect. We don’t know that the objectionable qualities those two report are necessarily due to "lack of damping". We and they only assume that connection.