SAT 30K+$$ TONEARM: W O R T H T O H A V E I T ?


http://www.swedishat.com/

That is the everywhere touted and very expensive tonearm. Touted by all professional reviewers and obviously " satisfied " owners ( around 70 of them. ).

Here some reviews:

https://www.stereophile.com/content/swedish-analog-technologies-tonearm

http://www.monoandstereo.com/2014/06/sat-swedish-analog-technologies-tonearm.html

http://www.absolutesounds.com/pdf/main/press/AirForce%20III_SAT_HiFi+_0817.pdf

and you can look elsewhere the TAS one and others.

Obviously that the proudly owners started to buy the tonearm because those reviews and trhough audio shows but mainly for the " great " reviews.

It was ranked class A in Stereophile and I know are coming two new models that inludes a 12" tonearm.

Other than the very high price I never was interested on the tonearm design due that is totally out of my budget. Its price cost what a decent whole audio system cost.

Anyway, a few months ago in an other analog forum and through a TT review the SAT appeared in that discussion thread and was here when I decided to analize this regarded tonearm design where I found out that those 30K+ dollars are a true money lost and does not matters of what reviewers and owners think about where there are not clear facts all of them are extremely satisfied with the SAT.



Let me explain a little why I said that through my post to MF:


"""""""

from your Stereophile review the SAT specs are as follows: P2S: 212.2mm, overhang: 22.8mm, offset angle 26.10° with an effective length: 235mm.


Those numbers tell us that you are listening ( with any cartridge. ) way higher distortion levels, that you just do not detected even today, against almost any other tonearm/cartridge combination.


Obviously that the SAT needs a dedicated protractor to make the cartridge/tonearm set up but we have to analize what those specs/numbers has to say:

the SAT maximum traking error is a really high: 3.09° when in a normal ( Jelco or Ortofon. ) 235m Effective Length tonearm Löfgren A alignment ( IEC standard. ) is only: 1.84°

the SAT maximum distortion % level is: 2.67 when in that normal tonearm only 0.633

the SAT average RMS % distortion is: 0.616 when in normal tonearm only :
0.412 ( Löfgren B even lower: 0.37 ).

All those makes that the linnear offset in the SAT be 10mm longer than in a normal tonearm ! !

All those are facts and you or Mr. Gomez can’t do nothing to change it. Pure mathematics reality.

You posted in that review: """ Marc Gomez has chosen null points of 80 and 126mm instead of the more commonly used 66 and 121mm. """

that’s a deep misunderstood on tonearm/cartridge alignment input/output calulations in the overall equations used for that alignment:

NULL POINTS WERE NOT CHOOSED BY MR. GOMEZ BUT ARE PART OF THE OUTPUT DATA ON THOSE ALIGNMENTS CALCULATIONS.

In the same is not true your statement: """ the more commonly used 66 and 121mm. """

that " commonly " just does not exist and only depends of the standard choosed for the calculations.

There are several other things in that SAT design that not only are not orthodox but that has a negative influence in what we are listening it:

he said that the tonearm owner can change the bearing friction levels and this characteristics could tell to you that’s a " good thing " but it’s not but all the way the opposite because makes not a fully 100% steady bearings.

Ask you a question?: why the best top cartridges use cantilevers of boron and not carbon fiber, it does not matters that laminated carbon fiber the SAT has.

Carbon fiber is way resonant no matter what. In the past existed cartridges with CF cantilever and sounds inferior to the boron ones. ....................................................................................................................................................................... the designer was and is proud that the tonearm self resonance happens at around 2.8khz, go figure ! ! !. It happens way inside the human been frequency range instead to stays out of that frequency range. """"



Dear friends and owners of the SAT: way before the mounted cartridge on it hits the very first LP groove and against any other vintage or today tonearm you have way higher distortions that per sé preclude you can listen a real and true top quality level performance and does not matters the audio system you own.


