All,
(admitting i did never try one) i have some objections to its design:
1st,
the tolerances between slider and rail tube could be critical, particulary if the gap becomes more and more narrow due to tar/nicotine deposit. On the VA i have read comments that this actually happens: the slider gets stuck due to deposit on the inner surface of the rail tube.
2nd,
the vertical pivot axis is way above the record surface and
3rd,
the effective arm length is small.
Those two properties together make the arm produce audible speed constance imperfections on record warps and pressing bubbles: the stylus movement is far from being (almost) vertical and the stylus height position change yields a horizontal position change. After all, relative stylus2groove velocity is all that counts and if it is not rock-solid stable, you'll hear it. Been there, done that.
4th,
to work at low friction levels, this slider bearing has to have play towards the rail tube. I do not observe anything like enough torsional inertia and/or weight and/or supporting width to let the tiny arm stabilize the cartridge against the rotation around the azimuth axis induced by the groove, particularly on rough transients.
I would expect cheap/poor sonics from this cheap/poor design.
I am just thinking about my own airless design (see website)... my ball bearings have no noticeable play, they support the slider in 4 points approx. 100 mm apart and the arm has its vertical pivot axis approximately (exactly for VTA being level and the cartridge having 17mm height) in the plane of the record surface
... and the stick/slip behaviour of my bearing structure (which has to carry 180mm effective arm length including the counterweight necessary for that and the weight of the carriage with bearings) is giving me the creeps. It is frightening me so much that i spend all my time for finding out if i can cram a Ladegaards style bearing into the same space.
I more and more get the opinion that a passive linear tracker with mechanical bearing is an inherently poor solution. Why? Because i know how sensible sonics are in respect to improper antiskating/lateral force bias balance. Because i had the great luck to obtain one of those fancy Orsonic Side Force Checkers and because i found that the side force checker's sensitivity is --just--enough to display audible antiskating force imbalances. But it is sensitive enough to get its dial needle hit the full scale stop if the cantilever is gently stroked by the tiniest artist's paintbrush available.
So:
a mechanical linear tracker will follow the groove, no doubt about this, no dicussion needed, this has been prooved. But the cartridge's cantilever will experience considerable side force all the time and the arm bearing's stick/slip behaviour will bring a side force checker mounted into the headshell to full scale reading all the time.
And i am not fine with that. I expect more from a tonearm.
Agreed, all this is theory but backupped by 1st experiments. To get a real comparison, i think, i will have to build one of each, the mechanical one and the Ladegaard one. But i already know the Ladegaard air bearing wins hands down.
(admitting i did never try one) i have some objections to its design:
1st,
the tolerances between slider and rail tube could be critical, particulary if the gap becomes more and more narrow due to tar/nicotine deposit. On the VA i have read comments that this actually happens: the slider gets stuck due to deposit on the inner surface of the rail tube.
2nd,
the vertical pivot axis is way above the record surface and
3rd,
the effective arm length is small.
Those two properties together make the arm produce audible speed constance imperfections on record warps and pressing bubbles: the stylus movement is far from being (almost) vertical and the stylus height position change yields a horizontal position change. After all, relative stylus2groove velocity is all that counts and if it is not rock-solid stable, you'll hear it. Been there, done that.
4th,
to work at low friction levels, this slider bearing has to have play towards the rail tube. I do not observe anything like enough torsional inertia and/or weight and/or supporting width to let the tiny arm stabilize the cartridge against the rotation around the azimuth axis induced by the groove, particularly on rough transients.
I would expect cheap/poor sonics from this cheap/poor design.
I am just thinking about my own airless design (see website)... my ball bearings have no noticeable play, they support the slider in 4 points approx. 100 mm apart and the arm has its vertical pivot axis approximately (exactly for VTA being level and the cartridge having 17mm height) in the plane of the record surface
... and the stick/slip behaviour of my bearing structure (which has to carry 180mm effective arm length including the counterweight necessary for that and the weight of the carriage with bearings) is giving me the creeps. It is frightening me so much that i spend all my time for finding out if i can cram a Ladegaards style bearing into the same space.
