Tonearm, yes tonearms for record players.

[watchnerd]

I got what was probably the last m2 12r ever sold individually to a consumer. I have no idea what the technical merits of it are beyond what is mentioned in the manufacturers spec sheet but it looks like the dogs doodahs on my stone age Garrard so who cares!

Ditto for my M2-9R.

I got it before the price hike, and then a few months after that, all gone from the market.

 

[anmpr1]

I was turned on to the Grace 707 tonearm in the mid 1970s.

I own a 707--it's taking up space in drawer somewhere. The bearings were the last thing I was concerned with. Smooth--no play.

However A) the horizontal (i.e., up and down) bearings are not angled to match headshell offset angle--not offsetting the pivot bearings will introduce an upward rotating arc on warps.

B) the headshell was made of a hard plastic which became brittle and eventually cracked. Fatigue from old age. I Superglued the peices back together and other than being ugly that worked.

Changing carts on this device was not an easy task. It required at least three hands and fifteen fingers. Years later, with fumble fingers I broke the anti-skating wire. LOL

How concerned should I be about “play” in a gimbaled tonearm bearing and how much effort should be exerted into making it free of play?

From a practical engineering standpoint, there is really no excuse for loose bearings. That problem was solved years ago.

The only tonearm I recall owning that had loose bearings was the Thorens TP-16 arm that came with my TD-160. The arm was generally ergonomic and sophisticated--magnetic anti-skating, dynamically balanced, straight tube with plug-in headshell making cartridge changes easy. But you could move the arm tube back and forth inside its gimbals. However, that was the least of my worries because I could never get the suspension to work well in my room.

I have a Dual 704 (1977, contemporary with the Grace 707) and the arm still works as new. Smooth bearings with no play.

My Garrard Z-100 pantograph arm has 6 bearings (to control up-down and sideways movement along with the rotating variable headshell tracking angle); no play in any of its bearings. I'm amazed at that--the engineering that went into it at the price-point.

My Technics SL-1100a and 1200 Mk5 have no bearing play.

@Robin L has it right. The beauty of records is that they give you something to worry about. You 'correct' one thing and you still have a dozen other things to obsess over. It's the perfect format for the neurotically inclined. I guess that means me!

 

[Angsty]

It is a good bit of engineering IMO but being made in one piece it has almost no inherent damping and is quite a stiff design so any plinth vibration will be transferred to the headshell up to a higher frequency and the arm resonance rings for a long time.
I have always been slightly bemused by one piece arm tubes, the original marketing BS was to make them stiffer, which it doesn't.

An almost exact mechanical description of my VPI Traveler. Ah, well, what to do? The Traveler performs well enough for my collection, room and system. Perhaps I’ll upgrade once my collection nudges above 500 records.

Regarding tone arm designs, what are thoughts about the VPI uni-pivot? I really like the industrial design of the VPI turntables, but I’ve been a little skittish about that fiddly uni-pivot. The Acoustic Signature WOWs look like matured versions of the Traveler, with multiple, in-house gimbaled tonearm options.

 

[Angsty]

From a practical engineering standpoint, there is really no excuse for loose bearings. That problem was solved years ago.

The PLX-1000 bearings can be tightened to eliminate play in the bearings, I just question my own ability to do so without wrecking them. The issue is so common that I have to believe it is a manufacturing choice versus a QC problem.

 

[Robin L]

Good stuff. How did you mod the XA to take the Grace? Any photos? I've fitted a Rega RB300 to my XA.

No photos. If I did it right, I would have drilled a hole for the Grace 707. I've seen that. Instead, I used a hacksaw, took a corner off the top plate and sawed a "U" on the subchassis where the original am attached. Later, for the third 'table [AR XAs were a yard sale special in Berkeley once CD players took off], I went for the whole Merrill Mod package, new acrylic subchassis, acrylic/lead platter, new motor, springs, everything but the top plate, plinth and on/off switch. That variation required sawing off a corner of the top plate. Yes, it sounded better. Yes, it meant endless tweaking. No, I was not satisfied.

