2. analog
  3. 142688-90127

Linear tracking turntables, whatever happened?

Curious as to the demise and downfall of the seemingly short lived linear tracking TT.
Just from a geometry point of view I would have thought a linear arm should be superior to one with a fixed pivot that sweeps through an arc.
Obviously there is much more to it than that, sort of the reason for this thread.
I am genuinely interested in trying one out for myself as well.
128x128Ag insider logo xs@2xuberwaltz
ct0517's avatar
ct0517
1,798 posts
 
@whart
you can take your counterweight as is into a Home Depot right now and go to the bolts section. they have a rack with bolts sticking out. See which of the bolts it threads into. Coming from Europe it will be metric. That gives you the thread pattern information. Then you can pick up a few nuts fatter and skinnier with that thread pattern and use those to test with. Use as many as needed to get it to the end of the rod. Once the number of bolts required is known - take them into the machinists/bike people and see if they can make you up one nut in that weight and thread pattern.
DIY
whart's avatar
whart
1,930 posts
 
10-4, @ct0517 - very helpful. Thanks. 
bdp24's avatar
bdp24
4,908 posts
 

My knowledge of physics is rather limited, so let me ask those of you who finished high school (;-) if the following is correct:

To achieve higher moment-of-inertia (same as mass?) in the vertical plane, the mass of a counterweight should be located as near as possible to the line described by the arm tube running through the arm’s bearings. In other words, extending left and right of that line in the lateral (horizontal) plane as little as possible, i.e. as close as possible to the arm's bearings laterally. The opposite of that is the Groovetracer counterweight made for Rega arms, which is in the "longhorn" style---extending a couple of inches to the left and right of the rear stub onto which it is installed.

If the above is true, I can envision, say, lead weights being attached to a counterweight above and below the hole running through it for the arm tube’s rear stub, but not to either side of that hole. Correct?

ct0517's avatar
ct0517
1,798 posts
 
Bdp24 - My knowledge of physics is rather limited, so let me ask those of you who finished high school (;-) if the following is correct:

@bdp24 
I never learned Physics in school. It was learned through real life experiences...especially near death ones. 8^0
Picture this - approaching a corner at speed, just after a rain, in a 1996 rear engine 993.

************

I am not sure what you're asking Eric; but I can tell you the Eminent Tech Tonearm has a horizontal inscribed line on the center of the manifold housing. When doing setup the User is supposed to set the record level with this line. Another area where setup error occurs.

If you follow the center of the air bearing out to the counterweights one can see that all is in the same line. The I Beam is level with this inscribed line.

Now the interesting part. If one loosens the end cap that holds the I Beam and Weights. and tilts it downward a bit - one can tune the bass and give it more heft. You will also be changing the VTF when you do this. Like wise in reverse - tilt it up - and the signal becomes leaner.
  
One can set the sound to ones room depending on the gear. If the room is bass heavy tilt it up a bit and vice versa if the sound is lean.

******************
@whart 
 are you able to loosen a bolt on the Kuzma Airline to tilt the counterweight rod up or down ?

terry9
931 posts
 
Moment of Inertia is denoted by I and is the angular analogue of mass. It is defined as the sum of (mass of molecule x distance to pivot squared). This is approximated by an integral (calculus), which is easier to calculate.

Thus, for a beam of just sufficient length and just sufficient strength to support the counterweight, the greatest Moment of Inertia I will be obtained by positioning the beam extending from the pivot parallel to an extension of the arm wand.

The obvious tradeoff is the amount of material required to position the beam that way.

There are other tradeoffs - one wants adjustability and rigidity and resonance control in the beam. Thus a system of a light but rigid tubing (say magnesium), with a lump of tungsten on the end, threading into a nut on the end of the arm, would give you the highest I/m ratio, but may be compromised with respect to resonance. I should try that on the Trans-Fi.


More to discover