Hello gentlemen,
I think I may be able to shed some light on a few issues discussed in this thread.
First of all, a US patent for the mechanism that is the heart of this tonearm has been granted on Nov. 5th. In addition, it is protected under design copyright law in the EU.
The use of this arm on any softly suspended deck(like a Linn LP12, Oracle Delphi, Voyd....) is less than optimal. Just like any tonearm - and airbearing tonearms in particular - the arm needs to be levelled(a provision for which is "hidden" in the arm base) or else the advantage of no side thrust generation(lack of skating force) will be jeopardized as, similar the an air bearing "sled", the pivoted arm will find a gravitational "null" or resting position. It's not as pronounced an issue as with airbearing arms as the mass displacement is a lot smaller, but still...
Tangency is maintained through a vector addition. Lateral tonearm displacement (and frictional pull) will move the fixed outrigger underneath the main arm bearing to which a magnet is attached. That magnet always maintains minimum proximity to the ferromagnetic "guide-rail" above, yet never touches it. So for any given angle that the main tonearm assumes, the pivoting bar is forced to move so that the magnet stays as close to the bar as possible.
Yes, that mechanism needs excellent, in fact, the very best bearings one can buy. The total bearing friction in the lateral plane(<3,5mN) is lower than ANY other conventional tonearm with captive bearings. In the vertical bearings, friction is ZERO, as in unmeasurable/waaay below what the wiring is contributing.
The slightest whiff will move the arm across a blank record, and a hair, gently put on the headshell while the arm is in equilibrum, will displace it. Yet there is NO play in any of the bearings in operation.
No skating compensation is required, even if set up with a little less care than what one should apply, side thrust on the cantilever can be brought down to unprescedented low levels. This means that it now takes the same amount of force to displace the cantilever laterally in either direction from center(all bass below 80-100Hz is mono on LPs), increasing linearity/dynamics/extension.
The eff. length was not chosen arbitrarily, but yields the best combination of geometry and associated forces. Longer wouldn't result in less tracing error(so why do it?), shorter forces the displacement of the pivoting bar to increase, requiring more force.
Sorry if this reads like an advertizing pamphlet, it isn't supposed to be one...
And I'm really happy that, so far, people who spent their hard earned money on this, really seem to "get" it!
Forgive me for stopping short of revealing everything that contributes to the fidelity of this arm, as I like to reduce the risk of plagiarism to a manageable level
Happy listening!
Frank Schröder