The fanciest turntable was a Linn Sondek LP-12, Valhalla mods, Ittok arm, Audio Technica high output MC. Everything tuned to perfection by the skilled lutist who sold it to me. I think that was when I first realized that inner groove distortion was not going away. It was another 20 years before I finally realized it was a hopeless task.

 

[Robin L]

@Robin L has it right. The beauty of records is that they give you something to worry about. You 'correct' one thing and you still have a dozen other things to obsess over. It's the perfect format for the neurotically inclined. I guess that means me!

I'm pouring all my tweaky neurosis into playing the guitar. There's plenty mechanical to fuss with if so inclined, a zillion potential adjustments possible esp. if one decides to plug in.

 

[JP]

There is a lot of stuff written about bearing quality and play.
If the "g" levels at the pivot never get above 1g (which it should not) the play will never be taken up so it shouldn't matter.
The idea of the arm needing to hold the cartridge still is correct as far as keeping alignment is concerned but at audio frequencies the thing keeping the cartridge body as the stator is the dynamics of the system not the statics so again rigidity shouldn't be at issue unless there is a resonance with an antinode at the headshell, in fact the more rigid the arm the higher up the frequency range plinth vibration will be carried to the headshell and appear in the cartridge output.
There is a lot of static "thinking" being used in the description of how record players work in magazines and the 'net and most of it is incorrect because it is the dynamics which determines the performance at audible frequencies.
I wouldn't modify or adjust it myself.

This is a 10kHz tone on an EPA-100 with a small amount of bearing play due to a chipped ball in the top horizontal bearing. I don't recall which cartridge was used - I've asked.

And this is the same arm after repair. The "after" was the same cartridge, 'table, test record, location, etc.

 

[AudioSceptic]

This is a 10kHz tone on an EPA-100 with a small amount of bearing play due to a chipped ball in the top horizontal bearing. I don't recall which cartridge was used - I've asked.

View attachment 81990

And this is the same arm after repair. The "after" was the same cartridge, 'table, test record, location, etc.

View attachment 81991

Wow (sorry)! What a difference. Are there any other tests like this out there with different arms/carts?

 

[Robin L]

I own a 707--it's taking up space in drawer somewhere. The bearings were the last thing I was concerned with. Smooth--no play.

However A) the horizontal (i.e., up and down) bearings are not angled to match headshell offset angle--not offsetting the pivot bearings will introduce an upward rotating arc on warps.

I remember that, and there were plenty of warped records back then.

B) the headshell was made of a hard plastic which became brittle and eventually cracked. Fatigue from old age. I Superglued the peices back together and other than being ugly that worked.

Changing carts on this device was not an easy task. It required at least three hands and fifteen fingers. Years later, with fumble fingers I broke the anti-skating wire. LOL

I managed to break several lead wires on the headshells, requiring my shaky soldering skills to get music again. No fun.

 

[Frank Dernie]

This is a 10kHz tone on an EPA-100 with a small amount of bearing play due to a chipped ball in the top horizontal bearing. I don't recall which cartridge was used - I've asked.

View attachment 81990

And this is the same arm after repair. The "after" was the same cartridge, 'table, test record, location, etc.

View attachment 81991

Wow that is huge! interested to know the cartridge, to get that much output from the cartridge the cartridge body must be excited massively.
I presume this is a 10kHz tone on an LP.
I have never seen anything this lively before and I am struggling to work out what could be causing so many anharmonic peaks. Really weird.

 

[anmpr1]

This is a 10kHz tone on an EPA-100 with a small amount of bearing play due to a chipped ball in the top horizontal bearing. I don't recall which cartridge was used - I've asked. And this is the same arm after repair. The "after" was the same cartridge, 'table, test record, location, etc.

