I said I had won the bid on a JVC L5-E for $70. It was for my old boss who would know Garrard 401 and LP12. It needed rebuilding. I will be honest I just guessed what to do and got lucky as it seemed very broken. I couldn't say why taking it a part and putting it together was so effective.
The machine looks like it is all plastic. A piece of metal is has might be a type of radio metal. If so more exspenisve than silver in some grades. The arm looks like plastic. It isn't. All in all a bargain. Even the generic stylus works. The L3-E I bought for another friend looks slightly better made. I suspect marginally the 5-E sounds the best. The motor is said to be the same as TT-71. I posted this as I suspect for all of it's domestic engineering the arm might be an example of propper design. It sounds far too good to be an accident. The motor also has no obvious defect. The same can not be said of the Technics SP10, I am not joking. Snap them up for friends who love music and hate hi fi. Then you will enjoy musical evenings when you visit. My JVC friend said all the patents Technics used were JVC. I think that might be right as VHS certainly was. He said I should get a TT-81. I might do that and use my Schroeder arm with it.
The machine looks like it is all plastic. A piece of metal is has might be a type of radio metal. If so more exspenisve than silver in some grades. The arm looks like plastic. It isn't. All in all a bargain. Even the generic stylus works. The L3-E I bought for another friend looks slightly better made. I suspect marginally the 5-E sounds the best. The motor is said to be the same as TT-71. I posted this as I suspect for all of it's domestic engineering the arm might be an example of propper design. It sounds far too good to be an accident. The motor also has no obvious defect. The same can not be said of the Technics SP10, I am not joking. Snap them up for friends who love music and hate hi fi. Then you will enjoy musical evenings when you visit. My JVC friend said all the patents Technics used were JVC. I think that might be right as VHS certainly was. He said I should get a TT-81. I might do that and use my Schroeder arm with it.
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
have got a start on 2 arms. one tiger maple, another Hond mahog.
Last edited:
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
View image: IMG 20151119 222235
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
http://s27.postimg.org/dyfgoek9f/IMG_20151119_222411.jpg
The plan is to use the alum cylinder to support the lower magnet which will be set in a recess and brass screwed in. That alum will be set into the solid plinth.
Also set in the plinth will be the main 'arm hanger' with a rectangular mortise. It is a cutoff of a larger U shaped channel (see link below). So one can get two 'arm hangers' out of one pices (about $12 for the full piece).
one can buy a 6" section and get two pieces out of. it's quite beefy at 5/16" for the top 'shelf' hanger section and 5/8" for the vertical support section. Should be nice and stout to hang the thread off of, which whill be a multistrand fish line.
https://www.onlinemetals.com/merchant.cfm?pid=14708&step=4&showunits=inches&id=298&top_cat=60
the 'headshell' section has a piece of aluminum glue laminated in a saw kerf slot. This serves to stiffen a bit and also provides a clean set of slots for the screws and a ready made arm lift. because the piece is actually a thinned down metal headshell.
I will create a separate arm support that will be mounted separately.
If anyone has any criticisms or ideas please let me know so I can change before commiting but I think t'his will be an elegant and clean looking design.
the magnets are 12mm x4mm and N50
Last edited:
information about magnets
Hi Zeonrider,
Great job and good design, like it.
May i ask yo the diameter, thickness and number of magnets you have used either in bottom part and upper part?
Did you drill the hole in the uper magnet/s?
I face a problem on my DIY tone arm, the thread do not stay in the center of the hole despite everthing if perfect in line.
Thank you in advance for your kind answer, hae a nice sunday
Adelmo
Hi Zeonrider,
Great job and good design, like it.
May i ask yo the diameter, thickness and number of magnets you have used either in bottom part and upper part?
Did you drill the hole in the uper magnet/s?
I face a problem on my DIY tone arm, the thread do not stay in the center of the hole despite everthing if perfect in line.