I more and more get the opinion that a passive linear tracker with mechanical bearing is an inherently poor solution. Why? Because i know how sensible sonics are in respect to improper antiskating/lateral force bias balance. Because i had the great luck to obtain one of those fancy Orsonic Side Force Checkers and because i found that the side force checker's sensitivity is --just--enough to display audible antiskating force imbalances. But it is sensitive enough to get its dial needle hit the full scale stop if the cantilever is gently stroked by the tiniest artist's paintbrush available.
So:
a mechanical linear tracker will follow the groove, no doubt about this, no dicussion needed, this has been prooved. But the cartridge's cantilever will experience considerable side force all the time and the arm bearing's stick/slip behaviour will bring a side force checker mounted into the headshell to full scale reading all the time.
And i am not fine with that. I expect more from a tonearm.
Agreed, all this is theory but backupped by 1st experiments. To get a real comparison, i think, i will have to build one of each, the mechanical one and the Ladegaard one. But i already know the Ladegaard air bearing wins hands down.
Hi,
Sure, all the reasoning against mechanical tangential bearings brought up in the previous post are well known and are the raison d'etre for air bearing designs and µ-processor controlled ones.
IMHO no amount of lateral compensation force will ever be right at the entire travel across the record because this is a variable angle force not a constant one, add the inertia of the bearings and you're into the deep end.
If you absolutely must use mechanical bearings than a three point design, one point making firm contact, the other two damped, provides better energy evacuation than a four point carriage but that's a fine-tune in case someone gets the thing to work properly in the first place.
For this to work it probably needs to hang off the rails, not sit on top of it, much like the Goldmund T3 design and it will still be a nightmare as the lateral forces will even try and succeed, to skew the carriage sideways.
Any way you look at it, it's a nightmare to get working and requires a dedicated masochist to design. (No offense Dice45)
So, if it makes anyone feel any better or worse about the approach I don't know but from my experience with the design of the T3 I just know this is as close to impossible to crack as I can imagine it.
Now, has anyone ever listened to that arm?
Cheers,
Sure, all the reasoning against mechanical tangential bearings brought up in the previous post are well known and are the raison d'etre for air bearing designs and µ-processor controlled ones.
IMHO no amount of lateral compensation force will ever be right at the entire travel across the record because this is a variable angle force not a constant one, add the inertia of the bearings and you're into the deep end.
If you absolutely must use mechanical bearings than a three point design, one point making firm contact, the other two damped, provides better energy evacuation than a four point carriage but that's a fine-tune in case someone gets the thing to work properly in the first place.
For this to work it probably needs to hang off the rails, not sit on top of it, much like the Goldmund T3 design and it will still be a nightmare as the lateral forces will even try and succeed, to skew the carriage sideways.
Any way you look at it, it's a nightmare to get working and requires a dedicated masochist to design. (No offense Dice45)
So, if it makes anyone feel any better or worse about the approach I don't know but from my experience with the design of the T3 I just know this is as close to impossible to crack as I can imagine it.
Now, has anyone ever listened to that arm?
Cheers,
Hi,
Actually I meant that other arm, the Opus 3 Cantus.
I suspect that's more to do with the cartridge and electronics.
The arm is not without flaws but I would most certainly not accuse it of being cold and lifeless.
Problem is you'd probably need a training course to set it up properly and extract the best of it.
Cheers,
Actually I meant that other arm, the Opus 3 Cantus.
I suspect that's more to do with the cartridge and electronics.
The arm is not without flaws but I would most certainly not accuse it of being cold and lifeless.
Problem is you'd probably need a training course to set it up properly and extract the best of it.
Cheers,
T3f
Cartridge was a vdH Grasshopper White Beauty SPX custom made to work on a parallel tracking arm (stiffer suspension, shorter cantilever, shorter coils and an output of 0.3mV).
MC-prepre was a diy Threshold M1.
Preamp was an ARSP15 and power amps were 2 diy ML monoblocks.
So, where was the COLD coming from?
