It is a VERY limited production, a single run and not everyone is from the forum. People who bought them will know how many there are in the edition.
david
9” vs 12” pick up arms. The mechanics explained minus the anecdotal B.S.
- Thread starter TrackingAngle
- Start date
It is a VERY limited production, a single run and not everyone is from the forum. People who bought them will know how many there are in the edition.
david
only $70K in tonearms required to perform the test...leaving carts out for the moment...
Congratulations on selling a number of the AS-2000s in the Far East, David. Marc Gomez may be referring to a few owners of the TechDAS AF1 who want the longer SAT arm on the other armboard because the two armboards are designed for different length arms. That would make sense in regard to his "customer demand" comment. I have read that the two AF1 armboards are different, the one in the rear being a cantilever design and the other is direct on the plinth. I think someone wrote that there is no sonic difference between the two. Has anyone confirmed this?
I think for a true direct comparison between the 9" and 12" SAT arms, they would need to be on a table with the same armboards. Do you know if any of your customers are planning to make such a direct comparison? If you say they don't care about any of this, why would they have one arm of each length on the same table, or do you mean that different people are buying different length SAT arms for your table?
I am going to take a different tack here and suggest that perhaps we are not seeing the trees because of the forest. During my career, my group was faced with many questions in process areas that were considered "black art". No one knew why certain things worked and others didn't. I certainly see that in this debate. In those situations I always found it helpful to step back and gather facts as we knew them.
One of the facts that really intrigues me is simply how many members here consider the SME 3012R to be one the best, if not best tonearms, bar none, available. And this is from those of you I see as being very well versed in the tonal qualities of many arms gathered over many years searching....and you all have come full circle to settle on a 3012R. Truly fascinating. Respecting your sage knowledge base, I was seriously on the quest for a 3012R until I messed up the chance to purchase one NIB, got pissed off at myself and vowed I would not miss another opportunity for a deal. I rationalized my coming about, perhaps foolishly, on the fact that the 3012R is ancient.
The SME is decades old technology folks, long before materials science was in vogue and would think that many of the tools available to today's designers were not available 40 years ago. By way of comment, I do feel that computer modeling is overly relied upon to give engineers the "correct" solution to any given problem but that is another thread. Suffice to say that I have witnessed too many conclusions that went up in flames because the model was flawed.
So here are a few questions, maybe they end up being answered for my own lack of knowledge and thus my benefit only...
1) What was the impetus for the 3012 design in the first place? I have read that it was out of need to produce an arm that would accommodate larger diameter platters and nothing more. True?
2) Many experts decry designs with removable headshells, be they 9", 10.5" or 12". Why is the 3012 not penalized for that design "flaw"?
3) The 3012 seems to be very unique in at least one aspect, the non linear arm. The SME is not alone in incorporating bent wands, many 12" designs are not straight but what stands out to me is that the 3012 is bent much closer to the arm pivot point than others. Has anyone looked at: a) whether or not bends in the wand provide a tactical advantage over simply angling the headshell at the end of the wand? b) How does location of that bend influence other factors, such a resonance? I can envision how a twisting torque on bent arm might behave completely differently than torque applied to a straight tube but unsure if that is of benefit, detriment or none of the above.
4) Given what seems to be a very effective tonearm design, why is the 3012 not in production today?
Curious minds want to know...
Brock
One of the facts that really intrigues me is simply how many members here consider the SME 3012R to be one the best, if not best tonearms, bar none, available. And this is from those of you I see as being very well versed in the tonal qualities of many arms gathered over many years searching....and you all have come full circle to settle on a 3012R. Truly fascinating. Respecting your sage knowledge base, I was seriously on the quest for a 3012R until I messed up the chance to purchase one NIB, got pissed off at myself and vowed I would not miss another opportunity for a deal. I rationalized my coming about, perhaps foolishly, on the fact that the 3012R is ancient.