Thank you in advance for your kind answer, hae a nice sunday
Adelmo
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
http://s30.postimg.org/ip0i5rqsx/fdf.jpg
Have spent many hours getting to this point and looks like a long way to go yet.
This is very rough stage at this point.
The arm seems to sit pretty nice with fairly smooth feel. The magnet strength is super strong, I have broken 6 magnets already from smashing together.
I wonder if this magnet strength is supposed to be so strong? There seems to be quite a bit of tension on the string,
Wish I knew how the arm was supposed to feel? can anyone try and describe what this type of arm feels like? should it have any side to side resistance for example? Should it feel like a standard arm or is this different?
I need to fine tune the magnets so that they are more parallel and closer and also need to decide on my top nut bias fixture
Alot of work yet to do!
Last edited:
Hi,
Good job!
Is anyone could kindly help me to get some answer to below questions:
May i ask yo the diameter, thickness and number of magnets you have used either in bottom part or upper part?
Did you drill the hole in the uper magnet/s?
I face a problem on my DIY tone arm, the thread do not stay in the center of the hole despite mechanically everthing is perfect in line and magnets are parallel
Thank you in advance for your kind answer, hae a nice sunday
Adelmo
Thanks for the information , i assume u use single magnet in lower and upper part. I was told that in upper part ,to avoid the string goes offset with hole center need 2 magnets.
Jn simple words the ratio in thickness between the lower magnet and upper magnet avoid ths problem.
I was wondering if other sucessful DIY have solved the problem in this way or other ways.
Tks n rgds
Adelmo
I'm not quite sure I follow what you are describing. But I used one magnet for top and bottom, Every diy magnetic arm I've seen only uses one top and one bottom as well..........
This magnet arrangement seems to work fine for aligning the two magnets. Meaning they self align just about perfect. The problem I have is getting the string to be perfectly in line with them. In other words, aligning the top hole and the way the string mounts is something I still have to figure out....
This magnet arrangement seems to work fine for aligning the two magnets. Meaning they self align just about perfect. The problem I have is getting the string to be perfectly in line with them. In other words, aligning the top hole and the way the string mounts is something I still have to figure out....
Last edited:
- Thanks!
- Diametar 6,36mm
- Тhickness 3,18mm
- Material NdFeB (Neodymium Iron Boron)
- 2 pcs
- Nope
Hi,
"Wish I knew how the arm was supposed to feel? can anyone try and describe what this type of arm feels like? should it have any side to side resistance for example? Should it feel like a standard arm or is this different?"
The magnets in the original develop as much as 14kg of attracting force(with minimal gap between magnets), so the "feel" of the bearing(front to back, side to side) should be stiff, not compliant. On the other hand, rotation around the armwand axis will be possible, albeit with a much higher restoring force tcompared to regular unipivot bearing tonearms.
All of the latest attempts published here look like they will exhibit a pronounced restoring force("stable balance"), causing VTF to change with VTA considerably(not a desirable trait...)
All the best for the upcoming NEW YEAR!
Frank
"Wish I knew how the arm was supposed to feel? can anyone try and describe what this type of arm feels like? should it have any side to side resistance for example? Should it feel like a standard arm or is this different?"
The magnets in the original develop as much as 14kg of attracting force(with minimal gap between magnets), so the "feel" of the bearing(front to back, side to side) should be stiff, not compliant. On the other hand, rotation around the armwand axis will be possible, albeit with a much higher restoring force tcompared to regular unipivot bearing tonearms.
All of the latest attempts published here look like they will exhibit a pronounced restoring force("stable balance"), causing VTF to change with VTA considerably(not a desirable trait...)
All the best for the upcoming NEW YEAR!
Frank
Ok thanks for the info. My setup is quite stable at the magnet both lateral and front to back. And the arm wand is quite loose but it is more resistive than my rega (it sounds like this is to be expected)
The main issue I have is the distance of the two magnets from each other. When it gets to about a quarter inch it really starts to grab (i'm guessing at least 14kg) and so I can only imagine what it would be like if I got down to a business card space (as is desired from what i've read). But when the magnets start to get that close they really want to clamp to each other and I'm not sure I can get them much closer than 1/8" or so.....[FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif]
I can imagine this will be an issue with the arm I'm building. There is some resistance in the vertical plane. Wouldn't this force get more severe if the magnets get closer (business card distance)? I wonder
this is taken from a phantom tonearm. discusses 'stable balance'...
