2. analog
  3. 134929-245

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
lewm
6,770 posts
 
 I have never owned or listened to an SME 3012R tonearm except perhaps briefly in other peoples systems, but I find it hard to believe that between the SAT and the 3012R there are no other competitor s that might be superior to the SME.  From this I would tentatively conclude that the SAT is middle of the road. Assuming that the 3012R is indeed superior to it in an obvious way.
Raul‘s criticism of Michael Fremer calls to my mind one of the positions that MF regularly takes that puzzles me. He often suggests that vertical effective mass should equal horizontal effective mass in the best designs.  He is often critical of certain tone arms for not meeting that criterion. Yet everything else I know about tonearm design suggests to me that for the best bass reproduction it is desirable to have high effective mass in the horizontal plane, compared to vertical effective mass. Many fine tonearms are so constructed. This is because reproduction of bass frequencies is dependent on motion of the stylus in the horizontal plane, and damping or controlling that motion by high effective mass is desirable, so that “the tail doesn’t wag the dog”. I wonder if other people have had thoughts along these lines.  On the other hand, we all owe MF a debt of gratitude for his long-term support of the vinyl hobby. 
lewm
6,770 posts
 
 I have never owned or listened to an SME 3012R tonearm except perhaps briefly in other peoples systems, but I find it hard to believe that between the SAT and the 3012R there are no other competitor s that might be superior to the SME.  From this I would tentatively conclude that the SAT is middle of the road. Assuming that the 3012R is indeed superior to it in an obvious way.
Raul‘s criticism of Michael Fremer calls to my mind one of the positions that MF regularly takes that puzzles me. He often suggests that vertical effective mass should equal horizontal effective mass in the best designs.  He is often critical of certain tone arms for not meeting that criterion. Yet everything else I know about tonearm design suggests to me that for the best bass reproduction it is desirable to have high effective mass in the horizontal plane, compared to vertical effective mass. Many fine tonearms are so constructed. This is because reproduction of bass frequencies is dependent on motion of the stylus in the horizontal plane, and damping or controlling that motion by high effective mass is desirable, so that “the tail doesn’t wag the dog”. I wonder if other people have had thoughts along these lines.  On the other hand, we all owe MF a debt of gratitude for his long-term support of the vinyl hobby. 
bdp24's avatar
bdp24
4,908 posts
 
Real good point lewm, perhaps the reason linear-tracking arms are known for their great bass reproduction.
Ag insider logo xs@2x
rauliruegas OP
9,123 posts
 
Dear @fleschler : """  My friend with the Caliburn/Cobra/Kiseki purchased it based on MF reviews """ 

Many gentlemans bought because MF reviews.

That Caliburn/Cobra review is a good example of what I posted on MF: the true and real star in that TT/tonearm combination belongs to the Cobra tonearm not to the Caliburn/platform.
MF just listening/reviews what he like it but with out a fixed methodology/proccess for serious audio evaluation items in reality he does not know what to look for with precise and specific detail/knowledge.  Normally the differences in between top audio items are truly elusive and several audiophiles and reviewers  gone for what " I like it " and not on which one performs nearer to the recording that's is way different.

If we know what to look for and our room/system were " builded " with tha evaluation fixed proccess then you never make or pay more attention on that " I like it " as the " truer to the recording " that means truer to what the recording microphones pick-up that along means to stay nearer to the live MUSIC/event.
MF is just out of that real audio game.

The foundation of a home room/system MUSIC quality performance belongs to the bass frequency range and if we own passive speakers always we need to have at least two self powered subwoofers integrated in true stereo fashion  ( the passive main speakers working with a high pass filter. ).

MF owns passive speakers with out those subs and I think he does not has it because his speakers goes to 20hx and feeels is done when it's not done.
Nothing can compare to a good subs design against a full range passive speakers handled by top amplifiers that where designed for use it as a " universal " way with different passive speakers when the subs the amplifiers where designed to fulfill the subs drivers needs/characteristics. This makes a huge differences for the better not only in the bass range but in the overall room/system frequency range.

Regards and enjoy the MUSIC NOT DISTORTIONS,
R.
Ag insider logo xs@2x
rauliruegas OP
9,123 posts
 
Dear @fleschler : The problem with reviewers as MF is that.

Other example of MF no evaluation bullet proof methodology is this:

Technics sended to him for review one of its new TT/tonearm designs and they send it with a top Ortofon LOMC cartridge with the alignment made it by Technics for that review.

What was the first step in that MF review?, with out listened a single note through the Technics set up he changed it.

What happened with the SAT review?, instead to change nothing he tested following the manufacturer advise. Different approach with no single reason/common sense to do it that way and not only that: the SAT is a stand alone after market tonearm so the owner/reviewer can use it with the manufacturer alignment advise but IMHO and for 30K the reviewer has the responsability and I can say the obligation to test the tonearm to a standard alignment as the IEC Löfgren A or B where the reviewer must have to change the P2S to the new alignment parameters and MF just did not.
MF not even ask why that dedicated SAT alignment? how will performs with a different alignment vs the dedicated one?

Very untrusty reviewer ( in reality he has not a system that he use it as his " reference " because several times he took electronics/cables/cartridges/TT/etc etc that he has at hand to review it and is the way he made his reviews. ) and it’s not the only one, all the other reviewers of magazynes or through the internet made it almost the same ! ! ! I know ( first hand experiences with. ) that some of them have a misunderstood/unknowledge deep levels on the tonearm whole alignment issues.


Regards and enjoy the MUSIC NOT DISTORTIONS,
R.
More to discover