2. analog
  3. 150758-92835

Trans-Fi Terminator Tonearm: 2019 Update

In reading a few related posts on linear tracking tonearm, in general,  and Trans-Fi Terminator , in particular, I thought I would give a brief update of the Terminator.

I purchased the arm directly from Andrey in Moscow two months ago. From what I understand, Andrey has taken over production after Vic's retirement. What I received is the most up-to-date version of the arm with the carbon fibre wand and brass counterweights, the direct wire leads from cartridge to  phono amp, and a new brass manifold ( not evident from the main web-site). Both the wand and the new manifold are Andrey's contribution to the continued refinement of the Terminator.

Also,  please visit this site: https://darklanternforowen.wordpress.com/2017/04/15/terminator-tonearm-new-arm-mount/. This gentlemen from NZ has developed a new arm mount for the Terminator which advanced the arm's sonics even further. It was reading through the the development of this new arm mount that convinced me to order the Terminator after much prior research. I did not purchase the arm mount from NZ as it would not readily fit my Verdier La Platine, instead Andrey made a custom arm mount. It is in essence a two point support mount rather than a single point support rod that is commonly used. 

My previous arm was a SME V of 1990's vintage mounted with a ZYX airy. The Terminator is several notch above the SME V. All the accolades given to the Terminator seem justified. My main point in writing is that the new developments by Andrey, i.e. the carbon fibre wand and the newest brass manifold, seem to improve upon the Terminator even more ( see link above ). This is the news that I wanted to share with existing Terminator owners. I asked Andrey to start a blog on all the new stuff that is happening with the arm, but it seems that he is busy making 'things'!




ledoux1238
ledoux1238 OP
276 posts
 
@dover Thanks for your input. While noting your caveat for not having seen or use the arm in the flesh, your instinct for the wire harness to rest on the apex of 'L' shape carrier seems a good one. However, it is the travel of the wire after affixing to the top of the carrier that causes problems. It will invariably make unwanted contact with the arm wand down the road. I tried this configuration after reading your post. I believe the wire contact with the carrier also affects the air pressure applied to the arm. In this configuration, the discrepancies in VTF's between outer and inner platter is as high as 1.0g!

The main problem is that the wires are not stiff enough to remain in a fixed position. And as the wires are loose, it will go off balance after a few spin of the records. However, stiffer wires are generally heavier. And they too will go off balance, creating greater havoc.

Right now, the solution is split the wires into right - left sides and co-join them at the pivot point of the wand. 


dover
2,187 posts
 
@ledouxThanks for feedback - very interesting.
The advantage of the ET2 here is that with the vertical pivot point outside the record due to the longer armtube, you can use a hanging loop to a fixed point behind the arm which does not affect VTF and is vertually negligible effect on lateral force if you use a light flexible wire and dress it properly. I think the captive bearing of the ET2 has a  benefit here as well.

You could do a custom longer armtube to get the pivot point outside the record - particularly if you use composite materials to keep the mass down. Then you could do a "hanging from the pivot" solution.

The only other thought I had was to have a flagpole on the arm carrier centred on the apex, and then you could run the wire up the flag pole and have a hanging loop back to a fixed point.




ledoux1238 OP
276 posts
 
@dover Thanks for your thoughts. I am beginning to appreciate one of the virtues of the ET arm regarding wire management / VTF. 

Having tried a few applications that involve attachment to the carrier, I am of the opinion that the wire harness should not touch the carrier at all. The carrier is in direct contact with air pressure applied to the arm.  Any attachment to the carrier affects its leveling and alters the air pressure asserted to the arm. Any application that touches the carrier in order  to secure the wires, be it a plastic tag or a 'flagpole', creates wild discrepancies in the VTF between inner and outer platter. My guess is that the attachments on the carrier alters the air pressure in a far greater extent than the contacts of the wire harness on the wand. Hence I could not get consistent VTF readings even with the cartridge in the same location on the platter.  A mere reset of the wand to make another measurement is enough to change the VTF!

As mentioned above, splitting the wires into two and reconnect at the pivot point of the wand seem to create the least damage for now.


dnicol
19 posts
 
I've had the transfi tonearm for over 5 years now. Used a Danner AP-8 (Sera/Top Fin). Out of the box it never had > 1.6 PSI all the way up at the pump. But the arm seemed OK around 1 PSI anyway. Only used a 1 liter tank near the pump.

Decided to revisit all this, had a feeling the Danner was never really good enough, not that I needed more PSI, but seemed like it wasn't optimal.

Reading posts about large and multiple smoothing tanks. But that many large tanks seemed like only something like the Hiblow pump could handle. So I tried a 6 gallon tank, using a Fluval Q2. Out of the box this had 4 PSI at the pump. But it could not push any air out of that size tank for some reason, no leaks either. So went to a 2 gallon, then to the 1 liter tank which is now ~ 3 feet from arm. The Fluval was able to push thru those OK, albeit it loses ~.4 PSI by the time it reaches the arm, which is fine. Must be the amount of back pressure these pumps can handle, the Danner seemed weak comparatively.

As others reported, the extra smoothing tank and stronger pump made a very nice difference. I may do a Hiblow someday, and get the 6 gallon tank running. But for now, I wish I would have spent the extra $$$ sooner and did this right.
ledoux1238 OP
276 posts
 
"As others reported, the extra smoothing tank and stronger pump made a very nice difference. I may do a Hiblow someday, and get the 6 gallon tank running. But for now, I wish I would have spent the extra $$$ sooner and did this right "

@dnicol  Very happy that the added surge tank contributed to better SQ.
I am a bit curious as to why your pump cannot work with the 6 gallon tank. For my application, there are four surge tanks / filter connected in series. The surge tanks ( plastic water containers ) are 4 + 20 + 25 litre, so approximately 10.8 gallon in total. The originally supplied Sera pump had no problem pushing through these. And the sound quality improved with the addition of each tank, so I am wondering why the 6-gallon tank won't work?  

I added a fourth filter consisting of a 3" PVC pipe, 40 cm in length capped at both ends. The addition of this PVC filter caused problems for the Sera, whereupon I switch to a Eheim 400 pump which is still in service.

I would encourage the addition of extra surge tanks. I believe you will be able to hear increased improvement.
More to discover