Lyra and OMA

@tomic601 

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.

Paint me disappointed!

Thank you all for you guidance.

ml

Michael, a few postings ahove you wrote something to the effect that the higher the effective mass, the higher the resonant frequency. Actually, it’s exactly opposite. Resonant frequency and tonearm effective mass are inversely related. So a higher mass tonearm will invariably reduce the resonant frequency for a given cartridge compliance..