The SME is decades old technology folks, long before materials science was in vogue and would think that many of the tools available to today's designers were not available 40 years ago. By way of comment, I do feel that computer modeling is overly relied upon to give engineers the "correct" solution to any given problem but that is another thread. Suffice to say that I have witnessed too many conclusions that went up in flames because the model was flawed.
So here are a few questions, maybe they end up being answered for my own lack of knowledge and thus my benefit only...
1) What was the impetus for the 3012 design in the first place? I have read that it was out of need to produce an arm that would accommodate larger diameter platters and nothing more. True?
2) Many experts decry designs with removable headshells, be they 9", 10.5" or 12". Why is the 3012 not penalized for that design "flaw"?
3) The 3012 seems to be very unique in at least one aspect, the non linear arm. The SME is not alone in incorporating bent wands, many 12" designs are not straight but what stands out to me is that the 3012 is bent much closer to the arm pivot point than others. Has anyone looked at: a) whether or not bends in the wand provide a tactical advantage over simply angling the headshell at the end of the wand? b) How does location of that bend influence other factors, such a resonance? I can envision how a twisting torque on bent arm might behave completely differently than torque applied to a straight tube but unsure if that is of benefit, detriment or none of the above.
4) Given what seems to be a very effective tonearm design, why is the 3012 not in production today?
Curious minds want to know...
Brock
Bob, I don't think there is such a bible, but measurements are very important in all of this. Vinyl is all about precision and proper set up for best sound. Precision requires measurements, computer or otherwise.
What do you understand Marc Gomez to mean when he writes that the 9" arm is more "accurate"? Lower distortion? Sounds more like real music? Is more transparent to the information cut in the grooves? I preferred the sound of the 12" version of my tonearm. Others may prefer the 9" version. I described how the two sounded different to me. How does "accuracy" fit in to those preferences? What does it mean, how is it measured?
At some point with future advancements in tonearm design, the effects of rigidity and moment of inertia may be less and less audible and other considerations like tracking distortion may become more primary to people's preferences. Right now, Mr. Gomez has his opinion on his designs. And as ddk wrote, I commend Mr. Gomez for his candor in sharing that opinion. However, I do not we should extrapolate from those opinions and assume they are applicable to all other designs.
I would like to read how Mr. Gomez, or anyone else, describes the difference in sound between his two arm lengths.
That is an excellent series of questions. I have never heard an SME 3012R and do not know the answers to any of your questions. Here is another observation: the curved arm tube is longer and therefore heavier, all things being equal, thus increasing effective mass and moment of inertia. An offset headshell does not have these issues. Perhaps the answer lies in the way resonances are affected.
I would love to know why SME discontinued the 300X series and developed the V arm. They made the rather bold and famous claim "The best pick-up arm in the world". Many obviously disagree with this. I don't know if it was referring to the 300x series or the newer V series of arms. It is interesting that when they developed the new V series, they started with the 9" and only developed the 12" 312S when they built the longer 20/12 table. I do not know if the SME Model 30 or the V arm came first. I have read that they wanted a compact design at the time.
David may have some answers for you.
I have always wondered this too! I totally respect the desire for easy cartridge change, but I cannot imagine how the detachable headshell is an advantage structurally or from the point of view of adding another wire junction.
If the 3012R had a fixed headshell version, that is the one I would prefer.
Since almost everyone, if not literally everyone, purchasing an AS-2000 is also asking David to install a 3012R we are going to have the opportunity for several members to report comparisons between the 3012R and current production tonearms.
I am considering a second tonearm (Schroder LT or Durand Tosca) myself.
Thanks Peter for your time and candid interest in the art of analog vinyl music reproduction to the highest level possible today June 2018.
Earlier Henry posted a very interesting perspective, and Brock brought some excellent points. Yourself are a top TT explorer, with everything related...cartridges, tonearms, suspension, all that groovy jazz.
David is the master TT expert of this forum and high up in the art of horn music reproduction from vinyls.
Michael Fremer needs no introduction; when he speaks people step in their tracks like a needle in the grooves.