[/FONT]STABLE BALANCE, normally seen in laboratory scales, occurs when the CG (center of gravity) of the moving system is placed BELOW the pivot point. This system resists a change in postion; when a tonearm utlizes this type of system, and such a tonearm is displaced from its preferred rest position, it will generate an immediate and opposing force which tries to return to that same position.
UNSTABLE BALANCE, when the center of gravity is placed ABOVE the pivot point, is entirely useless for tonearm design, and will exhibit serious problems, including reduced tracking force as the arm is raised.
The third, and most desirable system for tonearms, is NEUTRAL BALANCE. With this system, the pivot point and the Center of Gravity of the moving system are in the same plane. When the arm is raised or lowered, there is no opposing force trying to return the arm to a rest position; the pivoting system doesn't really know or care if the stylus is at the record surface level or a half-inch above or below it; as a result, there is no opposing force to the arm as it is traversing record deflection during play. The only downward tracking force is that of the adjustable counterweight, which remains a constant. --
Previously, all true unipivots - that is, those with a single contact point for the bearing and NO secondary stablizing surfaces, bearings, etc. - required the use of side weights or a significantly lowered counterweight in order to provide stability. And generally speaking, those arms with a secondary stabilizer point require a lowered center of gravity in order to provide constant contact with the stabilizer guide bearing.
The drawback to both these conditions is that this design becomes a Stable Balance system, which will cause a tonearm to have a preferred rest position and always tries to return to this point. ANY time the tonearm is raised, as in tracking warped records, it results an immediate and equally opposing force that tries to push the arm back to its rest position. The higher the warp, the more counter-force is applied.
A tonearm with Stable Balance can be identified by measuring the tracking force at the record surface level and again at a raised position above the record. If the tracking force INCREASES at the higher position, the arm has Stable Balance. Our own previous designs - the best we could make at that time - also had this limitation due to the use of side weights to provide lateral stability.
There are three types of balance for a unipivot tone arm assembly: unstable balance; stable balance; and neutral balance. Unstable balance positions the pivot fulcrum below the center of gravity and is unsuitable for any tone arm application. A tone arm with unstable balance will never track properly in the vertical plane. A tone arm with unstable balance will have a decreasing tracking force as the arm is lifted as when playing a warped record. The tone arm will have a tendency to continue traveling upwards at the peak of the warp, possibly even leaving the phonograph record surface entirely, rather than staying in the proper playing position.
Stable balance positions the pivot fulcrum above the center of gravity of the moving system. This kind of balance is useful in scales or other weight measuring systems. With this system any deflection of the moving system creates an immediate and equally strong opposing force with tries to right the assembly to its original rest position. When playing a warped record, the tracking force will constantly change with the vertical position of the tone arm. This in turn will change the stylus rake angle (the angle defined by a vertical line from the centerline of the stylus tip relative to the phonograph record groove) as the suspension mechanism of the cartridge is flexed due to these changing forces. The net effect of this will be that the micro-dimensions of the stylus tip tracing the phonograph record groove walls will also change angle. This will cause an immediate change in the reproduced sound, negatively affecting such functions as frequency response, channel separation and other spatial characteristics etched into the record groove. Unipivot tone arm assemblies are traditionally set to stable balance by adjustment of the counterweights.
