Are linear tracking arms better than pivoted arms?

03-01-10: Frogman
Never have I experienced a problem with cartridge/cantilever wear that I can attribute to the arm.

That, is the million dollar question. Unless this greater lateral force can be proven to cause increased distortion or cartridge wear, it is really a non-issue outside of the theoretical realm.

In which case, it all boils down to what sounds best in each particular system and owner's mind.

I think I might make a few inquiries tomorrow with some reputable cartridge manufacturers/repairers to see if they've noticed excessive or unusual wear due to linear tracking arms.

Unless a linear tonearm murders your cartridge in the very first days, you will hardly notice any effect till you dismount it and realize that your cantilever is off line.
Why ?
Because it is a constant small decrease in quality and sound over time. Our brain and ear won't react to very tiny rather constant changes - there are no benchmarks to verify the changes.
So in the end - how does it sound ?
You'll never know. You may like the sound of a linear tracker.
I've too.
As long as you do not notice its shortcomings. Once you detect them in the sonic signature, the magic is gone forever.
I have owned and used for several years side by side the Triplanar, Graham, ET2 2.5, Goldmund T3F, Air Tangent 2B and Reference to name the more prominent ones and contenders from both "camps".
The mechanical stress showed its results over time - it wasn't the same in all linear trackers ( the ET2 was best when very carefully set-up (= leveled and painstakingly rewired with ultra flexible litz-wire which finally did NOT interfere with the progression...) and running with twice the air pressure as recommended by its manufacturer) .

The originally question of this thread was - as stated by Mepearson - whether the linear tonearms as superior performers by nature.
In my opinion they are not.
THere are plain mechanical and real-life trade-offs in their concept and so far there is no linear tracker on the market which does address all these problems.
The theoretical geometrical advantage can't be denied.
But then it is corrupted by the need of derivation for progression - so far as well in passive as in motorized linear tonearms.
All these conceptional musings do not mean that a linear tracker can't put up an impressive sonic performance.
So you may like its sound for good reason.
BUt on the way up to the very top of Mt Everest the air gets thin and on the last two tracks to the summit the linear tonearms give in - not enough oxygen to fuel their lungs any more.
In direct contest with the best pivots their geometrical advantage becomes very tiny - their bearing and mechanical problems begin to show.

Again - I love the linear principle in tonearms.
But we yet have to see one fulfilling the promise and addressing all issues.

Dear Darkmoebius, if indeed

..."In which case, it all boils down to what sounds best in each particular system and owner's mind." ...

then all discussion is kind of waste of time - isn't it ?
This is similar to discussion about religious issues. In the end - when one party runs out of arguments - the final defensive statement will always be "but I believe".
Here is all comes down to "but I like the sound".
Fine.
In my point of view this is the ultimate thorn-wall against progression.
But then progression in itself was already judged as an erratic way of life by some greek philosophers 2400+ years ago.
Which shines a philosophical spotlight on analog high-end audio.
Now - isn't that nice.....

Dertonarm, I wrote:

"That, is the million dollar question. Unless this greater lateral force can be proven to cause increased distortion or cartridge wear, it is really a non-issue outside of the theoretical realm"

Now, in this particular case, there are two possible outcomes to this "million dollar question": 1) the increased lateral force does not produce increased distortion and/or cartridge wear, 2) the increased lateral force does produce increased distortion and/or cartridge wear

If outcome #1 is true, then I think that such force is a non-issue and it all comes down to personal preference as to what sounds best.

But, if outcome #2 is true, then I(obviously) think that such force IS AN ISSUE beyond personal preference of sound. I don't think many people want to intentionally subject their cartridges to excessive wear/damage.

I hinted that I might contact manufacturers/repairers because they would be the best suited to judge if, and when, a cart is out of spec or damaged - not just from a technical perspective, but also from a statistical one because their sample pool is likely to much larger than that of an individual audiophile.

Darkmoebius, sorry, but I doubt that you will find a cartridge designer/manufacturer with as wide experience in real-world practical audio analog life as several A'goners like Raul, Dougdeacon, Dan_Ed, Syntax, Thuchan to name just a few.
If you want to know about the virtues of a new Ferrari (now Mercedes...) racing car you should better ask Michael Schumacher - he most likely can tell you much more than any of the cars designers ( because he actually drives the car - and he is a much better driver than any of the designers/engineers...).
Furthermore they rarely know about the working history of a cartridge they get for repair/exchange. As too many audiophiles do know too little about set-up ( I have seen about 350 cartridge/tonearm set-ups/alignments so far over the past 30 years in other audiophiles systems. Not 3 of them were actually correct in all parameters - so much for real-life experience) , damage by improper set-up is the rule - not the exception.

The answer to the "million dollar question" is so clear and obvious that there in fact is no question. The physical/mechanical situation - at least under working conditions on this planets surface - is a (sorry...) fact and as such out of real question.