9” vs 12” pick up arms. The mechanics explained minus the anecdotal B.S.

[jeff1225]

Jeffrey, that sounds pretty easy. What adjustments if any do you make when switching cartridges?

It is easy!

1. Remove the anti-skate weight
2. Zero out the small counter weight
3. Install the new cartridge which is already in it's dedicated headshell or is an SPU
4. Adjust the large counter weight to balance the arm so it's perfectly level
5. Slide the small counter weight so it's the appropriate weight dictated by the cartridge manufacturer
6. Use my Japanese made Ortofon scale to insure the VTF is correct, its always super close
7. Unlock the SME sled to adjust the nuls
8. Use my DB system protractor to dial in the cartridge to two nuls
9. Attach the anti-skating weight to the appropriate weight
10. Adjust VTA visually....this arm is not that sensitive to VTA (unlike my Ikeda or SME IV)

And then I listen to sweet tunes. This take 3 minutes, 5 if I'm working on a fine single malt.

 

[miniguy]

There are so many "experts" in the world of 'audio' that the unwashed 'punters' can pick and choose which 'expert' to believe....(almost none of whom has any scientific proof to offer).
40 years ago, I started by using a Technics tonearm with detachable headshell but under pressure from the High-End Hi-Fi community (journalists)....I quickly changed to a fixed headshell Hadcock GH-228 and for the next 30 years I eschewed removable headshells.

10 years ago I re-entered the detachable headshell tonearm world and have owned nearly twenty different models of both fixed and removable headshell arms.
I have never, in that time, heard a detachable headshell tonearm sound inferior to a fixed shell because of it....
In fact....nearly all the fixed-shell tonearms I owned, have been out-performed by the removable-headshell ones until only one of my 6 tonearms has a non-removable shell (the Copperhead).

The 'expert' purist brigade once again makes its point by entering a world in which it has little expertise.....Structural Mechanics.
It posits the proposal that a 'mechanical joint' cannot be as rigid as a fixed (or no joint).....
In engineering, there are several ways of joining both alike and non-alike materials to form what is called a 'Moment Connection'.
This is a connection which essentially allows all forces (bending, shear) to be transferred without any movement or losses. In steel construction (to keep the example simple)...this can be achieved by riveting, high-tensile bolts or welding.
The bayonet and tightening-collar connection for a typical removable-headshell, effectively offers a high-quality Moment Connection.
Some tonearm manufacturers (those with real engineering credentials like Fidelity Research) actually advise that the ubiquitous rubber gasket (which accompanies every headshell) be removed to prevent any compliant coupling between arm and shell.

We are then left with the apparent 'weakness' of an additional 'electrical' connection between the headshell and arm....
This is beyond my expertise so I have essentially 'swallowed' this weakness and believed my ears
Imagine my surprise and delight recently, to find this posting by John Elison on Vinyl Asylum.....

Unless someone with higher qualifications than John is able to demonstrate the errors of his statement......I'm going with this

To rub further salt into the wounds of the 'fixed-headshell' brigade......the greatest improvements to the sounds of all my cartridges have occurred with changes to headshell material and construction.
Changes that far exceed (in many cases) those between individual cartridges themselves are readily available for ridiculously small amounts of money.
And this is something the fixed-headshell brigade will never experience......
In most cases, tonearms come with fixed headshells made of metal.
Only one of my 40 odd cartridges is mounted in a metal headshell with various wood and carbon-fibre shells sounding infinitely better

It will be interesting indeed to hear from all those truly experienced audiophiles on this Forum who have previously experienced only high-quality tonearms with fixed headshells and are now embarking on the sonic pleasures of the 3012R....

These comments strongly reflect my own understanding and experience. The benefits of a continuous run of wire from cartridge clips to output plugs and of fixed headshells have been way overblown for a long time. In addition, every cartridge I have mounted on my Uwe snakewood headshell has performed better than in any metal headshell I have tried.


Sorry about the rotated image.

 

[Ron Resnick]

There are so many "experts" in the world of 'audio' that the unwashed 'punters' can pick and choose which 'expert' to believe....(almost none of whom has any scientific proof to offer).
40 years ago, I started by using a Technics tonearm with detachable headshell but under pressure from the High-End Hi-Fi community (journalists)....I quickly changed to a fixed headshell Hadcock GH-228 and for the next 30 years I eschewed removable headshells.

10 years ago I re-entered the detachable headshell tonearm world and have owned nearly twenty different models of both fixed and removable headshell arms.
I have never, in that time, heard a detachable headshell tonearm sound inferior to a fixed shell because of it....
In fact....nearly all the fixed-shell tonearms I owned, have been out-performed by the removable-headshell ones until only one of my 6 tonearms has a non-removable shell (the Copperhead).