And Marc Gomez wrote a professional paper that I've read twice to fully absorb with correctness.
All of you together strike a chord. ...A music note from a piano key @ higher velocity, in the higher frequencies of the audio spectrum. It is that chord, that note, that key, that strike of that string I want to hear in balance with my surroundings.
Here's an excerpt from Marc's paper:
"... the groove reading and the sound quality will suffer. We are talking about deformations in the order down to nanometers (1/1.000.000 of a millimetre).
It is then obvious that any engineer would want to design this groove-reading devices as rigid as possible in order to reduce the detrimental deformations. That wouldn’t be any problem if the arm didn’t need to allow the cartridge to follow the warps and eccentricities - we could then use a very big, massive structure and have deformation levels orders of magnitud* lower than with current designs.
Unfortunately, we need to deal with record imperfections and the limitations that the cartridge suspension imposes on how massive an arm can be. This is why designing and building a truly high performance pickup arm is such a demanding task - two main opposing requirements must be met: very high rigidity and very low resistance to free movement in the vertical and horizontal planes.
The moment of inertia of an arm, which is related to what is usually called effective mass, represents a measure of how much resistance to initiate a rotating movement the arm has. An arm with low moment of inertia will react quickly to wraps and eccentricities, while a high moment of inertia will make the arm more sluggish and deflect the cartridge suspension more.
The laws of physics dictate that, due to the loads an arm is subjected to, a shorter length has a higher potential for rigidity and lower moment of inertia. Given an arm tube with a certain length, diameter, cross-section and material, when the length is doubled the bending and torsional stiffness will decrease to half. In the same example, the moment of inertia will increase to 4 times the original one.
To bring the stiffness of the 12 inch arm tube to the same levels as the 9 inch version, one must add material which will substantially increase the moment of inertia. Given a certain maximum moment of inertia allowed as design specification, I can always design a 9 inch version with much higher stiffness - every single time - no matter what kind of design the arm tube has.
Vibration and resonance
Arm design is a technical subject and require the use of accurate technical terms in order to reduce the risk for misinterpretations. Many are mixing the terms vibrations and resonances to refer to two different phenomena, though they are related. All bodies vibrate at their own natural frequencies and modes when excited, as well as their harmonics (multiples of the fundamental frequency). A longer and less stiff body will start vibrating from a lower frequency while a shorter and stiffer body will start vibrating at higher frequencies.
An arm tube vibration is mainly caused by the loads generated on a cartridge suspension. As this cannot be avoided, what matters is at what frequencies and, most importantly, with what amplitude the vibrations occur. The higher the amplitude the more detrimental the effect will be for reproduction accuracy."
Page 2
* magnitude
___
Let's forget for a moment reference versus preference, or accuracy versus euphony, or small classical chamber versus symphony.
The music that is being tracked and played back and reproduced and heard in our ears, are those the same notes that were first recorded and mastered on those vinyls, are they the same chords the same keys the same strings hit by the musicians and recorded by the master recording engineers?
I mean in the most accurate way possible and without personal identification of preference.
...On an engineering level.
I was certainly skeptical of the 3012R's performance (now own 5 of them) until I tried it. Not having a lot of experience with the arm, my first observation is that it's not overly damped. Perhaps this can be a problem in some systems, TT's where the bass can sound a bit fat for lack of a better expression ? In my system, I view the 3012R as merely a pipeline that lets the music flow unabashed, unvarnished...perhaps even somewhat un-damped. It works for me and it is my favorite arm. As far as the theoretical detriment of removable headshells degrading sound ??? In theory that makes sense. In practice...actual listening results trumps theory, ime.
Although I find your questions interesting your introduction needs some careful clarification. The SME3012R is well considered by those who appreciate a certain type of sound quality and system. Besides they own turntables and cartridges that match the 3012R. Naturally people who share preferences gather together and it is what is happening now in WBF. No one told us it was the best tonearm in the world.
I own 3 SME 3012R - I bought one, and could not resist when better specimen showed around me!
