a better calculator is imo the Korf which also calculates acceleration…. You do understand J Carr is THE designer at Lyra…… ?
- ...
- 47 posts total
I am pleased to hear that the Kleos could have more bottom end slam depending on the tonearm. In my Well Tempered Black Arm, the only thing I think could be improved is the bottom end slam. I was concerned that the Kleos was the issue, but seems like it could be the WTA. On my LP12, the WTA and the Kleos work well, but with the issue described above. |
Thanks, I'll check the Korf calculator. The 8.37Hz was from an actual calculation, not a chart. Yes, I kew he was the designer, as he stated such. Very cool that he even responded. So I'm asking one more time: Why does the low-mass arm create a shortfall in the response? I just don't get it...What are the mechanics that cause that? (same answer as why one cable sounds better than another? Ha) Is there a definable answer? Bent
|
The whole concept of arm effective mass and resonance is only a small part of the overall synergy between a cartridge and a tonearm. This paper goes into the derivation of what effective mass means and how that relates to the cartridge compliance and the resonance calculation - Microsoft Word - tone-arm.doc (cartchunk.org). However, the resonance calculation is actually quite simple, and it does not begin to address the other aspects that @jcarr - the cartridge designer addressed in his post and these are much more complex. |
11Hz should be fine for the calculated resonant peak. Keep in mind that you’re using parameters (compliance and tonearm effective mass) that are good guesses at best. Fortunately there is a lot of plasticity in the equation itself as well, since it’s based on the square root of the product of two inexact quantities. |
- 47 posts total