Neutral balance, where the pivot point and the center of gravity share a common line, is the preferred method of balance for a tone arm. The up and down motion from the stylus riding over warped phonograph records will not create a strong restoring force with neutral balance. Instead, only the constant, downward tracking gravity-applied force by displacement of the balancing weight will be observed. The stylus contact pressure remains constant regardless of whether the tone arm is tracking a flat phonograph record or one with warps which raises the tone are upward. The stylus rake angle will remain unaffected resulting in more accurate tracking of the grooves. However, with neutral balance there is no restoring force around the lateral axis to maintain proper stylus position with respect to the phonograph record. The lack of lateral stabilization and damping has been the drawback to setting unipivot tone arms in the preferential neutral balance configuration. The present version of this invention provides the lacking lateral stabilization and damping through a novel magnetic stabilization system.
A tone arm with an angled (offset) head shell will exhibit a tendency to swing toward the center of a rotating record. This is caused by the vectors of the rotating forces involved in the overhang (distance of the stylus tip extending past the center of the record) combined with the offset angle. Anti-skate systems are devices which apply a countering force to the tone arm effectively canceling out the natural forces tending to “skate” the arm toward the center. The goal of an anti-skate system is to apply the correct amount of continually changing force at any position on the phonograph record. The magnetic stabilization system provides a unique method of applying anti-skating forces that vary according to the position of the stylus over the phonograph record.
s will become evident from a reading of the following specification and claims, the novel tone arm magnetic stabilization and damping system achieves a method of lateral stabilization achieving neutral balance, as well as anti-skating, and thus avoiding the undesirable effects associated with stable balance. SUMMARY
The present invention is directed to a method and apparatus that satisfies the need for achieving neutral balance and stabilization for unipivot tone arm assemblies. The apparatus I invented comprises two magnets and a rotatable support member. The first magnet is mounted to the tone arm assembly housing assembly. The second magnet is mounted to a freely rotatable support member, the magnet height and distance from the first magnet may be adjustable to achieve the desired lateral stabilization for neutral balance. The two magnets are aligned along an imaginary horizontal line extending sideways from the housing assembly. The first and second magnets are separated by a gap of air and are not in physical contact. Lateral stabilization is achieved by the attractive magnetic force between the magnets. The support member may use a low friction ball bearing assembly for freer rotation around the fixed tone arm support shaft or assembly base.
[FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif]
[/FONT]
The main issue I have is the distance of the two magnets from each other. When it gets to about a quarter inch it really starts to grab (i'm guessing at least 14kg) and so I can only imagine what it would be like if I got down to a business card space (as is desired from what i've read). But when the magnets start to get that close they really want to clamp to each other and I'm not sure I can get them much closer than 1/8" or so.....[FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif]
I can imagine this will be an issue with the arm I'm building. There is some resistance in the vertical plane. Wouldn't this force get more severe if the magnets get closer (business card distance)? I wonder
this is taken from a phantom tonearm. discusses 'stable balance'...
[/FONT]STABLE BALANCE, normally seen in laboratory scales, occurs when the CG (center of gravity) of the moving system is placed BELOW the pivot point. This system resists a change in postion; when a tonearm utlizes this type of system, and such a tonearm is displaced from its preferred rest position, it will generate an immediate and opposing force which tries to return to that same position.
UNSTABLE BALANCE, when the center of gravity is placed ABOVE the pivot point, is entirely useless for tonearm design, and will exhibit serious problems, including reduced tracking force as the arm is raised.
The third, and most desirable system for tonearms, is NEUTRAL BALANCE. With this system, the pivot point and the Center of Gravity of the moving system are in the same plane. When the arm is raised or lowered, there is no opposing force trying to return the arm to a rest position; the pivoting system doesn't really know or care if the stylus is at the record surface level or a half-inch above or below it; as a result, there is no opposing force to the arm as it is traversing record deflection during play. The only downward tracking force is that of the adjustable counterweight, which remains a constant. --
Previously, all true unipivots - that is, those with a single contact point for the bearing and NO secondary stablizing surfaces, bearings, etc. - required the use of side weights or a significantly lowered counterweight in order to provide stability. And generally speaking, those arms with a secondary stabilizer point require a lowered center of gravity in order to provide constant contact with the stabilizer guide bearing.
