1. Home
  2. analog
  3. 1294607688

tonearm/cartridge matching, mass/damping/tweaking

I'm reading more and more, here and mostly elsewhere about matching cartrdge compliance to tonearm mass. Of course, the wonderful but also dreaded Denon 103/103r s are front in centre in most debates.
I recently swapped out my denon 103 for my nos GAS Sleeping Beauty and perceived a better overall sound although it just may be a better overall cart too, who knows?
I am running a Linn Akito 2b arm which is said to be a little low on the mass side for the Denon 103 at I think 11 grams. i have seen some raging debates with guys saying their black widow (really low mass) arm matches just great with a 103, and a mass proponent saying that you need at least 25 gram mass arm for the 103R (although his 'perfectly matched' jelco 750d is ironically an 18g mass arm....). being a sucker for punishment I have on order both a 301mkii and a 103r (my audiophile nervosa has ingrained me with the fear that 'they' may stop making cartridges - after all, I have read that the venerable technicss DD tables have been discontinued). Now, I could simply likely sell my Akito 2B and buy a Jelco 750db and be done with it. resurrect my light headshell for use with the 301 and start having swapping fun. WTF, I could prolly also build up an outboard tonearm stand and run a 12" jelco outside my SOTA opposite the akito2b and turn into a real freak (sorry to all you freaks out there, you know what you are ;-)).
I have read some possible arm tuning damping ideas too that dont smell of overdoing it. One being laying a couple of pieces of tonearm litz between the cart and the headshell when mounting to decouple slightly. Another is the adddition of herbie's hal-o jr's to the arm wand which is cheap maybe effective and readily reversible (unlike wrapping the wand).
i gotta wonder just how accurate some of these mass and compliance calcs are too. ironically, i had to use a supplied sheet of what appears to be lead with my GAS to give it sufficient weight to use with this arm and it is only a few grams less than the denon....
Any thoughts, ideas, current thinking on the mass vs compliance issues?
mickeyf
mickeyf OP
153 posts
 
Perhaps Bob. I got my information mainly from 'Blake' who posts frequently on Jelco and 103 related threads out and about. I note you are selling an MMT which should be pretty much identical to the Jelco although from the specs it looks like yours is a 10 inch? What table were you using that on?
I have not had a chance to write Sota yet, I will probably do that next week.
hesson11
233 posts
 
Hi Mickey. Actually, I have a couple of MMTs. I'm selling one and keeping the one I have mounted on my old but trusty Oracle Paris. Both arms are pretty much identical in condition, operation, etc., but I'd been looking for an auxiliary counterweight that came with the MMT originally. I had to buy a whole 'nother MMT to get one!

The MMT works and sounds great with my Soundsmith-retipped Shelter 501 II. The MMT effective length is 239mm, 10mm longer than the Jelco arm. I've been keeping an eye out for info on the Jelco because I thought it would be nice to have what is, more or less, a modern version of the MMT. I'd go ahead and buy a new Jelco, but of course, the mounting distance is different and I'm not too good at making mounting plates!
-Bob
2channel8
634 posts
 
Do you ALWAYS have fluid in your MMT/750/370; or only when you would turn the cap up greater than minimum? I always interpreted 'We recommend using fluid damping only for cartridges with dynamic compliance <9' to mean you don't need fluid. Then I thought, maybe it means there should be fluid in the reservoir; but the adjustment should be minimum. My Shure V15 with brush is mounted at the moment. I added a few drops of fluid and raised the knob and it seem the sibilants are more pleasant and there's a bit more ring to cymbals.
More to discover