Nick
Cartridge was a vdH Grasshopper White Beauty SPX custom made to work on a parallel tracking arm (stiffer suspension, shorter cantilever, shorter coils and an output of 0.3mV).
MC-prepre was a diy Threshold M1.
Preamp was an ARSP15 and power amps were 2 diy ML monoblocks.
So, where was the COLD coming from?
Nick
Hi,
Maybe someone forgot to close the door of the fridge?
Seriously, short of trying out a dozen of combinations with that gear you mentioned and some other stuff in an attempt to isolate the source of this cold sound, how can one tell?
A tonearm, like anything else in the reproduction chain, should be neutral in sound.
I know, nothing ever is but saying a T3F is a cold sounding arm?
Don't think so...
Kali nichta,
Maybe someone forgot to close the door of the fridge?
Seriously, short of trying out a dozen of combinations with that gear you mentioned and some other stuff in an attempt to isolate the source of this cold sound, how can one tell?
A tonearm, like anything else in the reproduction chain, should be neutral in sound.
I know, nothing ever is but saying a T3F is a cold sounding arm?
Don't think so...
Kali nichta,
I saw and heard the Cantus arm in operation at a show (Manchester). I didnt listen long enough to really pass any judgement on its sonic abilities - afterall the whole system was unknown to me - other than to say it didnt sound at any disadvantage to the other vinyl systems there (Blue Pearl aside).
One thing of interest though, the record being played had a badly offcentre hole and the lateral deviation per rev was quite severe - it had no percievable effect on the sound or visual effect on the stylus cantilever.
One thing of interest though, the record being played had a badly offcentre hole and the lateral deviation per rev was quite severe - it had no percievable effect on the sound or visual effect on the stylus cantilever.
fdegrove,
i don't agree with you completely.
1st,
the arm should not hang like the Goldmund or the Cantus. The arm should have its vertical pivot at record level and how then can it hang?
2nd,
probably a lateral force compensation cannot ever work properly and the lateral force will vary due to the groove being variable, agreed. But this is no reason to skip the task.
TME a pivoted arm needs skating compensation: the lateral force vector has to be either zero or very small but in any case the cantilever has to be deflected edgewards as few as possible but not spindlewards.
The force vector pointing spindlewards (equivalent to skating overcompensation) IMO leads to a dead sound without any perceivable µdynamics.
The cartridge cannot tell if it is mounted in a pivoted or linear tracking arm, it just experiences lateral force, period.
So if it is mounted in a classical passive linear tracker like the Air Tangent, its stylus experiences a lateral force deflecting the cantilever spindlewards. And it will punish you most probably by the mentioned dead sonics.
If now the linear tracking tonearm is able by any means to provide a lateral force biasing, one can adjust this bias force to a value a little bit more than compensating the transport force:
the tonearm's slider then always is a little bit more eager to approach the lead-out groove / spindle than the (variable) groove pitch wants to permit and as a result the stylus puts a bit more pressure on the inner groove wall and on the outer one and the cantilever is a teenyweeny bit deflected edgewards.
No question i want this pressure difference to eb as small as possible but i want the inner groove to win. As i do with the pivoted arm.
So: a lateral force compensation which is a little bit overdoing its task is just what i want.
Oh and before i forget it: what i described above is a systematic imperfection inherent to passive linear trackers. No matter if they work with an air bearing or with a mechanical bearing ... just the needed forces are different.
fdegrove said:
i don't agree with you completely.
1st,
the arm should not hang like the Goldmund or the Cantus. The arm should have its vertical pivot at record level and how then can it hang?
2nd,
probably a lateral force compensation cannot ever work properly and the lateral force will vary due to the groove being variable, agreed. But this is no reason to skip the task.
TME a pivoted arm needs skating compensation: the lateral force vector has to be either zero or very small but in any case the cantilever has to be deflected edgewards as few as possible but not spindlewards.
The force vector pointing spindlewards (equivalent to skating overcompensation) IMO leads to a dead sound without any perceivable µdynamics.
The cartridge cannot tell if it is mounted in a pivoted or linear tracking arm, it just experiences lateral force, period.
