Top 5 Tonearms Newer or Vintage Under 2500 That Will Beat anything above/below 2.5k?
@lewm your just @rauliruegas apologist. What are you his interpreter and mind reader? Both Your rhetorics are appauling and act are wearing thin. You both need to get a life. Take a trip together somewhere enjoy life and audio. If you would been more gracious with your initial comments id treat you with more respect but after you call me names and criticize me needlessly calling my post stupid why should i treat both you jerks with respect? Why did you even bother replying. You Give respect get respect. Comprende companeros? |
Nandric, In the context of my post where I tried to re-state Raul's critique of Vinny, I of course agree with Raul; Vinny's question was badly phrased. But I think Vinny is a "troll", from beginning to end. So, in that way, his question was well put. He got what he wanted out of it. As you also know, I and Raul disagree on many other issues. I refuse to take it very seriously. |
This is for Raul’s clarification. Raul - it is my opinion that when people post on AudioGon each of us have a different way of interpreting posts and what we end up focusing on. When you referenced me Raul, you focused on these OP words. This is the OP thread statements: I focused my one post comment to different OP text. The criteria also to be met are easy setups for all angles vta vfa azimuth anti skating etc and I told you in my second post that my comments were based on the "real" OP requirements. Let me clarify this. **************** I’d like to use Nandric (Nikola’s) previous post word of "Enumeration". So ...it is my opinion that in Vinny55’s enumeration of tonearm requirements, as documented in his original post, that I reference above, that we come up with 6 real requirements. (tonearm features he sees necessary in a tonearm). Easy setups for 1) all angles 2) vta 3) vtf 4) azimuth 5) anti skating etc 6) The Tonearm must also the ability to use more than just one or two cartridge compatibility ^^^^^ 6 real requirements / features needed. **************** Raul, the words that you are focusing on highlight how he would like the music to sound to him. These are his targets, not yours, not mine. I am merely saying, and understand this; that if he chooses tonearms that have the 6 features, he should be able to tailor the sound to his liking in his room. This is after all not digital, it is vinyl. With every angle change of the stylus in the groove, the resulting vibrations get altered. The sound is very tweakable in a resolving system kit. We make a lot of assumptions on threads especially when members do not show a virtual system to let us know what he owns. Shame on Vinny55. My comments assume he will combine the tonearms with a good cartridge and table , and the downstream components are in a room that is set up good. Alot of assumptions. The tables mentioned in his thread. Garrard 301/401, Lenco, Linn, Thorens 124, Technics 1100 1200 10 or 15. This discussion needs another thread. This is IMO because anyone I know who uses these tables... these days..... has done extensive modifications to them. Many are no longer recognizable from their stock form. This does not apply to cartridges and tonearms. |
| Post removed |
| Post removed |
I am lucky to have had my SME-IV modified by the late Brooks Berdan. He retrofitted the interior wiring with the then best Cardas wire and shot a closed cell foam into the arm wand to eliminate vibration. Those two steps eliminated the mid-bass bump, making the sound linear from top to bottom. Also, the horrible SME Din was replaced with an RCA junction box where I fit the finest low capacitance Grover Huffman phono cables to a Audio Interface SUT. So, I vote for an SME-IV modified as being a top notch arm for the price. |
@2channel8 i used to own a Wand+. It’s a great sounding tonearm for the money and in my system outperformed an SME-IV. It definitely has a unipivot zip and liveliness that was what I was looking for. As with any unipivot it takes some attention to get the setup right and errors in setup will be very audible. I think the + model is the sweet spot in the line and the 10.5” length is also a great fit with most turntables. I swapped it out for a Talea when one came up used and that’s not really a fair comparison but at least tonally the Wand and the Talea share much of the same DNA |
Dear @lewm : Of course only a stupid does not understand that and follows posting. . My very first post in this thread I ask to the OP to disclose his home audio system with no answer yet. Btw, what is a stupid person and an ignorant one ( at least for me. ): an ignorant person is whom in a specific subject has no knowledge about, I’m ignorant in several audio subjects. A stupid person is some one that not only is ignorant but that not only " likes " to shows his ignorance levels but that does not has the " brain " to understand why he does not understand in that " subject " and follows showing his stupidity level: is a stupid person that’s different from an ignorant one like me. The OP is not a stupid person but only a gentleman that has not yet the knowledge levles in the subject. @ct0517 , please read the lewm post. R. |