What we can listen through the SAT is an inferior quality performance levels with higher distortions. Obviously that all reviewers and owners like those heavy distortions but that does not means they are rigth because and with all respect all of them are wrong.


Some one send the link of what I posted to the SAT designer and latter on ( I do not knew he read my post. ) I ask for him for the information about the effective mass of the SAT. He gave me a " rude " answer and did not disclose that information that in reallity was not important in that moment.



I have to say that at least two professional reviewers bougth the SAT tonearm., both with the Continnum/Cobra TT/tonearm. At least one of them say the SAT outperforms the Cobra one ( maybe both, who knows why bougth it the other reviewer. )

The credentials of the SAT designer are impecable and really impressive ones but no single of those credentials speaks about audio and certainly not on analog audio.

He is a true " roockie " enthusiast ( and I say it with respect.) and obviously that is welcomed in the high-end " arena/area/ring " where all of us are learning at each single day. Any one that’s marketing an audio item has a true merit and this is not under discussion: SAT designer has his own merit for that.

You that are reading this thread permit me to ask: what do you think, overall, about?, at the end audiophiles are the ones that has the last " word " or should be that way.


Regards and enjoy the MUSIC NOT DISTORTIONS,

R.






Ag insider logo xs@2xrauliruegas
The last 3 posts are the most intelligent thing I have read on this forum. Any one who has built tonearms has to know there are lots of variables which effect the sound. Null points are not that big on the list.

People who talk in absolutes should be viewed with a grain of salt. Anyone that posted on the importance of null points, able to hear a record without looking and hear the 2 perfect null points? Then change the points play the record again and listen for perfection. You get the idea. Math is a wonderful thing but not extremely useful with emotion. That said if you listen with just your head, maybe it is all you need.

In regards to 30,000 big ones get real!!! Only one justification for that. R+D!!! Like to see what took that much time. That being said if it sounds the best in someone’s system and MONEY is no object, then let capitalism do its thing.

Enjoy the ride
Tom
cleeds, I agree with your citation of "underslung" or "underhung" tonearms as an example of why tracking angle error may not be such a big deal in determining the "distortion" produced during vinyl reproduction.  Because you're quite right, such tonearms exhibit much higher tracking angle error at points distant from their single point of tangency to the groove than do conventional "overhung" tonearms.  However, I have observed repeatedly that my RS Labs RS-A1 (underhung) tonearm seems (meaning to my subjective ear) to produce actually LESS distortion than does the typical overhung tonearm.  To use one analogy, sounds closer to that of a master tape. (Probably someone should make actual measurements of the distortion introduced to the audio signal by both types of tonearm.)  I am such a fan of the RS Labs that I thought long and hard about buying a Viv Float last time I was in Tokyo visiting our son.  (The cost in Tokyo is about 60% of the US cost.)  But I didn't pull the trigger, only because I already own far too many tonearms. Maybe next visit.

So, I thought, what distinguishes these two types, besides the spatial relation of the stylus tip to the spindle?  Headshell offset is one answer.  In an overhung tonearm, the headshell offset angle is necessary to permit the cantilever to achieve tangency to the groove at two points along the surface of the LP, the inner and outer null points.  But the offset angle introduces a source of skating force that is always present, even at the points of tangency.  Maybe that (zero headshell offset angle) is a factor in the relative goodness of the few underhung tonearms available in the marketplace.

The designer of the SAT appears to have chosen to minimize tracking angle error/distortion between the two null points of his chosen geometry (as pointed out by John Ellison on Vinyl Asylum), and this results in lots of error of both types on inner grooves.  If you're playing LPs with a large empty space ("run-out grooves") between the end of the playing surface and the edge of the label, maybe that's relatively inconsequential.
In analog playback, there are just too many variables that can affect the sound. Measurements while good doesn’t mean for something to sound good. Very rarely does good measurements correlates to good sound. Larryi said it best. Digital measures perfectly and somehow doesn’t sound good. Measurements should be taken with a grain of salt. Listening with your ears is more important. 