The 'expert' purist brigade once again makes its point by entering a world in which it has little expertise.....Structural Mechanics.
It posits the proposal that a 'mechanical joint' cannot be as rigid as a fixed (or no joint).....
In engineering, there are several ways of joining both alike and non-alike materials to form what is called a 'Moment Connection'.
This is a connection which essentially allows all forces (bending, shear) to be transferred without any movement or losses. In steel construction (to keep the example simple)...this can be achieved by riveting, high-tensile bolts or welding.
The bayonet and tightening-collar connection for a typical removable-headshell, effectively offers a high-quality Moment Connection.
Some tonearm manufacturers (those with real engineering credentials like Fidelity Research) actually advise that the ubiquitous rubber gasket (which accompanies every headshell) be removed to prevent any compliant coupling between arm and shell.

We are then left with the apparent 'weakness' of an additional 'electrical' connection between the headshell and arm....
This is beyond my expertise so I have essentially 'swallowed' this weakness and believed my ears
Imagine my surprise and delight recently, to find this posting by John Elison on Vinyl Asylum.....

Unless someone with higher qualifications than John is able to demonstrate the errors of his statement......I'm going with this

To rub further salt into the wounds of the 'fixed-headshell' brigade......the greatest improvements to the sounds of all my cartridges have occurred with changes to headshell material and construction.
Changes that far exceed (in many cases) those between individual cartridges themselves are readily available for ridiculously small amounts of money.
And this is something the fixed-headshell brigade will never experience......
In most cases, tonearms come with fixed headshells made of metal.
Only one of my 40 odd cartridges is mounted in a metal headshell with various wood and carbon-fibre shells sounding infinitely better

It will be interesting indeed to hear from all those truly experienced audiophiles on this Forum who have previously experienced only high-quality tonearms with fixed headshells and are now embarking on the sonic pleasures of the 3012R....

You may be correct; I have no idea. But I think your conclusions do not flow easily from your premises. I am objecting to the integrity of your argument, not to the correctness of your conclusions.

A) structural integrity

1) How does "effectively" undermine your assertion?

2) Is a bayonet and tightening collar connection as strong as welding, or is it not?

3) Does a bayonet and tightening collar connection have the same shear strength and bending strength as a titanium or magnesium headshell welded to a titanium or magnesium armwand, or does it not?
​

B) electrical connection

I do not understand their argument, but I believe that the people who are troubled by an additional electrical juncture are concerned about some issue other than merely electrical resistance due to the connector. So explaining that the increased resistance is infinitesimally small does not address their issue.

I think their issue has something to do with the breaking of the electrical connection, not with infinitesimally increased resistance through the connector.

C) changing headshell materials

Obviously if you prefer one headshell definitively to another, the fact that you can attach your preferred headshell to your armwand is going to outweigh, for you, any issues arising from a removable connector. But that is an answer to a different question. Of course an installable headshell you like is preferable to you than a fixed headshell you do not like.

So the question becomes -- would you be happiest of all being able to affix permanently to your armwand the headshell you do like?

 

[andromedaaudio]

1 more good connection can be made , we use it all the time in industry.
A shrink fit or Krimppassing in dutch , you Heat up for example the bearing or coupling or headshell in this case , max. 120 degrees celsius, please remove the headshell wires lol
It expands a bit and will slide over the Shaft let it cool down perfect fit , usually in combination with a keyway .
Obviously you need a Shaft that's a Little bit bigger in diameter, talking 100/1000 s of a mm , depending on diameter.

 

[Halcro]

You may be correct; I have no idea. But I think your conclusions do not flow easily from your premises. I am objecting to the integrity of your argument, not to the correctness of your conclusions.

A) structural integrity

1) How does "effectively" undermine your assertion?

2) Is a bayonet and tightening collar connection as strong as welding?

3) Does a bayonet and tightening collar connection have the same shear strength and bending strength as a titanium or magnesium headshell welded to a titanium or magnesium armwand?
​

B) electrical connection

I do not understand their argument, but I believe that the people who are troubled by an additional electrical juncture are concerned about some issue other than merely electrical resistance due to the connector. So explaining that the increased resistance is infinitesimally small does not address their issue.

I think their issue has something to do with the breaking of the electrical connection, not with infinitesimally increased resistance through the connector.

C) changing headshell materials

Obviously if you prefer one headshell definitively to another, the fact that you can attach your preferred headshell to your armwand is going to outweigh, for you, any issues arising from a removable connector. But that is an answer to a different question. Of course an installable headshell you like is preferable to you than a fixed headshell you do not like.

So the question becomes -- would you be happiest of all being able to affix permanently to your armwand the headshell you do like?

A) 1) Not at all. Moment Connection is a definable engineering term. I was comparing the bayonet and collar connection to those of steel moment connections. There are many other ways of creating Moment Connections in all materials.

