Pivoting Linear-Tracking Tonearms

[G T Audio]

I’ll explain why I find the Thales arms mediocre. In fact, when something sounds mediocre, it just does—but I’ll outline the reasons behind that impression.

First of all, Thales (or more specifically, tangential pivoted tonearms) attempt to solve a tracking-error problem that was never a real issue to begin with. They offer a “solution” at the expense of rigidity. There are so many ball bearings in the mechanism of Thales that it’s impossible for the arm to remain truly rigid. You can see this clearly when playing a resonance test track. You don’t need any analyzer—the arm visibly cannot remain the cartridge stable. By the way, the Statement (5 or 6 different arms) performs better than the Simplicity II (5 arms) but still lacks proper rigidity.

When there are that many joints and bearings, you cannot avoid backlash. Even if you believe you have eliminated it, the “sponge effect” of the bearings and joints remains. This kills dynamics and drains the life out of the music.

The internal tonearm wiring is also problematic. It sounds harsh and tipped up in the highs. My guess is that they chose that cable to compensate for the arm’s inherently dull and lifeless performance—but trying to fix one flaw with another is not a real solution. Additionally, the hole where the cable enters the arm base is bare metal, which gradually scrapes the insulation and leads to hum over time. That is a design flaw.

More importantly, there is no adjustable anti-skating. It is preset at the factory and rarely matches the cartridge being used. In my experience, the value isn’t even consistent from sample to sample and is typically far too high, bending the cantilever and creating more tracking error than the tangential geometry supposedly solves in the first place.

Cartridge setup is also more restrictive. You are forced to use their jig, and your entire setup depends on multiple assumptions: correct P2S distance, correct jig alignment, etc. But this is not the best method. The best way is to visually verify stylus alignment on a protractor with proper VTF applied. You cannot properly do that with Thales arms. Beyond overhang, there is an even more critical factor: zenith error. You cannot reliably check stylus/cantilever zenith with the Thales system. Even if you manage it, you still have non defeat-able anti-skating working against you. In the end, the lack of proper zenith alignment probably introduces more tracking error than the tangential geometry corrects.

I can go on, but I think that’s enough for now.

I have demonstrated at shows and in my listening studio the Thales Simplicity II against other top tonearms when the Simplicity came out in 2010 and it certainly didn't sound mediocre. As I have said previously it requires very careful set up. Back then only the Schroder Reference sounded superior.

It is well known that parallel tracking tonearms, just like the cutting lathe where the record was cut, does eleminate any tracing or tracking distortion that a pivoted tonearm gives no matter how long the armtube is, and this what Thales has tried to achieve. To say the tonearm armtubes are not rigid is laughable. It is a very rigid structure due the the headshell bridge and the bearing bridge within the tonearm mounting pivot providing a 4 point rigid structure. Also, there is almost zero play and backlash in the bearings as these come from the watchmaking industry. Having compared this tonearm with other pivoted arms, gimbal and uni-pivoted types, the "bearing play" is less with the Thales than with other tonearms.

I do agree that the wiring coming out of the arm in through the base is a potential weak spot but when I installed these on customer turntables I used some fine butyl rubber sleeves that slide up the tonearm wiring and through the base and solved this potential issue. Any competent installer should be able to do this when installing these arms. The wiring I might add was of a very high quality and I had absolutely no issues in the 6 years installing these tonearms.

The jigs provided by Thales provide accurate stylus to pivot distance, also cartridge alignment too and makes this job relatively easy. I have check the geometry with my Acoustical systems Smart Tractor and found the Thales system to be accurate.

There is cartridge azimuth adjustment, not sure why you call it zenith. It's normally referred to as HTA or Horizontal Tracking Angle or Cartridge Azimuth. I suggest you read the manual. I have included a clip of the relevant section below.

As I have said previously, the Thales Simplicity II is a very good tonearm especially when it came out in 2010. There was very few tonearms around at that time that could provide this level of performance. I am sure today, well I would hope by today, that tonearm design has improved and sound quality has moved on a little further...

 

[G T Audio]

I did find Ikeda much superior to simplicity having Zyx universe 1 on both on Feickery Firebird. It was thin and digital. That said, statement is supposed to be better and the red sparrow first became famous at Audio exotics on the Thales statement, and given it works with linear trackers like Vyger and Bergmann, would like to hear it with the Statement

The Ikeda was based on the Fidelity Research FR64 & 66 tonearm, Ikeda being the designer of both. I owned a IT-407 back in 2009 but it was really designed for use with medium to high mass cartridges like the Ortofon SPU, as were a lot of Japanese tonearms. There is something very strange about the geometry on the IT-407 and this is described by Keith Howard in the Stereophile Review in 2013. Basically, the bend angle in the armtube isn't sufficient for good parallel cartridge alignment in the headshell. It's quite a major fault IMO.
Sound wise: it was big and beefy sounding due to its high mass and ideal for the big heavy cartridges. Its just not able to be nimble and agile sounding like a lighter tonearm, like a Brinkmann for example.

 

[mtemur]

I have demonstrated at shows and in my listening studio the Thales Simplicity II against other top tonearms when the Simplicity came out in 2010 and it certainly didn't sound mediocre. As I have said previously it requires very careful set up. Back then only the Schroder Reference sounded superior.

It is well known that parallel tracking tonearms, just like the cutting lathe where the record was cut, does eleminate any tracing or tracking distortion that a pivoted tonearm gives no matter how long the armtube is, and this what Thales has tried to achieve. To say the tonearm armtubes are not rigid is laughable. It is a very rigid structure due the the headshell bridge and the bearing bridge within the tonearm mounting pivot providing a 4 point rigid structure. Also, there is almost zero play and backlash in the bearings as these come from the watchmaking industry. Having compared this tonearm with other pivoted arms, gimbal and uni-pivoted types, the "bearing play" is less with the Thales than with other tonearms.