So if it is mounted in a classical passive linear tracker like the Air Tangent, its stylus experiences a lateral force deflecting the cantilever spindlewards. And it will punish you most probably by the mentioned dead sonics.
If now the linear tracking tonearm is able by any means to provide a lateral force biasing, one can adjust this bias force to a value a little bit more than compensating the transport force:
the tonearm's slider then always is a little bit more eager to approach the lead-out groove / spindle than the (variable) groove pitch wants to permit and as a result the stylus puts a bit more pressure on the inner groove wall and on the outer one and the cantilever is a teenyweeny bit deflected edgewards.
No question i want this pressure difference to eb as small as possible but i want the inner groove to win. As i do with the pivoted arm.
So: a lateral force compensation which is a little bit overdoing its task is just what i want.
Oh and before i forget it: what i described above is a systematic imperfection inherent to passive linear trackers. No matter if they work with an air bearing or with a mechanical bearing ... just the needed forces are different.
Hi,
I am afraid we'll just have to disagree on this as far as airbearing arms go...
If set up correctly you will notice no sideforces whatsoever, neither centripetal nor centrifugal.
As for the cliffhanger design, I don't see why it can't hang from the rail and still have it's pivotal centre at record level either.
But that's not important anyway, I'm just giving away ideas here...
Cheers,
I am afraid we'll just have to disagree on this as far as airbearing arms go...
If set up correctly you will notice no sideforces whatsoever, neither centripetal nor centrifugal.
As for the cliffhanger design, I don't see why it can't hang from the rail and still have it's pivotal centre at record level either.
But that's not important anyway, I'm just giving away ideas here...
Cheers,
Opus 3 Cantus
If anyone is interested, I am a long-time personal friend of the Gentleman who designed the Opus 3 Cantus (And Continuo, Concrete Turntable).
The design is revolutionary, and has unique charateristics.
The Replay Dynamics are unbelievable, because the Cartridge cannot move Up and Down.....it can only move Forwards and Backwards....And because of the Resistance in the Horizontal motion, the Stylus to Body Dynamics are vast!!
The relatively slow motion of the rotating Groove, easily pulls the Carriage along the Track, Backwards and Forwards, if the Record is "Out-of-Centre".
All that is necessary on Set-Up, is to ensure that the Glass Tube is either perfectly Level, or tilting slightly towards the Centre Spindle.
Because it is Linear-Tracking, there is NO need for Anti-skate.....The stylus sits perfectly still on a Blank Record Surface!!
Two points are required along the Linear Path, to ensure that the Cartridge Body is perfectly parallel to the Cutting Groove. These can be drawn on the Platter Surface, using a Protractor.
The recommended Cartridge is "The Music-Maker" from the "Cartridge Man", it is a FANTASTIC combination.
http://www.thecartridgeman.com/
http://www.rauna.com/slides/continuojpg.html
http://rauna.e-butik.se/
http://go.to/pentacone
Kindest regards,
Pentacone Peter.
If anyone is interested, I am a long-time personal friend of the Gentleman who designed the Opus 3 Cantus (And Continuo, Concrete Turntable).
The design is revolutionary, and has unique charateristics.
The Replay Dynamics are unbelievable, because the Cartridge cannot move Up and Down.....it can only move Forwards and Backwards....And because of the Resistance in the Horizontal motion, the Stylus to Body Dynamics are vast!!
The relatively slow motion of the rotating Groove, easily pulls the Carriage along the Track, Backwards and Forwards, if the Record is "Out-of-Centre".
All that is necessary on Set-Up, is to ensure that the Glass Tube is either perfectly Level, or tilting slightly towards the Centre Spindle.
Because it is Linear-Tracking, there is NO need for Anti-skate.....The stylus sits perfectly still on a Blank Record Surface!!
Two points are required along the Linear Path, to ensure that the Cartridge Body is perfectly parallel to the Cutting Groove. These can be drawn on the Platter Surface, using a Protractor.
