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
moonglum
605 posts
 
The resurgence of the 3012 does revive the question of the advantageousness of the single wiring loom once more ;)

Not going there.... ;)
daveyf's avatar
daveyf
1,174 posts
 
@moonglum

indeed there are a number of disciples on that forum.
Many of them have never even heard the SME3012R arm, but that doesn’t stop them from wanting it, lol.
A’philes are well known for buying with their eyes vs their ears. Or better still, if some guru tells them it’s great...well then why bother listening for oneself!
daveyf's avatar
daveyf
1,174 posts
 
@lewm

There is a supposition being made here...and that is the user who reports that the SAT is less satisfying than his SME3012R arm is actually listening to the SAT on an appropriate platform and with the correct set up of the SAT arm. Somehow, I seriously doubt it!

The SAT has far more going for it in the area of engineering than the old ‘war horse’ SME. That, plus the fact that the SAT arm has fresh cabling and connections...and I think you can see that to say you prefer the SME...would indicate that something is seriously wrong with your SAT set up!

i recently heard a great new arm from Durand...looked a lot like the SAT arm, and it was exemplary. Not saying the Durand is designed with the same flaws as perhaps the SAT incorporates, but the Durand was certainly in a totally different league than the old SME!


fleschler
766 posts
 
I've noted that the SME IV can be improved upon with new wiring and armtube foam resonance control.  It is extremely likely that the SME 3012R can also be improved, particularly in it's wiring.  Stock SME wiring was "crap" in its day.  Add was the SME DIN wire I got in 1989 which was inferior to my other arms cabling from Cardas and  Audio Source.  I can imagine that the SAT should sound better even with the noted tracking distortions.
Ag insider logo xs@2x
rauliruegas OP
9,123 posts
 
Dear @fleschler : The real problems with the 3012-R even with today re-wiring are that knife bearing type and not very well damped design.

I own Sao Win top LOMC cartridge and his advise in the operation manual says: don't mount the cartridge with knife bearing tonearm designs. I owned SAEC knife bearing design tonearms and Sao Win is rigth, that kind of bearing is not for top LOMC cartridges.

That's why from some yers now SME just left to use tht type of bering in its tonerm models.

Perhaps an advantage of the 3012 as any other removble headshell tonearm design be eactly this: removable headshell.

As always in audio exist trade-offs but in the case of removable headshells designs this trade-off is for the better:

a removable headshell designs makes a lot more easy to match the cartridge needs with the tonearm due that we can choose different headshells with different builded materials ( that resonates and with control of those resonances different too. ), different shapes and different weigths.
So we can find out the rigth headshell for any cartrige can shows it at its best, something that in a fixed headshell designs can't do it and not only that but due that we can choose a headshell with different weigths we can stay always inside the ideal cartridge/tonearm resonance frequency range.
Other very important advantage of a removable headshell design is that we are not " married " with the signature sound that always exist in a fixed headshell designs. Only if the fixed headshell tonearm design is " dead neutral " that non-ideal signature could disappears but the trde offs in a fixed designs are worse than the trade offs in a removable headshell designs.

R.
More to discover