I do agree that the wiring coming out of the arm in through the base is a potential weak spot but when I installed these on customer turntables I used some fine butyl rubber sleeves that slide up the tonearm wiring and through the base and solved this potential issue. Any competent installer should be able to do this when installing these arms. The wiring I might add was of a very high quality and I had absolutely no issues in the 6 years installing these tonearms.

The jigs provided by Thales provide accurate stylus to pivot distance, also cartridge alignment too and makes this job relatively easy. I have check the geometry with my Acoustical systems Smart Tractor and found the Thales system to be accurate.

There is cartridge azimuth adjustment, not sure why you call it zenith. It's normally referred to as HTA or Horizontal Tracking Angle or Cartridge Azimuth. I suggest you read the manual. I have included a clip of the relevant section below.

As I have said previously, the Thales Simplicity II is a very good tonearm especially when it came out in 2010. There was very few tonearms around at that time that could provide this level of performance. I am sure today, well I would hope by today, that tonearm design has improved and sound quality has moved on a little further...

View attachment 161614

I’m sorry, but your response is not relevant to the issues I addressed. I’m not going to reply to each of your points, but it seems you mixed up a few parameters, especially HTA, azimuth, and zenith error. I specifically mentioned zenith error in my prior post.

I know these tonearms inside out, and I have read the manual. If you have any questions or would like to learn more about them, I’d be happy to help.

 

[thekong]

I’ll explain why I find the Thales arms mediocre. In fact, when something sounds mediocre, it just does—but I’ll outline the reasons behind that impression.

First of all, Thales (or more specifically, tangential pivoted tonearms) attempt to solve a tracking-error problem that was never a real issue to begin with. They offer a “solution” at the expense of rigidity. There are so many ball bearings in the mechanism of Thales that it’s impossible for the arm to remain truly rigid. You can see this clearly when playing a resonance test track. You don’t need any analyzer—the arm visibly cannot keep the cartridge stable. By the way, the Statement (5 or 6 different arms I heard) performs better than the Simplicity II (5 arms) but still lacks proper rigidity.

When there are that many joints and bearings, you cannot avoid backlash. Even if you believe you have eliminated it, the “sponge effect” of the bearings and joints remains. This kills dynamics and drains the life out of the music.

The internal tonearm wiring is also problematic. It sounds harsh and tipped up in the highs. My guess is that they chose that cable to compensate for the arm’s inherently dull and lifeless performance—but trying to fix one flaw with another is not a real solution. Additionally, the hole where the cable enters the arm base is bare metal, which gradually scrapes the insulation and leads to hum over time. That is a design flaw.

More importantly, there is no adjustable anti-skating. It is preset at the factory and rarely matches the cartridge being used. In my experience, the value isn’t even consistent from sample to sample and is typically far too high, bending the cantilever and creating more tracking error than the tangential geometry supposedly solves in the first place.

Cartridge setup is also more restrictive. You are forced to use their jig, and your entire setup depends on multiple assumptions: correct P2S distance, correct jig alignment, etc. But this is not the best method. The best way is to visually verify stylus alignment on a protractor with proper VTF applied. You cannot properly do that with Thales arms. Beyond overhang, there is an even more critical factor: zenith error. You cannot reliably check stylus/cantilever zenith with the Thales system. Even if you manage it, you still have non defeat-able anti-skating working against you. In the end, the lack of proper zenith alignment probably introduces more tracking error than the tangential geometry corrects.

I can go on, but I think that’s enough for now.

While I can’t comment on the sound quality of the Thales arms, as I have not done any critical audition on them, I tend to agree that too many bearings is probably not a good thing!

One of my friends had a Simplicity, and was having difficulties equalizing the VTF, ie there was a dramatic difference in VTF at the outer and inner grooves, up to 0.2g or 0.3g if I remember correctly! I didn’t know the arm had preset anti-skate, as you mentioned, maybe that is at least part of the problem!

I have handled (not setting up) the arm a little bit and read the manual, so have a bit of understanding on how it works. I think it is very tedious and will take a lot of patience to get the arm right! It would be a nightmare if I want to fine tune the VTF by say 0.01 or 0.02g! Not sure whether the latest models have improved on that, but I certainly don’t have the patience required for setting up the earlier ones!

Another problem that I see with the Simplicity is the plating. While it may not be a concern in the drier parts of the world, in an area with high humidity such as Hong Kong, the plating on my friend’s Simplicity has changed color slightly, probably due to slight oxidation! If the plating is oxidising, I can’t help but thinking what would happen to all those bearings!

An interesting thing I see in tonearm marketing is to proclaim the designer as a watchmaker previously! As I see it, a tonearm and a mechanical watch are two totally different operating systems, and require different sets of skills to design! Even the bearings used in a tonearm are tens of times bigger than those in a mechanical watch, can we really look at them equally? I have to stress I am not saying those arms are bad, just their performance may not be that highly related to the watchmaking background. I don’t doubt some of those designers can be good at both!

 

[G T Audio]

The point about tonearms and watchmaking is "precision engineering" and the two should go hand in had with each other. It is a shame more mainstream tonearms are not made with the same precision as some of the top Swiss watches. Micha Huber is the only designer I know of who has done this successfully and combined both disciplines.

Hi-Fi reproduction is all about compromises. There is no such thing as a perfect tonearm or any other piece of audio. It is all about minimising these compromises to get a great musical result.

Interesting to note that Micha Huber, the owner and designer of Thales is now the head of the following companies: EMT (turntables, tonearms and cartridges), X-Quisite cartridges, Goldenberg cartridges and of course his own brand Thales. It looks like he has been pretty successful.