Hadcock arms

Hey Viridian,

Thanks! That was exactly how I would have responded.

Thanks all.

Joe

I agree with Audiofeil, the old Hadcock 228 works surprisingly well with stiffer carts too. I've tried an Ortofon MC30 super in it with good results. Have not tried the Denon 103 in it though. I would not call it a traditional unipivot since the "needle" goes into a bearing with 4 balls. Mr Hadcock tried a 3 ball bearing as well but found that 4 balls gave a better result.
The arm is a b*tch to set up though...

The Hadcock arms are excellent value for money. They have always had the inverted unipivot and 4 ball bearing since they appeared in the late 1970s. I still use my original hadcock 228 (circa 1981) although it plays second fiddle to my Schroeder 2 now.
Over the years I have used this with all sorts of carts - ortofon VMS20, ADC XLM, Ortofon MC10, Decca London Maroon and Gold (Garrott Brothers) and my current Allaerts MC1B. I've had no problems with any of them. You need to use fluid damping for the Deccas and MCs. Otherwise it's excellent. It has gone up in price since I bought mine in 1981 - I paid 65 GBP (120 USD) for my new arm then!
The newer versions are better made, more adaptable (with removeable armwands) and the longer ones have a slightly higher mass to suit the current vogue for lower compliance MCs. But they all work fine.

>>You need to use fluid damping for the Deccas and MCs<<

Perhaps for the older models but not the latest versions.

Some of the information in this thread is incorrect. All Hadcock 228's and 242's use the 4-ball bearing; none are traditional unstabilized unipivots. In the earlier 228's, the arm tubes were aluminum, and the headshell angle was slightly incorrect. The 242's had steel arm tubes, slightly longer. At one point, a heavier-duty bearing structure became available in some models.

The current-manufacture 228's and 242's all use an upgraded 4-ball bearing structure and steel arm tube, and the headshell angle is correct. The only difference between the various Hadcock models now is the arm length and the quality of the wiring. I own and use a 242 Integra.

Having been surprised at the mass of my 242, I installed a Denon 103 just to see what would happen. It sounded *fabulous*!

Although the Hadcock is a pain to set up (especially after my JMW 10), it seems to be unusually versatile. I never would have guessed that the same tonearm could work with my high-compliance Music Maker 3 and a low-compliance unit like the 103!

The operating principle seems weird to me, but I can't argue with how it sounds.