2. analog
  3. 1412834749

The Arm/Cartridge Matching Myth

When I began my journey in high-end audio 36 years ago….no-one ever wrote about arm and cartridge matching nor tonearm resonant frequency…?
Over the last 10 years or so…this topic has become not only ubiquitous, but has mutated beyond its definition, to THE guiding principle of matching cartridge to tonearm….❓❗️😵
The Resonant Frequency can be calculated using a complex formula relating Tonearm Effective Mass to the cartridge’s Compliance….or it can be simply measured using a Test record of various frequency sweeps.
The RECOMMENDED Resonant Frequency of any tonearm/cartridge combination is between 8-12Hz.
But WHY is this the recommended frequency and WHAT does it really mean…?

The raison d’etre of this Resonant Frequency…is to avoid WARPED records inducing ‘resonance’ into the tonearm…..
Say what…❓😵
WARPED records….❓❗️
Yes…..ONLY warped records❗️😎
But doesn’t it have any meaning for NORMAL records…❓
None whatsoever…..😊👍
Let me explain….🎼

A badly warped record induces the tonearm to rise and fall rapidly on the ‘sprung’ cantilever of the cartridge.
Depending on the severity and frequency of this warping…..a subsonic frequency between 2-5Hz is induced so if your tonearm/cartridge Resonant Frequency dips into this frequency range….it will begin resonating and thus miss-track and/or induce hum through your system.🎤
Keeping the lower limits of your tonearm/cartridge Resonant Frequency to 8Hz simply insures against this possibility.🎶

So what about the 12Hz upper limit…❓
This simply insures against the possibility of any ultra low-level frequency information which MAY be on the record, also inducing this same miss-tracking or hum. For instance if your tonearm/cartridge Resonant Frequency was 18Hz and you had an organ record or one containing synthesised bass going down to 16Hz…..your tonearm may miss-track or you MAY develop a hum❓😢

So how many badly WARPED record do you possess…❓
I have three out of a thousand or so……and have NEVER experienced miss-tracking or hum even on these three…❗️😍

Yet these days….everyone (without exception it seems)…even tonearm and cartridge designers….happily follow the dictum of this Arm/Cartridge MATCH as if it affected sound quality…..❓
This Resonant Frequency has ZERO affect on the sound quality of a particular tonearm/cartridge combination and I have proved it hundreds of times with a dozen different arms and over 40 cartridges.

The best match for ANY cartridge ever made….is simply the very best tonearm you can afford…whatever its Effective Mass…😘
128x128halcro
halcro's avatar
halcro OP
2,664 posts
 
Test moderation
howardalex's avatar
howardalex
64 posts
 
I’ve just bought an old Shure V15 111 with elliptical stylus; an impulse £150 buy off eBay based completely on an old Stereophile review. Obviously a total risk as it could have been totally knackered, but also because my arm is a Fidelity Research FR 66s, a very high mass arm which I got because I have several Koetsus, SPU’s, FR7s Denon 103 s and a (Decca) London Reference cartridge. So the chances of getting a decent sound appeared small...
It came in a Jelco headshell. It needed a good clean but looked good under eyeglass and aligned on my Brinkmann Balance very easily using Brinkmanm alignment tool.
I set VTF at 1.25 gm and first ran the Hi Fi News cartridge lateral and vertical resonance tests. It didn’t actually resonate at any frequency detected on these tests (no idea if that’s good or bad !).
I then left the world of theory and measured tests and actually played some records.
All I can say is that while there may be some improvement possible in another tonearm (who can say there won’t be without trying) what I am hearing is quite astonishing at any price let alone £150, so my penny’s worth is that what the technical specs and calculations say is not necessarily going to be an issue in real listening mode.
This Shure is amazing and I haven’t even started fussing over VTA etc. Given that I’m lucky enough to have a Koetsu Jade with diamond cantilever and London Reference both in Arche headshells and the fanciest silver headshell wires and the Shure is in a  basic headshell with wires from the 1920s it’s even more surprising how good the Shure is. I’m going to try it in the Arche and then really get OCD about VTA and see what happens.

lewm
12,481 posts
 
The problem with your conclusion based on your observations is that you can have no idea what the actual compliance of your Shure cartridge is at this point in time. By now, it may be a low compliance cartridge which is actually a fairly good match for the FR 66S. I have very successfully mated an Acutex cartridge with my FR 64S, and the combination works beautifully, but the Acutex is 40 years old at this point and probably no longer exhibits its original super high compliance. So all I can say is it works, but I think that is weak evidence for throwing out the customs related to tonearm matching. On the other hand, I am all for trying things out in my own system before disavowing them.
chakster's avatar
chakster
6,144 posts
 
... because my arm is a Fidelity Research FR 66s, a very high mass arm which I got because I have several Koetsus, SPU’s, FR7s Denon 103 s and a (Decca) London Reference cartridge.... 

All I can say is that while there may be some improvement possible in another tonearm (who can say there won’t be without trying) what I am hearing is quite astonishing at any price let alone £150... 

This Shure is amazing and I haven’t even started fussing over VTA etc. Given that I’m lucky enough to have a Koetsu Jade with diamond cantilever and London Reference both in Arche headshells and the fanciest silver headshell wires and the Shure is in a  basic headshell with wires from the 1920s it’s even more surprising how good the Shure is.

Welcome to the Moving Magnet world. If you like the result with that Shure cartridge i can only imagine your reaction to some of the best vintage MM/MI that many audiogon members including the OP discovered long time before i jumped in the game. My advise is to continue your search for the killer MM cartridges. I also have FR tonearms (64s and 64fx) and FR-7fz cartridge along with Ikeda 9III and Ikeda IT-345 tonearm, but some rare Moving Magnet cartridges are just superb, i can't do anything about it, they are just great! 

I don't have 66s tonearm, but in fact i enjoyed Pioneer PC-1000 mkII and many more killer MM like Stanton 980 on Lustre GST-801 and on Reed 3p "12 with high-ish mass. In my opinion an MM or MI cartridge is a must have for anyone next to your LOMC on the same turntable for easy comparison. This is where the cheaper cartridge can be better, really. The MM technology is cheaper by default, but nothing wrong with that.  





howardalex's avatar
howardalex
64 posts
 
Lewm,
that’s a great point: I did read that the suspension is likely to have hardened considerably on the Shure given its age so perhaps it’s no longer a springy high compliance cartridge.
If the suspension has hardened to the extent necessary to transform the compliance from high to low would there be any obvious sonic degradation attributable to that ? I only ask as the cartridge is not showing any nasty tonal characteristics or sibilance, tracking issues etc. When I lower the cartridge down onto the record it settles nicely so there does still appear to be some suspension give.
The only thing I’ve noticed that on the one fairly badly warped record I’ve tried to play the Shure/FR 66 on it simply wouldn’t work - the stylus jumped out to the grooves.
Whether that’s a sign of a cartridge tonearm mismatch or a knackered suspension I have no idea ?
It’s sounding great on non-badly warped vinyl ....

More to discover