This may seem like a basic question but what are the advantages and disadvantages of high effective mass tonearms? I am aware of the need to pair them with high compliance cartridges and that they do not handle warps as well as low mass arms. Are there any others that need consideration?
My beloved AT1005II arm was due to see service in a new build TT but I am wondering if a lower mass arm wouldn't be a better choice for what will be general mixed disk use. I am unlikely to go the moving coil route for the foreseeable future.
My beloved AT1005II arm was due to see service in a new build TT but I am wondering if a lower mass arm wouldn't be a better choice for what will be general mixed disk use. I am unlikely to go the moving coil route for the foreseeable future.
Hi,
high compliance cartridges generally suit low effective mass arms.
low compliance cartridges generally suit high effective mass arms.
at the mass/compliance resonance the output from the cartridge is very far from typical audio frequency response output levels.
If this is a peak in response at resonance then you want that peak and the slopes/flanks to be far away from the LF audio band.
But you also want the peak well away from record warp/eccentricity frequencies.
A happy medium between these two is ~ 8Hz to 10Hz for the mass/compliance resonance.
You select or adjust the arm effective mass to give that resonant frequency with your chosen cartridge LF compliance.
Beware, the LF compliance can be very different from the audio band compliance.
BTW,
it is relatively easy to add effective mass to a low mass or medium mass arm.
high compliance cartridges generally suit low effective mass arms.
low compliance cartridges generally suit high effective mass arms.
at the mass/compliance resonance the output from the cartridge is very far from typical audio frequency response output levels.
If this is a peak in response at resonance then you want that peak and the slopes/flanks to be far away from the LF audio band.
But you also want the peak well away from record warp/eccentricity frequencies.
A happy medium between these two is ~ 8Hz to 10Hz for the mass/compliance resonance.
You select or adjust the arm effective mass to give that resonant frequency with your chosen cartridge LF compliance.
Beware, the LF compliance can be very different from the audio band compliance.
BTW,
it is relatively easy to add effective mass to a low mass or medium mass arm.
Last edited:
Thanks for the reply and yes, it did help. As it stands, I have a high effective mass arm and thus will have to partner it with a suitable compliance cartridge. This is not really a problem and I am sure I can get a good match either by calculation or experimentation. Aside from the resonance issue, is there anything else to consider when employing a highish mass arm?
The reason I am keen to get as much information as possible now is because the turntable build will be very much tailored to the arm I settle on.
Don't get me wrong, I love the AT arm and am more than happy to employ it. However, if something such as a Rega RB250 etc would be a better choice for me then I would consider trading in the old arm.
The reason I am keen to get as much information as possible now is because the turntable build will be very much tailored to the arm I settle on.
Don't get me wrong, I love the AT arm and am more than happy to employ it. However, if something such as a Rega RB250 etc would be a better choice for me then I would consider trading in the old arm.
Hi,
Two good matches for your arm :
Budget :
Audio Technica AT 95 E / AT95E Tonabnehmer - 20,90 EUR
Not so budget :
Thakker AT 95 HE / AT95HE Tonabnehmer - 59,90 EUR
(This a hyper elliptical tipped cartridge.)
rgds, sreten.
Two good matches for your arm :
Budget :
Audio Technica AT 95 E / AT95E Tonabnehmer - 20,90 EUR
Not so budget :
Thakker AT 95 HE / AT95HE Tonabnehmer - 59,90 EUR
(This a hyper elliptical tipped cartridge.)
rgds, sreten.
Last edited:
Denon DL-103 or DL103R might be worth considering as well. Suitable transformers like the Partridge 977 are not too expensive (eBay.co.uk) if the pre does not have LOMC capable inputs.
Not sure how these fit your budget requirements particularly if you need the SUTs which have increased in cost 50% since I bought mine this spring...
Transformers here: http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/PARTRIDGE-MOV...rntable_Parts_Accessories&hash=item588bacf3af
FWIW: I'm currently using a Zu/Denon DL-103 on my SME 3009 Series II using Partridge 977 transformers for step up duties and really like the combination - hence my recommendation.
Not sure how these fit your budget requirements particularly if you need the SUTs which have increased in cost 50% since I bought mine this spring...
Transformers here: http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/PARTRIDGE-MOV...rntable_Parts_Accessories&hash=item588bacf3af
FWIW: I'm currently using a Zu/Denon DL-103 on my SME 3009 Series II using Partridge 977 transformers for step up duties and really like the combination - hence my recommendation.
Last edited:
It is a long time since I thought about these matters, but I seem to remember:
- low mass arms can be more subject to arm resonances colouring the sound (not the subsonic arm-tip resonances but the arm itself ringing at audio freqs)
- high mass arms can distort the vinyl as it has more work to do
So the choice (assuming in each case a suitable cartridge compliance) seems to be between colouration and distortion.
- low mass arms can be more subject to arm resonances colouring the sound (not the subsonic arm-tip resonances but the arm itself ringing at audio freqs)
- high mass arms can distort the vinyl as it has more work to do
So the choice (assuming in each case a suitable cartridge compliance) seems to be between colouration and distortion.
Not seen any real evidence to support that conjecture provided that everything is in good working order, and records are kept clean. Certain models of the Ortofon SPU track at forces well in excess of 4gms, and no one seems to complain of undue record wear.
I run a DL-103 tracking at 2.5gms or so on fairly high mass arm. No signs of wear out so far. I play a lot of records quite repetitively... (I know my bad..
)I have records I purchased nearly 40yrs ago that were played on turntables with ceramic cartridges tracking at 4gms and above, no audible problems either. Then they were played with an inherited M3D in a very high mass arm tracking at >5gms on an early Garrard stereo changer (probably an RC-121 or similar) , and again no evidence of issues. The M3D at least sounded better IMHO than the inexpensive garden variety Shures, Goldrings, and Ortofons I used subsequently.
Last edited:
Thanks for the replies, they have convinced me to keep the arm. I was very nearly sucked into the "new is better" camp which is not my usual view. Having completed much of the design for the new T/T, even building a mock up to test the effectiveness of the motor decoupling design, I didn't really want to change anything now. I think I just needed nudging back onto my original path which this has done nicely, thankyou all.
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.