The drawback to both these conditions is that this design becomes a Stable Balance system, which will cause a tonearm to have a preferred rest position and always tries to return to this point. ANY time the tonearm is raised, as in tracking warped records, it results an immediate and equally opposing force that tries to push the arm back to its rest position. The higher the warp, the more counter-force is applied.
A tonearm with Stable Balance can be identified by measuring the tracking force at the record surface level and again at a raised position above the record. If the tracking force INCREASES at the higher position, the arm has Stable Balance. Our own previous designs - the best we could make at that time - also had this limitation due to the use of side weights to provide lateral stability.
There are three types of balance for a unipivot tone arm assembly: unstable balance; stable balance; and neutral balance. Unstable balance positions the pivot fulcrum below the center of gravity and is unsuitable for any tone arm application. A tone arm with unstable balance will never track properly in the vertical plane. A tone arm with unstable balance will have a decreasing tracking force as the arm is lifted as when playing a warped record. The tone arm will have a tendency to continue traveling upwards at the peak of the warp, possibly even leaving the phonograph record surface entirely, rather than staying in the proper playing position.
Stable balance positions the pivot fulcrum above the center of gravity of the moving system. This kind of balance is useful in scales or other weight measuring systems. With this system any deflection of the moving system creates an immediate and equally strong opposing force with tries to right the assembly to its original rest position. When playing a warped record, the tracking force will constantly change with the vertical position of the tone arm. This in turn will change the stylus rake angle (the angle defined by a vertical line from the centerline of the stylus tip relative to the phonograph record groove) as the suspension mechanism of the cartridge is flexed due to these changing forces. The net effect of this will be that the micro-dimensions of the stylus tip tracing the phonograph record groove walls will also change angle. This will cause an immediate change in the reproduced sound, negatively affecting such functions as frequency response, channel separation and other spatial characteristics etched into the record groove. Unipivot tone arm assemblies are traditionally set to stable balance by adjustment of the counterweights.
Neutral balance, where the pivot point and the center of gravity share a common line, is the preferred method of balance for a tone arm. The up and down motion from the stylus riding over warped phonograph records will not create a strong restoring force with neutral balance. Instead, only the constant, downward tracking gravity-applied force by displacement of the balancing weight will be observed. The stylus contact pressure remains constant regardless of whether the tone arm is tracking a flat phonograph record or one with warps which raises the tone are upward. The stylus rake angle will remain unaffected resulting in more accurate tracking of the grooves. However, with neutral balance there is no restoring force around the lateral axis to maintain proper stylus position with respect to the phonograph record. The lack of lateral stabilization and damping has been the drawback to setting unipivot tone arms in the preferential neutral balance configuration. The present version of this invention provides the lacking lateral stabilization and damping through a novel magnetic stabilization system.
A tone arm with an angled (offset) head shell will exhibit a tendency to swing toward the center of a rotating record. This is caused by the vectors of the rotating forces involved in the overhang (distance of the stylus tip extending past the center of the record) combined with the offset angle. Anti-skate systems are devices which apply a countering force to the tone arm effectively canceling out the natural forces tending to “skate” the arm toward the center. The goal of an anti-skate system is to apply the correct amount of continually changing force at any position on the phonograph record. The magnetic stabilization system provides a unique method of applying anti-skating forces that vary according to the position of the stylus over the phonograph record.
s will become evident from a reading of the following specification and claims, the novel tone arm magnetic stabilization and damping system achieves a method of lateral stabilization achieving neutral balance, as well as anti-skating, and thus avoiding the undesirable effects associated with stable balance. SUMMARY
The present invention is directed to a method and apparatus that satisfies the need for achieving neutral balance and stabilization for unipivot tone arm assemblies. The apparatus I invented comprises two magnets and a rotatable support member. The first magnet is mounted to the tone arm assembly housing assembly. The second magnet is mounted to a freely rotatable support member, the magnet height and distance from the first magnet may be adjustable to achieve the desired lateral stabilization for neutral balance. The two magnets are aligned along an imaginary horizontal line extending sideways from the housing assembly. The first and second magnets are separated by a gap of air and are not in physical contact. Lateral stabilization is achieved by the attractive magnetic force between the magnets. The support member may use a low friction ball bearing assembly for freer rotation around the fixed tone arm support shaft or assembly base.
[FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif]
[/FONT]
Last edited:
Hi again,
Your thread is attached too far above the magnet that sits in the armwand, therefore the arm exhibits a "stable balance" behaviour, getting more pronounced as the gap gets closer(due to increase in attraction, not due to change in geometric layout).
Increase the diameter of the magnets you use or lower the attachment point of your suspension thread.
One can also use the amount of mass offset of the counterweight to "adjust" the behaviour of the arm. Most diyers seem to believe that a counterweight with a very low COG is a good thing. I would have to disagree... but one needs an offset-drilled counterweight to facilitate azimuth adjustment. Unless one can rotate the headshell against the armwand axis.
Cheerio,
Frank
Your thread is attached too far above the magnet that sits in the armwand, therefore the arm exhibits a "stable balance" behaviour, getting more pronounced as the gap gets closer(due to increase in attraction, not due to change in geometric layout).
Increase the diameter of the magnets you use or lower the attachment point of your suspension thread.
One can also use the amount of mass offset of the counterweight to "adjust" the behaviour of the arm. Most diyers seem to believe that a counterweight with a very low COG is a good thing. I would have to disagree... but one needs an offset-drilled counterweight to facilitate azimuth adjustment. Unless one can rotate the headshell against the armwand axis.
Cheerio,
Frank
Hi,
"For the tonearm like this, do you think the center of pivot may shift? If the center of pivot shifts, I think it will change the sound."
What exactly do you mean by "center of pivot"? And why would there be a change in sound(define sound, please)?
The attachment point of the thread is not the sole pivot point, as was discussed many posts earlier. The fluxlines form another connection(the thread being the main connection) that results in the pivot point for vertical movement to be below the bottom magnet. Unless you give the facing surfaces of your magnets a different shape... like a pin, a ball, a cup, ....
Best,
Frank
"For the tonearm like this, do you think the center of pivot may shift? If the center of pivot shifts, I think it will change the sound."
What exactly do you mean by "center of pivot"? And why would there be a change in sound(define sound, please)?
The attachment point of the thread is not the sole pivot point, as was discussed many posts earlier. The fluxlines form another connection(the thread being the main connection) that results in the pivot point for vertical movement to be below the bottom magnet. Unless you give the facing surfaces of your magnets a different shape... like a pin, a ball, a cup, ....
Best,
Frank
Hi Frank,
Let me put the question differently for better understanding. Actually, I am asking you how stiff is the bearing. I understand the attracting force between the magnets is 14 kg. But I looked the actual arm and pushed the arm wand slightly, I was not sure if there were free of side movements on the bearing. If the side movements exist, it will have effect on the playback sound.
Regards,
Jim
Let me put the question differently for better understanding. Actually, I am asking you how stiff is the bearing. I understand the attracting force between the magnets is 14 kg. But I looked the actual arm and pushed the arm wand slightly, I was not sure if there were free of side movements on the bearing. If the side movements exist, it will have effect on the playback sound.
Regards,
Jim
Hi Jim,
The moving part(s) of a conventional tonearm has(have) a mass of about 2-300gr. If it employs ballrace bearings that require the slightest amount of play to move(keyword: bearing chatter), you can imagine that displacing a mass ~50 times higher, damped through induction of eddy currents would result in less of an impact on the sound. In fact, many other factors are just as, if not more important...
A unipivot bearing arm will typically be devoid of bearing play, but exhibit an ability to rotate around the front-to-back-axis. The relative position of the generator will therefore be able to change, and so will the vectors of velocity, generating the output signal.
I'll stop here, but why don't you go back to earlier posts in this thread and you will grasp the operational principle of this type of bearing. Then again, it's likely getting harder and harder to get to the core info. Maybe the thread's too long by now?