2) Yes

3) Yes Just try for yourself to break apart both types of connections

I think their issue has something to do with the breaking of the electrical connection

I don't understand what this means....?
Do you " break" the electrical connection when you connect to your SUT? or to your Phono Stage or to your Preamp or to your Amp or to your speakers or to your subwoofers.....?

So the question becomes -- would you be happiest of all being able to affix permanently to your armwand the headshell you do like?

No....because a better headshell is always a possibility :b

 

[miniguy]

“So the question becomes -- would you be happiest of all being able to affix permanently to your armwand the headshell you do like?“

For me not at all. Since the effective mass of a tonearm is largely determined by the mass furthest from the pivot, it offers the flexibility to users of multiple cartridges with differing compliances the ability to most suitably adjust arm effective mass with the appropriate headshell to achieve a close to desirable resonance between 8 Hz and 12 Hz.

 

[NorthStar]

These comments strongly reflect my own understanding and experience. The benefits of a continuous run of wire from cartridge clips to output plugs and of fixed headshells have been way overblown for a long time. In addition, every cartridge I have mounted on my Uwe snakewood headshell has performed better than in any metal headshell I have tried.

 

[andromedaaudio]

You can also cool down the armwand Shaft with liquid nitrogen, same principle, in that case the cables are cyrogenically treated for the same cost lol!!!

 

[bonzo75]

A) 1) Not at all. Moment Connection is a definable engineering term. I was comparing the bayonet and collar connection to those of steel moment connections. There are many other ways of creating Moment Connections in all materials.

2) Yes

3) Yes Just try for yourself to break apart both types of connections


I don't understand what this means....?
Do you " break" the electrical connection when you connect to your SUT? or to your Phono Stage or to your Preamp or to your Amp or to your speakers or to your subwoofers.....?


No....because a better headshell is always a possibility :b

Halcro, what are your favorite headshells? I guess would depend on the cartridge. Tried the Arche?

 

[ddk]

I thought you said the series 2 (aluminum) was inferior sounding to series 1 with steel arm tube ?

It is inferior, my point was that the 3012 was never a lucky accident but a masterful piece of engineering SME just took a brief detour with the aluminum tube Series 2 following the low mass trend pushed by audio rags at the time but then went back to the steel tube. 3012-R is the Series 2 with some ergonomic upgrades and a steel tube, hence Series 2 Improved.

david

 

[pcosta]

In a sense you may be right as SME made a 3012R series 2 version with an aluminum arm tube and perhaps some other small changes. The sound quality from what I understand went backwards...

Christian

I think all of the 3012R versions have a stainless wand. I don't know what the difference is with the 3012R and the 3012R series 2, I have a NOS 3012R series II in the box still and it looks identical to the original 3012R I got from David. The R is the designation of that?
I believe the Series II you are referring to is the previous arm that used a aluminum wand in the 70's for the MM era? Someone correct me if I a wrong.

 

[ddk]

Christian

I think all of the 3012R versions have a stainless wand. I don't know what the difference is with the 3012R and the 3012R series 2, I have a NOS 3012R series II in the box still and it looks identical to the original 3012R I got from David. The R is the designation of that?
I believe the Series II you are referring to is the previous arm that used a aluminum wand in the 70's for the MM era? Someone correct me if I a wrong.

All the 30xx-R arms have steel tubes and are called Series II Improved.

david

 

[rockitman]

It is inferior, my point was that the 3012 was never a lucky accident but a masterful piece of engineering SME just took a brief detour with the aluminum tube Series 2 following the low mass trend pushed by audio rags at the time but then went back to the steel tube. 3012-R is the Series 2 with some ergonomic upgrades and a steel tube, hence Series 2 Improved.

david

Okay, thanks for clearing that up.

 

[Lagonda]

Here is a link for explanations of differences of the SME 3009/3012 versions.
http://www.analogue-classics.com/html/sme_3009___3012.html

 

[microstrip]

Here is a link for explanations of differences of the SME 3009/3012 versions.
http://www.analogue-classics.com/html/sme_3009___3012.html

Owners should also remember that the null point protractors are different for each SME version - geometry and effective length differ even between similar size versions. Do not use an old SME protractor found in the depth of your drawer without checking it is the proper one!

