DynaVector DV505 is it worth the hassle?

Dear Lewm: Take a look to the 505 manual here:
" 6. Arm resonance in low frequency range " , it is very objective to understand what you ask.

Now, the 505 has a low effective mass ( sub-arm ) against the main arm. It is light, you speak about the 15gr headshell weight but this is the weight not the effective mass that has a direct relationship from at what distance ( from the pivot ) is that weight ( 15grs. ) that in this case that distance is extremely short and this fact gives ( on the vertical way. ) a lower effective mass than the 15gr. weight.

Here it is what you can read on the 507-MK2:

" 2. What is the bi-Axis inertia controlled tonearm.
The tonearm is required to fulfill two functions so that the cartridge can reproduce the exact signal from the record groove. One of these is to hold the cartridge stationary at audible frequencies so that the stylus and cantilever motion is translated into a music system without losses.
The other is to allow the cartridge to track warped records.
These require totally contradictory properties from the tonearm and so all conventional tonearms are a compromise between the two.
However, a very reasonable solution exists in the bi-axis tonearm.
The bi-Axis inertia control tonearm is in effect two arms in one - the main arm beam has an effective-mass that is 3 or 4 times higher compared with conventional tonearm
but moves only horizontally. On the other hand, the sub-arm has a lower effective- mass than any conventional tonearm but moves only in the vertical direction.
This combination means that the high effective-mass in the horizontal direction holds the cartridge steady at audio frequencies, especially at low frequencies and high groove excursions, whilst the low vertical effective-mass allows unmatched warp riding performance. "

Lewm, you can always ask directly to Dynavector whom can/could give you a lot better explanation that I can.

I think that we can give you only what were/are our each one experiences with that tonearm design.

Regards and enjoy the music.
Raul.

I get it. The vertically pivoting portion of the tonearm can develop a relatively high effective mass AND be "light" in weight at the same time, due to its short length. I am especially intrigued by Raul's mention that it can be used with no drilling, by fastening it to the mounting board with double-sided tape.

Lewm, ONLY the 505 can be fastened to the amrboard without drilling. The 507 is another story. You need to drill to install the 507.

Hope this helps clear things out.

I am also considering a Dynavector for my new Raven. In my research I came across another curiosity. Dynavector uses Stevenson's alignment rather then the more common Lofgren or Baerwald. Is this something to consider when choosing an arm or are the differences really just academic?

Motnic,

The mounting template that the 507 MK II comes with has a pivot to spindle distance of 226mm and an overhang of 15mm for an effective length of 241mm. Null points are at 60.1mm and 116.5mm. I don't know what alignment method this is, but I've tried Loefgren and Baerwald and both worked fine for me. I currently have it set up based on the template and the cartridge mounting gauge provided. I use what was provided with the arm because I find the cartridge mounting gauge very convenient and it allows you to set up the null points as well.

If the tonearm is mounted based on the template provided and then one decides to use Lofgren to set the overhang, the Dynavector headshell barely has enough room for the cartridge to slide to where it should go. I experimented with a Sumiko headshell and had no problem setting it up since this headshell has long mounting slots for the screws.

In my experience, either using Loefgren or the template provided with the arm, I always got clean and undistorted sound from the arm.

Best Regards,

iSanchez