Are linear tracking arms better than pivoted arms?

I was about to raise question that DarkMo just did.

"In the case of lateral force issues mentioned about linear arms, is this more a of mechanical/longevity concern or one of noticeable sonics, too? "

I think the discussion somehow got steered towards lateral force comparison and stress on cartridge etc. Which does not mean linear arm are inferior performer.

I also think original poster gave in too soon. I happen to believe that the linear arm are 'overall' superior performer. In my experience ( again I have not had top notch pivot arms in my TT set up at the same time with same cartridge (it would be definitive experiment though, like Darkmoebius suggests) but I do have other two TT set ups with pivot arms and I have optimized these two to death but still, in terms of completeness of notes and air around it as well as center of earth bass ( when present) sets its self apart from the other two TTs. Stand alone the other two TTs sound real good. It is only when you play back to back, the completeness of natural sound reproduction with linear arm is without a doubt 'better' in many ways.

I do agree that lateral force and stress issue are legible concerns. But I tend to Clean the linear travel rod more often to reduce friction.

Darkmo

are there cartridges that work equally as well on the two

My experience has been, not really! Perhpas because the cartridge quality parametres for one type of arm are different from those required for the other? I am, of course talking of hi-end cartridges.
Maybe a low compliance, rugged construction cartridge would do just as well -- mechanically -- on either type of arm?

Say the best type of DJ cartridge, or a Denon 103??

My experience is of course, absurd, as on paper this disparity shouldn't exist -- or should it?

Darkmoebius, if you are really interested about pivot vs linear on the same TT and with competitive cartridges in a true top-flight set-up, you should get in touch with Thuchan.
He has everything from ET 2.5, Goldmund T-3F, Kuzma Airline, the big SAEC 12", DaVinci 12", Kuzma 4Point, FR-66s with all the top cartridge you can name on 2 Micro Seiki 8000, Goldmund Reference, Garrard 501, TX-1000 Naka, Continuum Criterion and Kelch Reference.
He can shine some light.

BTW - it always depends on the rigidity and construction of the cantilever/suspension system of a given cartridge whether it reacts fast to the forces in a linear tonearm (read: wears out fast...) or whether it can withstand the slight abuse for much longer.
In general, cartridges with low compliance are less sensitive to fast wear-out.
High compliance cartridges with high body weight are apparently the most vulnerable.

Dear Albertporter,There are foreigners in this forum.What
do you mean by :^)))?

Regards,

Pryso, well - ABEC 7 isn't bad. It's good and heads away from playground marbles.
That there still are higher levels of precision ( = less friction + less noise ) doesn't mean the "7" isn't good.
A single ABEC 7 ball-bearing in miniature size will set you back about $14.
If bought in 100+ quantities it will be down to $8/pc.
That's about 1/10 the price of an ABEC 11.
ABEC11 are used in high precision laser linear slides and µm-measurement devices.
We see 60 cent brass RCAs jacks in $6k phono stages and 35 cent signal-coupling capacitors in $12k line stages.
In this world a ABEC 7 ball-bearing is already more than I expect to see in a modern high-end tonearm.
Frankly, I think you'll have a hard time finding a ball-bearing higher up the ABEC-scale in any other top-flight pivot tonearm.