Fidelity Research FR-64 vs. FR-54

I had a go at re-wiring the tonearm on my Kenwood L07D, which has a separate part number, L07J.  I gave up when I found that I could not separate the vertical shaft from the pivot housing, even after all fasteners that might have prevented the separation had been removed. I don't know what was holding them together, but I was loathe to exert total brute force.  So, after several tries with "moderate" effort applied, I gave it up. With every pivoted tonearm, the delicate internal wires need somehow to get past the bearing at the pivot and must be installed so as not to impede the bearing in any plane.  The job was too scary for me.  I have conceived of a "quick and dirty" method, which I intend to apply to the L07J; one could run the wires entirely external to the arm tube but fixed to the arm tube with bits of tape, from above the headshell back to the pivot.  Then fix the four leads right over the pivot point (so not to impede its motion) and run them maybe another foot back of the arm or all the way to the phono stage.  I guess the same could be done with the FR tonearms, but mine has "Silver Inside", and I have no issues with short circuits.  The L07J has Litz wire inside, which is commendable for low capacitance but I have always perceived a sort of sluggish coloration from Litz wire interconnects.  The Kenwood, nevertheless sounds fine, but could it be better with "better" wire?  This is what keeps us awake at night (for 5 minutes).

The first was the recommendation to use Bearwald instead of Stevenson and consisted in increas of the spindle-pivot distance with 1,5 mm (aka eff.lenght of 246mm).

Dear Nandric,

When I adjust the PS distance at 231,5 mm, my SPU can not catch the Baerwald - it is on the Stevenson point. I need 1,5 mm to catch the Baerwald (Dr. Feickert protractor) or the Dennesen protractor intersection point.  When I adjust the SP distance at 230 mm, the SPU is just on the Baerwald and on the Dennesen points ....?

@nandric 

Dear chakster, You should write to my brother Don and ask where his Lustre is rewired. He got my Lustre 801 as present but the (silver) wire was broken in one of the channels. He is very happy with the result and prefer the Lustre above his Graham 2 (?) for the MC carts. 

oh, yes
I remember this story from Don. Just checked by mailbox now and you know i realized the answer is already there. Don has described full story from the start in september when i asked about external cable. Nice, so he had the same problem with old Lustre internally. Ok, his choice is Discovery Cable from Joseph De Phillip who rewired your ex Lustre silver with Discovery copper cable. That's good as it's medium priced copper litz.

@lewm 

 The Kenwood, nevertheless sounds fine, but could it be better with "better" wire?  This is what keeps us awake at night (for 5 minutes).

Haha, exactly.
It took at least 2-3 hrs to disassemble my Lustre 801 in parts for the first time, we did it. Internal tube damping doesn't looks like in the manual, but there is something inside for damping (Raul love it) in this armtube. I'm looking forward to try the arm with new wires. The magnetic tracking force works, but incorrect. I hope the magnetic (?) antiskating works, i have no idea how it works in this Lustre tonearm.     

Dear @dcbingaman : I still own the great DP-75 in a 50kg beautiful green marble plynth that on specs is over the DP-80 that I owned.

The best from Denon was and is the DP-100 even over the SP 10 MK3.

I own too The Mechanic that is very good tonearm, was the only regular tonearm where the cantilever-less Ikeda REX 9 performed good.

In the other side the Fx tonearm is way different to the 64S. Stainless steel is the worst metal to use in a non-damped tonearm against the aluminum from the Fx.

Now and this is something that almost no one take care when talking of the FR 66/64 and is that that touted ( @lewm ) high mass is the other serious problem of those arms other than the main non-damped design.

In those old years tonearm designers and TTs ones were in favor of high mass to damps its products. On tonearms was SAEC whom publicited " papers " explaining the tonearm high mass designs as their models but were totally wrong because they don't took in count how it really works the cartridge/tonearm combination along the spining LPs.

Exist no single LP that comes with precise/perfect concentric hole for the TT spindle to avoid the normal " excursions " during playback. Those " excursions " ( lateral movements. ) along the other characteristics for the cartridge very hard work ridding the LP grooves  means that  as higher the effective tonearm mass as higher p´roblems to " stop " the inside/forward to the spindle natural path of the tonearm becausrtia of those movements. 
Lower mass tonearm has lot lower problems to stop that natura inside inertia to follow in better way the LP grooves.

That dynamic mass goes against a precise and clear sound and per se produces distortions and additional to this always is that undamped tonearm design. SAEC has the same problem and in this issue the 66 is worst than the 64 and no the FR bearings are not something especial but more of the same.

@thekong 66/64 S are non-damped and the VTF mechanism always is ringing and degrading the cartridge signal integrity.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.