Cheerio,
Frank
The moving part(s) of a conventional tonearm has(have) a mass of about 2-300gr. If it employs ballrace bearings that require the slightest amount of play to move(keyword: bearing chatter), you can imagine that displacing a mass ~50 times higher, damped through induction of eddy currents would result in less of an impact on the sound. In fact, many other factors are just as, if not more important...
A unipivot bearing arm will typically be devoid of bearing play, but exhibit an ability to rotate around the front-to-back-axis. The relative position of the generator will therefore be able to change, and so will the vectors of velocity, generating the output signal.
I'll stop here, but why don't you go back to earlier posts in this thread and you will grasp the operational principle of this type of bearing. Then again, it's likely getting harder and harder to get to the core info. Maybe the thread's too long by now?
Cheerio,
Frank
Hi Frank,
Thank you for replying! Sorry if I missed some of info in previous posts.
I have another question about your tonearm. On a regular pivot arm, there is a single contact point or there are four contact points. The resonance caused by cartridge movements and transferred through arm wand is mostly damped by the bearing, i.e. the contact point or points. In other words, it is mechanically grounded. But on your arm, the arm wand is suspended in the air. How do you deal with the resonance? Can magnetic bearing damp the resonance effectively? Wood arm wand may help to absorb some of energy, but in my opinion, wood will certainly colorize the sound.
Regards,
Jim
Thank you for replying! Sorry if I missed some of info in previous posts.
I have another question about your tonearm. On a regular pivot arm, there is a single contact point or there are four contact points. The resonance caused by cartridge movements and transferred through arm wand is mostly damped by the bearing, i.e. the contact point or points. In other words, it is mechanically grounded. But on your arm, the arm wand is suspended in the air. How do you deal with the resonance? Can magnetic bearing damp the resonance effectively? Wood arm wand may help to absorb some of energy, but in my opinion, wood will certainly colorize the sound.
Regards,
Jim
Hi Jim,
There are also dual pivot arms, such as the Moerch DP6 and many variants...
It is not in the bearing where any resonance exited by the cartridge while tracing a groove is"damped". How would that be possible, say, in a unipivot?
In my arms, the wand isn't suspended in air. It "weighs" a virtual 14kgs and, yes, relies on the internal damping of the materials used in conjunction with the way the individual elements are connected to each other for energy "management"(surpression of resonances, standing waves or reflections).
If, as you wrote, wood helps to absorb some of the energy, how can it colorize the sound more than a material that has much lower inherent damping, such as stainless steel, aluminum or even simple carbon fiber tubes?
Wood isn't wood, isn't wood, isn't w... chose a suitable species, shape, treatment(impregnation, sealing, heat treatment...) and you have an extremely wide range of parameters at hand to alter/influence the base properties of a given type of wood.
To summarize; Some woods are entirely unsuitable for use as armwands or other structural elements, other types are vastly superior to many a man made material.
Good night!
Frank
There are also dual pivot arms, such as the Moerch DP6 and many variants...
It is not in the bearing where any resonance exited by the cartridge while tracing a groove is"damped". How would that be possible, say, in a unipivot?
In my arms, the wand isn't suspended in air. It "weighs" a virtual 14kgs and, yes, relies on the internal damping of the materials used in conjunction with the way the individual elements are connected to each other for energy "management"(surpression of resonances, standing waves or reflections).
If, as you wrote, wood helps to absorb some of the energy, how can it colorize the sound more than a material that has much lower inherent damping, such as stainless steel, aluminum or even simple carbon fiber tubes?
Wood isn't wood, isn't wood, isn't w... chose a suitable species, shape, treatment(impregnation, sealing, heat treatment...) and you have an extremely wide range of parameters at hand to alter/influence the base properties of a given type of wood.
To summarize; Some woods are entirely unsuitable for use as armwands or other structural elements, other types are vastly superior to many a man made material.
Good night!
Frank