The arm is a bargain, compared to top tonearms we see now, and this helps spreading them around WBF audiophiles. I have listened to one of them, but not yet in an adequate turntable. I am preparing a better support for it, and if eventually I do not like it I am sure that my loss will be minimal. 1. Yes, the answer to your question is detailed in the original SME3012 brochure - you can download and read it in full in the vinylengine library https://www.vinylengine.com/library/sme/3012.shtml
2. Not everyone and some people accept that it is more important to have adjustable azimuth. The SME 3012 r headshell has a dual pin more solid lock system. Also some users use special quality head shells to couple the cartridge to the arm.
3. SME addressed this issue and several articles were written in Wireless World around this aspect.
4. It was referred in Munich that it will be re-introduced again. All IMHO, YMMV.
Am I the only one dreaming about the SME 3012 RG Gold Limited Nr. 0008 - Boxed - New/Never Used at ebay and fearing it is a not a real deal?
Last edited:
There's always a joint between the headshell and the armtube and the armtube with the backend of the tonearm no matter the design so should a properly designed collet for removable headshells be inferior to other types joints? Graham has removable pipes, same type of joint are his tonearms inferior to others because of it?
Many people adopted the 3012-R since I started mentioning it here and everyone including those with other top arms have found it to be among the best most natural sounding tonearms. AFAIK tens of thousands have sold and yet they're relatively hard to come by used, this should tell those experts something about this design.
david
Last edited:
David, I think the SME V arm tube is designed specifically as a single piece of magnesium without any joints, from one end to the other. Here is a quote from the SME website: "Unique one-piece pressure die-cast tone-arm utilising the advantages of magnesium, replace conventional fabricated construction." Of course, this is the version with the fixed headshell. There is also a version with a removable headshell.
Not sure what that means been a very long time since got rid of mine and can't remember how it was assembled. I just remember being disgusted with the sound.
david
That's one piece tonearm too:
? http://www.smetonearms.com/index.php?main_page=product_info&cPath=15&products_id=87
? http://www.smetonearms.com/index.php?main_page=product_info&cPath=15&products_id=87
This is made that way to save cost not for sound quality, let's at least stick with serious tonearms not toys.
david
david
Last edited:
Okay....bear with me and let me see if I have a grasp on damping and see if this makes sense. We all know that the business end of a translating vinyl grooves into music lies within the cartridge, cantilever and stylus wherein the motion of the cantilever/coil or magnet combo creates a fluctuating voltage. In an ideal world, ignoring all other complications and the reality where the cartridge has to follow the groove, tt vibrations and such, would a cartridge perform at it's best if bolted to a solid foundation where none of the vibrational energy is lost through transformation to tonearm movement. If such a system were possible, is that a situation which defines zero damping other than that inherent to the cartridge/coil/magnet/cantilever/stylus combo?
The corollary seems to be the reality of using a tonearm to perform one critical function, to give the cartridge the ability to follow the spiral. In a relative sense, the cartridge is no longer secured, is subject to reactive forces generated as the stylus vibrates and is of low mass. Thus it becomes possible for vibrations to be transferred to the arm where one of two things (or both) occur. Either the vibrations are completely absorbed in the arm material or the arm sets up sympathetic vibrations, much like a tuning fork begins to vibrate when a piano string is properly tuned. Is the former a damped system and latter a situation in which some frequencies are amplified/accentuated by the arm?
I ask because the idea of matching cartridge compliance to tonearm effective mass alone does not quite make sense to me. Yes, I get the fact that a low compliance cart matched with a low mass arm will allow the stylus to push the the arm around (thus losing efficiency) but it doesn't seem to tell the whole story. Resonant frequencies in the arm have to play a part too, or am I way off base here.
Similar threads
 | Steve Williams Site Founder | Site Owner | Administrator |  | Ron Resnick Site Co-Owner | Administrator |  | Julian (The Fixer) Website Build | Marketing Managersing |