1. Home
  2. analog
  3. 1117142645

TriPlanar Tips

The manual that comes with the TriPlanar Mk VII tonearm is fairly complete, but there are a few things I’ve learned only by living with the arm. Note: I do not know which if any of these would apply to previous versions of the arm. My only experience is with the Mk VII.

1. NEVER raise the cueing lever while the arm is locked in the arm rest. This pressures the damping cylinder and could cause a silicone leak. For this reason and also for safety, whenever the arm is in the arm rest the cueing lever should be DOWN. This is backwards from most arms and takes some getting used to.

2. If your Tri-Planar doesn't cue straight down there's a quick fix, which may be included on some new arms. The problem is insufficient friction between the arm tube and the hard rubber cueing support bar. Just glue a bit of thin sandpaper to the underside of the arm tube. Make it big enough and position it so it hits the cueing support bar at all points across the arm’s arc. (Note: after doing this you will need to adjust the cueing height, see Tip #3.)

3. When adjusting cueing height (instructions are in the manual) always do so with the arm in the UP position. This adjustment is VERY touchy, since the cueing support bar is so close to the pivot. Be patient and be careful of your cartridge. (Note: after doing this you may need to adjust the anti-skate initiation point, see Tip #4.)

Chris Brady of Teres told me of a way to improve cueing even more by re-shaping the cueing support. Moving the cueing support point farther from the pivot improves its mechanical advantage and makes the cueing height and speed adjustments less touchy. This mod is easier than it sounds and requires only a length of coat hanger (!), but I don’t have pix and haven’t yet done it myself.

4. Changing the cueing height affects the point where anti-skate kicks in. (Yes, it's weird.) Once cueing height is satisfactory, adjust the short pin that sticks out of the front of the cueing frame. That pin controls where the anti-skate dogleg first engages the knot on the string.

5. The Tri-Planar comes with three counterweight donuts of differing masses. Many cartridges can be balanced using either of two. The arm usually tracks best with the heaviest donut that will work, mounted closer to the pivot. Of course this also reduces effective mass, which may or may not be sonically desirable depending on the cartridge. It also leaves more room for Tip #6.

6. For fine VTF adjustments don’t futz with the counterweight, there’s an easier way. Set the counterweight for the highest VTF you think you’ll need (ie, close to the pivot). Pick up some 1/4" I.D. O-rings from Home Depot. To reduce VTF a bit just slip an O-ring or two on the end stub. Thin O-rings reduce VTF by .01-.02g, thick ones by .04-.05g. Quick, cheap, effective. (For safety, always lock the arm down while adding or removing O-rings.)

7. When adjusting VTA, always bring the pointer to the setting you want by turning it counter-clockwise at least ¼ of a turn. This brings the arm UP to the spot you've selected, which takes up the slop in the threads. You can easily feel this happening.

Hope someone finds these useful. If you know any more, please bring ‘em on!
dougdeacon
jfrech's avatar
jfrech
1,816 posts
 
Phaser,

Congrats on your table and arm. I went the same path as you and really have enjoyed my GPA Monaco and Tri arm. What cartridge and arm cable are you using?

I also put 2 o rings on the cueing lever, one down a ways and one up. On Antiskate, I decided I like the weight better than just o rings, so I flanked each side of the weight with o rings jammed as close to the weight as I could. Seemed to marginally help a little.

But agree with others, the damping trough is just awful, it should be left it box automatically and only added by user desire.
lewm
6,770 posts
 
Can anyone tell me why the damping trough should be such a negative as claimed? Do you think it is the damping per se or is it resonances set up by the physical presence of the trough and paddle? In that regard, have you all checked that the screws securing the trough were tight, in the process of deciding to remove it entirely? By the way, between Leroy Nieman and Rubens, who would want the former? An unfortunate analogy. How about Rubens v Pollack or v a great French Impressionist? Nieman is trite.

I am going to try it, because now that I am also listening to a Dynavector DV505, I notice that the Dyna is more dynamic sounding than the TP.
dougdeacon OP
3,338 posts
 
Lew,

So sorry for the poor analogy, especially if it offended artistic sensibilities. Pollack will do.

While we're offering corrections, no one on this thread has merely "claimed" the damping trough is a negative. We've removed it and listened for ourselves (and yes, mine was screwed on very tight).

The PRESENCE of the trough is a negative for one reason, as discussed above when the suggestion was first made. It's the same reason the antiskate device and armrest are (somewhat lesser) negatives.

The USE of the trough is a negative in sonically different ways. Damping alters the internal resonance characteristics of the arm, and the result is not good.

Try it. You'll have no trouble deciding for yourself, as so many others have. Explanations don't convince so well, and risk being trite!
lewm
6,770 posts
 
Thanks, Doug. I did not mean to sound snotty about Nieman, but I guess I did.
I knew Herb Papier for his last 15 years or so. He was a very careful listener, and he did not do anything to his tonearm that he himself did not try out in his own system, which was a pretty good one (Sound Lab A1, Rowland 7 amp and his top preamp, Basis Debut turntable). Since I assume Herb felt the damping trough was a positive addition to his tonearm and that this judgement was based on his own trial and error in his own system, I have been reluctant to believe that one would be better off without the trough entirely. But you make a good point; I need to try it. I am now prompted to do so after being blown off my feet by the dynamics of the DV505 tonearm compared to my TP.

PS. I don't know whether the trough alters the resonance of the tonearm so much as it may sink some of the energy at resonance, which was meant to be a good thing. Perhaps it is not.
sirspeedy
738 posts
 
I have to give kudos to the non damping crowd,wheter it "is" in the bearing or not(as in trough...a total NO-NO).

I have a group of pals who will not touch an arm if it requires "any" kind of damping!....Bearing or an external trough!!

From my experience with a Graham 2.2 and Phantom I,and II.....the pivot bearing certainly had it's own "signature",regardless of how much, or little fluid was needed.The results were absolutely superb,but there was always a "something" going on with any fluid addition or subtraction.

Though the results were superb,I always wondered how much more could be had without any fluid,if that could be the case(this was a NO-NO on the Grahams).

I finally gave up,once it was demonstrated enough times,on a "measely" VPI 12.6,using NO fluid anywhere(the "measely crack" was just kidding,because it is quite superb,and the arm replaced an Air Tangent linear masterpiece).

I'm going to assume that the latest Triplanar arm is about as good as is "really necessary",and should suffice any realistic assumption of what should be had from an LP.

If I were to buy any current arm(not any time soon,due to my daughter's upcomming wedding....OUCH)the TRI would be high up on the list.

Regards

More to discover