DynaVector DV505 is it worth the hassle?


I have a Garrard 301 with a SME3009 II improved arm. The table is coming back from ZU audio with a new ZU DL103 catridge and their Xaus tonearm cable. While waiting for the table, I happened upon a really good deal on a DynaVector DV505. It looks cool but it appears complicated to set up and use. I'm somewhat of a novice and just joined AudiogoN. Any opinions about the DynaVector arm would be appreciated. By the way, Sean Casey and his crew at ZU audio just blew me away with their level of customer service. Unbelieveable!
eriksdad
Dear Erik: As all those post I agree that the 505 is very simple to set-up even is more simple to setup in an arm board because you could need no drill holes to fix it ( of course if you want it you can fix through screws. ), you can do it using only a double sided tape ( like the one used to fix carpeting/rugs.
This is the way that I use it all the time in different TTs and works really fine and you can mount it evrywhere in any surface type.

Now, Albert point out some VTA/warps problems because the 505 design, well I have to say that I never had any single trouble or sound degradation due to what Albert post that certainly he had.

This is a " surprise " to me because a big part ( main ) of the 505/507 design is really that: the very high tracking " resolution " of the tonearm, here it is what we can read in the 505/507 Dynavector manual:

+++++ " Conversely, the
vertically movable sub-arm is made so light that it never lets the stylus jump the groove of even a disk
with warp(s) previously unnegotiable. " +++++

Lewm, both the 505 and 507 are dynamic balance design and as I already write here I never had/have a single trouble about and in all my audio years of experience this is the very first time that a Dyna tonearm owner has a complaint on the subject.

Regards and enjoy the music.
Raul.
As with any arm, there are different sets of tradeoffs in all designs. The Dynavector is no different. Is there a perfect arm? I cannot really answer that.

Yes, the short armtube is more sensitive to VTA changes on warped records but was there for a few specific reasons. The short and light armtube tracks almost anything without a hiccup.

Because of the low vertical mass, the armtube and the cartridge works as one. The arm can follow the record profile (no record is perfectly flat) without a hitch hence the great trackability compared to longer tonearms. It will also take the work load off the cartridge's suspension (as the suspension is not fighting a heavy armtube)making the cartridge work more efficiently and track quieter.

Being a 507 mk2 owner, I have not really detected sonic changes/degradation due to changes to VTA. Can "you" hear it? I don't know. Maybe if you strain you might but when the music is playing...everything else will be forgotten.

Lastly, setting the arm from scratch is a breeze. Pls do not let the "look" of this arm scare you. It is highly adjustable and a very flexible arm to use with a wide range of cartridges.

If you have the opportunity to get a 505, go for it. It's a great tonearm and way ahead of it's time.
As I write this I am looking at my tonearm. I see the table turning, but with the ring clamp and spindle clamp...or with a vacuum system, the arm moves across the record with grace and alacrity. I just looked at the stylus, and it too seems not to move. I suppose if your records are warped and in need of Dyna's answer to tracking, you should get it. However, eliminating the warp in the first place enables the cartridge to sit in the groove and not be tossed around at all.
I have the DV501, the earliest of them all, this was given to me by a friend last year. This is set up on the Raven One (separate motor) together with the Benz Micro LP. In relation to the set up, I was so surprised that set up was a breeze. This is the most manual of the Dynavector tonearms, there is no dial to adjust anti-skate and tracking force.

Tracking warped LPs does not present any problem,perhaps this is due to the short armtube, one hardly sees the stylus riding the LP up and down.

The looks gives the impression of a "difficult to set up" tonearm, in reality, it is not.
Dear Raul and Genesis, Your remarks and Raul's quote from the DV manual are a bit puzzling to me. How do we reconcile the two concepts of "lightness" as you both mention and tonearm "effective mass"? In their literature DV does make the dual and to me internally contradictory claims for both qualities. In fact, they quote the effective mass (with their standard 15-gram headshell) at 25 grams! (That's high, folks.) As I understand the concept of effective mass, it is a measure of the inertia of the tonearm, which along with the cartridge and hardware mass interacts with the compliance of the cartridge to determine the LF resonant frequency. I don't see how a tonearm can be described as "light" when it has a high effective mass. Mind you, the high effective mass is what you want with a low compliance LOMC, and this is what makes me interested in the DV tonearm, in fact. It certainly is a beautifully made and well thought out product.