The recommended Cartridge is "The Music-Maker" from the "Cartridge Man", it is a FANTASTIC combination.
http://www.thecartridgeman.com/
http://www.rauna.com/slides/continuojpg.html
http://rauna.e-butik.se/
http://go.to/pentacone
Kindest regards,
Pentacone Peter.
Hello vinyl lovers,
I have not had the pleasure of hearing the Cantus...
But the people over at noteworthy, recommend it in their sub 700£ tonearm list (last item on the page).
http://www.noteworthyaudio.co.uk/Tonearms1.html
They have nice pictures of the Cantus as well, so that you can see / understand its working principles. Of course they want to sell something, but considering what this small arm is compared to, and the way these merchants put things, there must be real quality I guess..
cheers,
Mark
I have not had the pleasure of hearing the Cantus...
But the people over at noteworthy, recommend it in their sub 700£ tonearm list (last item on the page).
http://www.noteworthyaudio.co.uk/Tonearms1.html
They have nice pictures of the Cantus as well, so that you can see / understand its working principles. Of course they want to sell something, but considering what this small arm is compared to, and the way these merchants put things, there must be real quality I guess..
cheers,
Mark
Have used this for years and i have no intetion to replace it, it out-performs anything i have tried. The sound can be described as very dynamic, dry and rock-solid. One clever part of how the arm is working is that there is no defined pivot piont since it will will move around, and still it maintains a solid mechanical contact with the glass tube. In practice this means that the arm does not have a well defined resonance either, smart. It is highly recommended in my book.
/Anders
/Anders
Nanook....
could a person use three ballpoint pet tips in a three point arm cradle to run an arm like this on a smooth tube? I wondered if you had them set into the end of a fine threaded machine screw so they could be adjusted in toward the tube till just enough pressure was made to keep the cradle assembly from ratteling and it could then freely rotate around and slide across the tube. Would a longer arm tube be of any assistance to the geometry of an arm like this? Could make a poor mans Souther and call it the Tri-Bic. Any thoughts Stew?
At a show in Vegas I talked with Lou Souther at length. Lou got an LP with a centre hole drilled 3/4" off centre and wild warps about a 1/4" high and handed it to me asking if my arm would play it. I laughed said no and added that his would not either. Lou smiled and put the record on the dec and set the stylus in the groove and the tip stayed in the groove. That cartridge looked like a ship being tossed at sea in the waves but we laughed and watched it ride across the whole disk. By the way before I left Lou played a flat record on the same machine and it was beautiful probably the best sound I had heard.
could a person use three ballpoint pet tips in a three point arm cradle to run an arm like this on a smooth tube? I wondered if you had them set into the end of a fine threaded machine screw so they could be adjusted in toward the tube till just enough pressure was made to keep the cradle assembly from ratteling and it could then freely rotate around and slide across the tube. Would a longer arm tube be of any assistance to the geometry of an arm like this? Could make a poor mans Souther and call it the Tri-Bic. Any thoughts Stew?
At a show in Vegas I talked with Lou Souther at length. Lou got an LP with a centre hole drilled 3/4" off centre and wild warps about a 1/4" high and handed it to me asking if my arm would play it. I laughed said no and added that his would not either. Lou smiled and put the record on the dec and set the stylus in the groove and the tip stayed in the groove. That cartridge looked like a ship being tossed at sea in the waves but we laughed and watched it ride across the whole disk. By the way before I left Lou played a flat record on the same machine and it was beautiful probably the best sound I had heard.
Why three points when two is enough? The Cantus does not rattle since the bearings are like train wheels and hence are mechanically biased a bit off-center, adding the drag that the reding of the grove causes makes it even better. The ref to the Souther is interresting since the Cantus have been developed after quite som experience of that one. It can be considered a Souther taken one step further, even though it might not look so at first sight. I mightbe a little bit biased since do know the designer very well but i must say that i do like the Cantus better than the Souther. Its only real drawback is that it takes a little bit of work to set up and the finish is not up to the standard of many other arms, then again, it comes at a lower price than the competition. I am today running it with an Ortofon Rohmann but have used ZYX RS-10, vdh modified SPU and EMT TSD15 with very good results.
BR,
Anders
BR,
Anders
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.