Dear Lew, This is not the first time that you try to explain ''what Raul is trying to say''. Either Raul is no capable to explain what he thinks or you know better what he thinks than himself. However by ascribing some thoughts to him it is not clear what your own are. Have you chosen your tonearms ''in concert with peculiar carts'' or based on all kinds of sources available to you? We usually assume many things as known because explicit enumeration of ''arguments'' would be boring. I already mentioned that this thread was confusing and used the opposition between numerical (5) and universal quantors as example. As is usual the case we got the chance to name and praise our ''old beloved stuff''' + the new stuff. Raul used this occasion to point out who according to him is stupid and ignorant. I assume that you wanted to save his... as usual. |
I think Raul is trying to say that the tonearm, per se, does not create these specific sonic qualities, that the tonearm always has to be considered in concert with the cartridge. So, the better question is whether tonearm X can get the best possible performance out of cartridge Y. (And of course, the table is the major determinant of rhythm, timing, and pace.) Since this properly phrased question immediately tells us that there are hundreds if not thousands of combinations to be considered, the question itself seems open ended. But I agree with Raul if he means to say that it is folly to describe a tonearm per se in the terms suggested by the OP. |
Dear @ct0517 : Coming from you is unveliable what you said in your post to me. This is the OP thread statements: " Top 5 tonearm list that are known for their musical superlatives in all music ranges and genres? including finer detail nuances feeling, 3d sound but also deep bass and midbass, basspunch. Airy highs. And importantly long hours listening without fatigue. "" TT preference?. Both things makes no sense. R. |
terry9 Terry9 From the manufacturers website. Terminator splits the Horizontal & Vertical components using 2 different bearings, air for the horizontal movement, & a mechanical Twin Point Pivot bearing for the vertical. Sounds to me like it is not a full air bearing, but a multi - bearing tonearm of Air and Mechanical bearings. DG (Dave) explained to me years ago that it's like a sled. OP (Vinny55) There is only one tonearm mentioned on your thread that has VTA on the Fly without changing set up parameters like VTF. If that's important. Antiskate not needed. @Raul - the OP indicates his TT preference in the original post. |
Dear @vinny55 : No, wrong. What you have to do is to learn why your thread statement is absolutely wrong with no idea about: """ Top 5 tonearm list that are known for their musical superlatives in all music ranges and genres? including finer detail nuances feeling, 3d sound but also deep bass and midbass, basspunch. Airy highs. And importantly long hours listening without fatigue.. "" R. |
I have AudioCraft headshells (many) and i like them, i also use Stax headshells (lightweight) with azimuth/overhang, Grace HS-5 Carbon is also very nice, ZYX Live-18, Audio-Technica Technihard ... so no problem with headshells. I bought 64FX primary for FR-7f cartridge, so i don’t need headshells at all, but my arm comes with stock FR headshell, but with only one counterweight (w-250), you’re lucky to have all 3 counterweights. I think the price for FR-64s is too high! |
Dear chakster, If you think of FR-64s and FR-fx without counter weight and headshell there will be not much difference qua arm mass. Nobody uses the original FR- headshell (S/3 19.5 g). I don't use any FR or Ikeda headshell because they are mediocre. Besides FR-64 S has 3 counterweights. Standard (250), light (170g) and heavy (270g). In my opinion you should buy FR-64s instead of FR-64 fx. |
MicroSeiki SX 8000!! with Micro max 282 and 237 arms Technics SP 10 mark 3 with EPA 100 mark 2 arm Thorens 124 with SME V arm Nakamichi TX 1000 with SME 312 and Dynavector 507 arms various cartridges, running through Allnic other tables....Empire, Thorens, Lenco, Oracle with sme ,grado etc arms all made in the golden age by some very bright dedicated people with no holds barred engineering and cost no object, perhaps matched by some new specialty gear but probably not the money and engineering capacity as some of Japanese companies had or still do, ex Matsushita stereo gear various mostly marantz and mcintosh from the 50s thru the 70s various spkrs, jbl, tannoy, platinum audio, kef, empire, rogers much of it sounds good here but also has become collectible art hard to really say whats better or best as arms etc are only part of a total system somebody once said everything between the stylus and speaker should act like its not there, aka coloration early Tannoy and quad 57s are like that , impressive when one listens running on a few watts a testimony to early engineering that has never really been improved on in many cases and perhaps can be described as only unecessary gimmicks driven by marketing, the God of todays stuff I spent yrs in mfging engineering and product design incl marketing on small and big stuff and have great respect for the early gear cuz modern society seems to have traded quality for quantity esp in America anyways just my two cents as I do not profess to be an audio expert I usually do my research on the internet as well as face to face with those in the bz before purchasing, many with more yrs at it then me although I was there in the 60s and 70s when it was in the stores, only coming back to it in recent years cheers W |