 

[Fsonicsmith]

I respectfully find Marc Gomez's white paper to be simplistic and little more than ad copy. Many tonearm manufacturers have similar white papers explaining the principles of their arms. Theirs too prove nothing. They help explain the designer's priorities and goals and little more. He simplistically concludes that a 9" arm is inherently more rigid than a 12" arm. So what? Where is it written and confirmed by peer reviewed scientific journals that any resonance running fore and aft the tonearm causes undesirable effects? The tonearm holds the suspension-sprung cartridge in place on one end and anchors it to a pivot on the other. Resonance and vibrations are a part of life and focusing on it as some kind of musical pariah is failing to see the forest for the trees. What is it about a 9' arm that magically eliminates resonance? Nothing! Vibrations are inherently produced by the cartridge/cantilever/stylus as they track the grooves and that vibration has to go somewhere, largely converted to heat. There are first, second, and even third resonant nodes inherent in any tonearm. My point is that rather than eliminate every resonance, some has to be tuned to the product in a favorable fashion. For a very relevant analogy, go over to the Artisan Fidelity website and FAQ https://www.artisanfidelity.com/faq/ and read the author's explanation as to why one plinth design is not optimum for every table. The author and man behind Artisan Fidelity explains that each vintage widely revered benchmark deck has its own set of properties that have to be "played" in complementary fashion with the damping characteristics of the plinth-that overdamping can kill off the music! I respectfully submit that given Mike Fremer's fantastic listening skills (meant sincerely), the SAT arm sounds great for being a complimentary whole and not by virtue of it being a 9" arm. Last thing I need to say; MF used, "if you want correct, get a CD player" as some sort of riposte to me. Let me (please) turn that around where I believe it is more accurately directed-Mr. Fremer, if you want to eliminate all resonance and analogue imperfections, get a CD player!

 

[DaveyF]

I respectfully find Marc Gomez's white paper to be simplistic and little more than ad copy. Many tonearm manufacturers have similar white papers explaining the principles of their arms. Theirs too prove nothing. They help explain the designer's priorities and goals and little more. He simplistically concludes that a 9" arm is inherently more rigid than a 12" arm. So what? Where is it written and confirmed by peer reviewed scientific journals that any resonance running fore and aft the tonearm causes undesirable effects? The tonearm holds the suspension-sprung cartridge in place on one end and anchors it to a pivot on the other. Resonance and vibrations are a part of life and focusing on it as some kind of musical pariah is failing to see the forest for the trees. What is it about a 9' arm that magically eliminates resonance? Nothing! Vibrations are inherently produced by the cartridge/cantilever/stylus as they track the grooves and that vibration has to go somewhere, largely converted to heat. There are first, second, and even third resonant nodes inherent in any tonearm. My point is that rather than eliminate every resonance, some has to be tuned to the product in a favorable fashion. For a very relevant analogy, go over to the Artisan Fidelity website and FAQ https://www.artisanfidelity.com/faq/ and read the author's explanation as to why one plinth design is not optimum for every table. The author and man behind Artisan Fidelity explains that each vintage widely revered benchmark deck has its own set of properties that have to be "played" in complementary fashion with the damping characteristics of the plinth-that overdamping can kill off the music! I respectfully submit that given Mike Fremer's fantastic listening skills (meant sincerely), the SAT arm sounds great for being a complimentary whole and not by virtue of it being a 9" arm. Last thing I need to say; MF used, "if you want correct, get a CD player" as some sort of riposte to me. Let me (please) turn that around where I believe it is more accurately directed-Mr. Fremer, if you want to eliminate all resonance and analogue imperfections, get a CD player!

And 'if' Michael Fremer decides to reply, I sincerely hope he won't continue to confuse your posts with mine....LOL.

 

[Fsonicsmith]

http://vpiforum.com/viewtopic.php?f=9&t=10621

 

[advanced101]

FWIW, I had both the 10" 3D (Sig Wiring) and 12" 3DR on my Avenger and greatly preferred the 10" 3D with a A95. I only had one but I swapped them back and forth. I have always felt that VPI's arms were their greatest weakness.

 

[Fsonicsmith]

FWIW, I had both the 10" 3D (Sig Wiring) and 12" 3DR on my Avenger and greatly preferred the 10" 3D with a A95. I only had one but I swapped them back and forth. I have always felt that VPI's arms were their greatest weakness.

I agree with you. Further adding support to this view is that VPI is putting a toe in the water of gimbaled arms.
What makes me feel most uncomfortable with VPI unipivots is that once azimuth is adjusted by means of a Fozgometer, the arm more often than not is significantly canted to one side when at rest. The extent of this leaning ameliorates as the arm travels across the record surface. I think the design of the balancing weights under the pivot point has much to do with this. But the bottom line is that I have never achieved great sound with a VPI arm.
I am heavily influenced by a very knowledgeable person, whom I will leave out of this, that in all likelihood 10.5" is the best all around compromise for tonearm length given all the various compromises and their consequences in the very imperfect world or analogue vinyl playback. But as HW said, a 9" arm may be best for rock and a 12" may have the blackest backgrounds (he didn't say that, but that is what I read into what he did say) and in the middle is....