Cartridge ISOLATION; What Say You?


another good read, it does go against my 'instinct' of a rock solid cartridge/arm connection. (non-removable headshell) 

Who thinks what?
Who tried what?

https://www.tnt-audio.com/accessories/isolator_e.html

btw, has anyone tried a Len Gregory cartridge (with or without the isolator)?

another comment in the article: reviewer mentioned a layer of isolation under the tonearm base (he tried blu-tac). Also against my 'instinct'.
elliottbnewcombjr
I'm sure Lewm and Atmasphere shed some light on this.

Cartridge isolation is very important but at what level? This is not difficult at all. The cartridge has to maintain a fixed orientation to the record. ANYTHING that corrupts that relationship like unipivot arms is bad. So the solution is, you isolate the entire turntable or rather the chassis that carries the tonearm and platter. This is the rational behind suspended turntables. They keep the environment from interfering with the cartridge without further corrupting the relationship of the cartridge to the record.
This cartridge isolation pad is beyond silly. What it does is dependent on the surface area of contact as well as the tightness of the screws, two variables that can not be easily controlled not to mention it corrupts that relationship. 
CARTRIDGE ISOLATOR it’s called.

Plinth and Base Isolation put to the side for this:
Jitter within the cartridge’s guts, down the signal wires, put to the side for this:

It’s about Jitter getting into the tonearm and back into the cartridge isn’t it?

It’s about less rigid fastening of the cartridge body, no matter how thin, to the arm isn’t it? This UGLY thing is quite thick.

And, the reviewer (not the isolator’s maker) mentioned a less rigid fastening of the tonearm base to the plinth, a double whammy of some, even if infinitesimal, movement.

Jitter into/back out of the arm, if acknowledged, is unwanted movement, sooooo, isolate from jitter? a speck of isolation (movement) reduces the jitter going/thus reduces the jitter feedback?

That's what makes the Strain-Gauge, supposedly essentially Jitter Free so tempting to me.

Elliot, I am still stewing, because you said “Lew’s thing is ugly”. My wife refuses to comment.

The ugly truth is none of us understands the physics well enough to judge the Enabler out of context, where context is one’s own ears and one’s own audio system. My hunch is that results will vary according to cartridge construction and compliance, headshell composition, tonearm damping, effective mass, and bearing stability, etc. So insults and invective have no place in this discussion. If you’re interested, give it a shot and report back here stating the cartridge and tonearm you use, at minimum. Saying “I loved it”, or “I hated it”, doesn’t help.
https://www.zotefoams.com/product/azote/evazote/1st thing that comes up when I google "closed cell, crosslinked ethylene copolymer" as taken from The Cartridge Mans website. Used in sporting goods.
Anyway, I subscribe to the closed loop philosophy of tying the cartridge to the tonearm to the platter spindle. Any movement or damping of movement between the two will result in an inaccurate reading of the record grooves. Will it sound different? I'm sure but lots of things can make your music sound different, doesn't necessary mean it's better and in almost all cases it isn't.
BillWojo