"S" shaped tonearm ?


what is the reason a company ,such as denon for instance to put an "S" shaped tonearm on there table. ive had both straight and S . and while not high end , i currently have the denon dp500m table . ive heard nor seen an advantage to either, though my experience is very much amature audiophile.
jrw40
'feil, I take your point about engineering principles, etc, but the audio hobby is replete with examples of real world experience running counter to science-based expectations. So, you must admit that, for a given individual with a given turntable and cartridge (and amplification and speakers), it is possible that an S or J shaped arm tube might "outperform" (in the opinions of listeners) a straight arm tube on the very same pivot, as per the report by Raul where he can change from S or J to straight on a Micro-Seiki. I have no axe to grind; I use only two tonearms, and they both have straight arm tubes. The auto analogy is a nice one, but it is not relevant to audio where subjective judgments are all we have to go on. Surely no one would argue that class D solid state amplifiers are not well ahead of tube amps in technology, but how many of us would want the former type of amp in our two channel stereo listening rooms in lieu of a great tube amp?
Audiofeil, if you think a '58 Edsel looks "cool", then you and I have VERY different tastes and senses of aesthetics. 8^)
Dear friends: I respect all opinions including that of persons that has not any knowledge about.

Any one of you can take an Ikeda tonearm/Audiocraft/Micro Seiki/Lustre/Technics/Grace G940/Satin/Mission/MDC800/Dynavector,etc, etc, and test against say: VPI, Triplanar, Basis, Schoroeder, Transrotor, SME, Graham, Kuzma, etc, etc and in the same conditions you will see that the new ones have no any single advantage not only that but that the S/J shaped ones beats the straight ones ( it does not matters what the theory say about. )

There are so many parameters that are inside/influence in the quality performance of a tonearm/cartridge that it is almost impossible to say that the straight tonearms are better because in practice it is not.

Here are some of those parameters: type of bearings, bearing material, bearing tolerances, statical or dynamic balance way, position of the counterweight in reference to the cartridge stylus, counterweight isolotation, counterweight material, effective tonearm mass, tonearm material used, internal tonearm damping, external bearing damping, internal wiring quality, tonearm geometry, lenght of the tonearm, headshell design, headshell wire quality, headshell material, antiskating design, connectors type to the phono interconnect cable, tonearm base design and material used, etc, etc. These are only some of those tonearm parameters and we have to add all the cartridge parameters that are critical on the quality performance.

As any one can see it is very complex and that famous theory does not help here to say ( only for that theory ): this is better, no it can't period.

Now, old vs new. IMHO this is a controversial subject and depends of on what kind of audio items we are talking about because our opinion/experiences could change if we talk about amplifiers than if we talk about tonearms or TTs.
If we take tonearms/TTs I can say that the " old " ones not only are competitive with today gear but some times beat them.
It could be interesting to analyse tonearm/TTs designs like Technics ( EPA 100/501, SP10 MK2-3. ) ) that are great ones. Mi first question about is to ask who is Technics?, well Technics was/is a Panasonic division that belongs to Matushita corporation, could you imagine the research resources that the Technics designers ( yes a designer/research group not a single designer person with limited resources. )group had/have?
Thechnics EPA-100MK2 tonearm was designed/build in 1982 ( 25 years ago, still running and unbeatble!!!!!!), was the first tonearm made of Boron/Titanium material ( still today is the only one and no one use this material, wonder why?. ) that has the lowest bearing friction of any pivoted tonearm in the world, the on the fly VTA and damping adjustment is unique even to today standards, the quality construction is almost unsurpassed for any today tonearm, etc, etc, if in the future any one of you have the opportunity to work with this Technics Gem you could understand everything I'm talking about.
Technics?, take its TT motors, till today the direct drive motor specs are unsurpassed on the SP-10MK3 and Do you know which motor use the famous Micro Seiki TTs? well: Panasonic!!!!!!

It is a sad that these kind of professional people with no limit resources stay away from high end.

Old vs new ?, cartridges: Air Tight, Myabi, XV-1, Allaerts, Magic Diamond, ZYX, Transfiguration, Titan, name it. Well there are at least two " very old " MM ( yes you read well: MM!!! ) cartridges that ovearall beats almost any of today MC cartridges: Audio Technica ATML 180OCC and AKG P8ES Supernova VDHII and at least other ten more that are a challenge to any today MC cartridge design.

Yes IMHO some times the old designs are still a reference standard for today designs, at least on tonearm/TT/cartridges.

Regards and enjoy the music.
Raul.
Well it seems quite simple. You can believe:

1. The guys who design and build the tonearms. They have degrees in mechanical engineering, physics, electrical engineering, and acoustic sciences.

2. The amateur hobbyist with a bunch of toys.

I know where to place my bet.

Note to Pryso, actually IMO the Edsels are some of the homeliest cars Ford ever built but cool is in the eyes of the beholder. I grant you it was a poor example.

I'll leave S and J shaped arms to the folks who buy clocks, rocks, and teleportation tweaks.

I'm done.
Being that my daughter never stops reminding me how old I am getting,I'll have to state that OLD is ALWAYS better!! -:)