Dear @cleeds : As almost always you don't have nothing say. That's a double negative. Nice of you to praise him, Mr. Irugas. |
rauliruegas04-12-2018 2:41pm Your thread has no sense at least what you stated ... stupid ... Stupid things ... ignorant ... no-sense statement ... Your logic about those cartridges with diferent color has no sense ... other gentlemans already gave you opinions in your no-sense statement ... you like to live in that " audio world " a wrong/dark one ...Not everyone who disagrees with you is stupid, Raul. Not all of the "ignorant" people who disagree with you are wrong. |
@rauliruegas The black body cartridges started at the end of 1980. What is your source to make sure the carts are from the end of the 1980 while the FX series of the tonearm is from the beginning of the 1980? Why you said: " and supposed to be made for each other."" when the tonearm appeared at the begening of that year and the cartridge at the end ! ? ! ? They are from the same year (1980), your statement must be checked, but actually it doesn’t change anything. With optional W-250 counterweight FX series of the Fidelity-Research tonearm is suitable for FR-7f and FR-7fz cartridges from the same designer, but also suitable for lighter carts with different counterweight. This tonearm is more universal than its predecessor 64s. I didn’t said it was made exclussively for FR-7f and FR-7fz or FR-702 cartridges, but those cartridges were the best from Ikeda-San at that time and according to J.Carr - Ikeda-San is still proud of them. In my opinion matching the best products in color is also a good idea for those who cares not only about the sound, but also about aesthetics. |
Dear @vinny55: Your thread has no sense at least what you stated: """ From all your tonearm experiences trials errors comparisons etc is there a Top 5 tonearm list that are known for their musical superlatives in all music ranges and genres? including finer detail nuances feeling, 3d sound but also deep bass and midbass, basspunch. Airy highs. And importantly long hours listening without fatigue. """ Where do you learn that could exist the possibility that a tonearm can comes with those atributes/characteristics? Btw, the incredible things in this thread is that all other gentlemans already gave you opinions in your no-sense statement ! ! ! ??? I N C R E D I B L E ! Regards and enjoy the MUSIC NOT DISTORTIONS, R. |
Fidelity-Research products in order by release dates: 1) FR-7 (1978): http://audio-heritage.jp/FIDELITYRESEARCH/etc/fr-7.html 2) Tonearm FR-64s (1976): http://audio-heritage.jp/FIDELITYRESEARCH/etc/fr-64s.html 3) Tonearm FR-66s (1977): http://audio-heritage.jp/FIDELITYRESEARCH/etc/fr-66s.html 4) FR-7f (1980): http://audio-heritage.jp/FIDELITYRESEARCH/etc/fr-7f.html 5) Tonearm FR-64fx has been released in 1980 and discontinued in 1990 as far as i know: http://www.jupiteraudio.com/5005/5005.html According to this logic the FR-7f cartridge and FR-64fx tonearm were introduced in the same year (1980) and supposed to be made for each other with W-250 counterweight. P.S. I wish to continue with release dates of the FR-7fz and FR-702 cartridges, but i have zero information about it. Anyway these models appeared to be released later than FR-7f. They are all black, so the latest Ikeda-San's tonearms under Fidelity-Research brand are the FR-66fx and FR-64fx. Normally any tonearm designer is trying to upgrade his products in the latest versions. |
Dear @chakster : Your logic about those cartridges with diferent color has no sense to reklated to tonearms for it. Both cartridges are diferent: has diferent output levels. The 64fx appeared at the begening of 1980, the 66fx in 1981 and the 64fx pro in 1984. The black body cartridges started at the end of 1980. Anyway , I know that you like to live in that " audio world " a wrong/dark one but is your choice. Too much to learn, me too. Regards and enjoy the MUSIC NOT DISTORTIONS, R. |
@lewm Chakster you must have misspoken when you wrote that the FR64 is best suited to light, high compliance cartridges. Can't find anything about it in this thread, but anyway the FR-64FX is not like the FR-64s. So what i said earlier somewhere is that FR-64FX (Black Color) has a bit lighter effective moving mass compared to FR-64s superheavy monster. The FR-64FX can be used for heavy FR-7f or SPU cartridges and that's why i bought my FR-64FX. Actually even with the small counterweight the heavy MC cart like FR-7 can be balanced and used as i can see in the internet, but it's probably wrong as the counterweight is to far from the pivot. The right conterweight for heavy carts (up to 32g) is FR W-250, on this picture you can see both (the bigger is W-250). This arm was developed in the 80s, later than FR-64s. FR-7f black cartridge (and FR-7fz) also developed later than silver color FR-7. So i believe the FR-7f supposed to be used with 64-FX tonearm (they are both black). But it shouldn't be a problem to use lighter carts with 64FX tonearm if the owners got additional (smaller) counterweights. So the FR-64FX is more versatile tonearm than his older brother FR-64s. |
Everybody knows Van den Hul, some know Van den Dungen (Kiseki + Prima Luna) but who is familiar with the 3th Dutch ''grand master'' Eddy Driessen? Certainly worth mentioning by ''vintage tonearms'' . The problem is: if you need to ask for the price you are not suitable as his customer. His trade mark is ''Pluto'' while all his TT''s and tonearms are hand made by him. |