I dont own a SAT arm nor do I represent one. It is one piece of work. Lucky for those who own one like and enjoy their sound. 
Dear @lewm @tomwh @perkri friends: I know very well the JE analysis and learned many things from him. Now I was enfatic that the measures were taking Löfgren A with IEC standards.

Maths is a perfect science what's not perfect is any pivoted tonearm and in any kind of alignment ( even custom one. ) exist trade-offs, always exist a compromise. Stevenson is the extreme of those compromises.

lewm, I'm not talking of inner grooves. If we have a little lower distortion level in between null points then out of those null points we will have higher distortion level. 

Any one can choose to has a custom alignment as the SAT designer and that's why we need to use its dedicated protractor. 

If I remember VPI mix/combine two kind of alignments and that's why was a pain to align it with universal protractors.

Seems to me that that could be the SAT kind of alignment using " in box " calculations ( btw, I always try to think " out of the box " and see what happen. ). The main knowed parameter ( critical if we don't know what choosed the designer. ) in the SAT is the P2S distance and using a custom standard ( not IEC, DIN or JIS. ) inner most/outer most groove we can be rigth there. Combined Löfgren A and B is not so dificult due that both alignments comes with the same offset angle.

Again, with its own trade-offs. My post to @tli try to explain why with his protractor tools using a " standard " alignment he said that the sound is not so good but dim and flat. 
Dim is not a good thing but flat is a different matters.

tom, I built my own tonearm and yes there are several variables that have an effect in the quality of sound and  one of those variables, other than bearing and damping,  certainly is the alignment of the cartridge/TT/tonearm.

Now, in no single way I'm diminished the SAT build quality level or the designer " credentials " in his specialities. The subject is different.

The SAT price tag deserves for the customer a clear information that can corroborates the reviewers/owners believes on that " unique " kind of sound.
Seems to me that the SAT owners/reviewers experiences tell me that all today tonearm designs comes only with average/mediocre quality level performance.

Btw,  we don't know the two newcomers  models ( 4 units. ) operation design and the already SAT owners do not know either if they will have a retro-fit for the very fast " obsolence " of their units and the main subject here could be if the new units outperforms the out of production today SAT.

I can think the newcomers will outperforms the today ones. Where outperforms the today ones? this is something that only the today owners can answer .

Anyway, there are things with the SAT owner/reviewers that makes not exactly sense as is those top cartridges that were mounted with a lower VTF that the manufacturer specs and " everybody " happy with.

I don't know what J.Carr or J.Allaerts or Ortofon can think about because that VTF range specification is to have centered coils as a main target and asure the best quality sound level.
Only think that the Allaerts MC2 Finish/Formula one has only 0.05grs of tolerance on VTF ! !  

The VTF specs were determined by the cartridge designer not only for best grooves tracking during playback but to asure that the cartridge stylus tip and the LP grooves can " suffers " a minimum  wear and more preservation time.

I don't know what all of you and especially the owners can think on my points of view but I don't think that as some of you already did it try to diminish all those facts.

@jperry , no I don't have the opportunity to listen it yet and I'm not in a hurry. Better to wait not only for the new models but for a more steady/experienced designs.


Regards and enjoy the MUSIC NOT DISTORTIONS,
R.


Dear @genesis168 : Measurements always can be correlated with sound if we know what to look for and how to do it.

Through the AHEE all we " learned " that subjectivity is the name of the game but this was and is for convenience of that AHEE.

Today what measures good sounds good, in the past things were way different. Today audio designs achieved a very good grade of maturity in almost all orders.

In many ways the AHEE accustomed to like more what is " wrong " than what is good and they teached us with no single explanation/facts other than : " listening is bealieving or I like it ", no matters what.

I'm not against the SAT, every audio newcomer is always welcomed, no doubt about but there are not very clear information on it. That's all.

Regards and enjoy the MUSIC NOT DISTORTIONS,
R.