That arm used very fragile synthetic ruby bearings (at least that's how reports from the field had it). One would think that extreme user care would be the rule with an expensive arm, but accidents happen. I wonder if the jewel bearings were just not fit for the job?

@Frank Dernie reminded me in another thread that the old '60s Garrard TPA tonearm used ruby bearings. Probably others did, too. The rare as hens teeth Castagna (later branded as the Sao Win tonearm) used ruby bearings, but also used magnetic repulsion to lower the friction. That arm literally 'floated' in its fixed travel.

 

[Frank Dernie]

@Frank Dernie reminded me in another thread that the old '60s Garrard TPA tonearm used ruby bearings. Probably others did, too.

The standard Garrard arm bearings were spring loaded ruby bearings, accurate and inexpensive. I noticed some marketing with this sort of bearing recently. It works well but seeing the responses above is quite shocking, I have no idea what could possibly be going on there.

 

[mhardy6647]

so -- first and foremost, of course, the OP'll want to minimize tracking error.
There are two ways to do this.
One can use a linear tracking arm, of course -- but that's not very audiophile.
Here's the audiophile way.

PS In all seriousness, that Fairchild 750-3 tt in the photo above was/is one of the absolute finest turntables ever built. Ever.

Here's a 750-2 (the two-speed morph) with a Thomas Schick tonearm of more modest dimensions

 

[Tom C]

so -- first and foremost, of course, the OP'll want to minimize tracking error.
There are two ways to do this.
One can use a linear tracking arm, of course -- but that's not very audiophile.
Here's the audiophile way.
View attachment 82001



PS In all seriousness, that Fairchild 750-3 tt in the photo above was/is one of the absolute finest turntables ever built. Ever.

Here's a 750-2 (the two-speed morph) with a Thomas Schick tonearm of more modest dimensions
View attachment 82002

Is that idler wheel drive? Or is the red knob on a speed selector?

 

[JP]

Wow that is huge! interested to know the cartridge, to get that much output from the cartridge the cartridge body must be excited massively.
I presume this is a 10kHz tone on an LP.
I have never seen anything this lively before and I am struggling to work out what could be causing so many anharmonic peaks. Really weird.

Cartridge was a Supex 901 Super. 10kHz track from the NAB test record. If I still have the file I'll post some spectrums from there other tracks. It took me about 15 minutes of playing with the arm to get it to a point where I could feel the play. All I could find was one chipped ball:

That arm used very fragile synthetic ruby bearings (at least that's how reports from the field had it). One would think that extreme user care would be the rule with an expensive arm, but accidents happen. I wonder if the jewel bearings were just not fit for the job?

I haven't measured all 5 of mine, but this one was easy to hear with a tone so I know I don't have any samples this bad.

 

[mhardy6647]

Is that idler wheel drive? Or is the red knob on a speed selector?

It is belt drive and built to amazingly tight tolerances -- and, yes, the red knob is a speed selector. The three-speed morph has a large "knob" (visible at the front left of the tt in the first photo I posted).

Here's another, slightly closer look at a 750-3 (again, with a Thomas Schick arm, and an Ortofon SPU).

 

[anmpr1]

I once came upon someone who offered replacement of the jewel bearings with standard steel. I've long ago lost that link. Those Technics arms were very 'exotic' from a materials standpoint. Sometimes I wonder whether it was engineering inspired, or marketing? In any case, for the long term most people want something that isn't going to break with routine handling.

Those tonearms were not that common, but the bearing problem seems to be a common problem with them. At least from the posts one often comes across. If I was in the market for a second hand tonearm, I'd really shy away from an EPA 100 because of that. I don't recall how the EPA 500 'modular' tonearm system used jewel bearings.

 

[LTig]

The fanciest turntable was a Linn Sondek LP-12, Valhalla mods, Ittok arm, Audio Technica high output MC.

At least it's not fancy looking. I do like the understatement look of my 1994 vintage LP12 with used Lingo PS, used Ekos arm and a used and retipped Van den Hul MC1 special. But I rather don't ask @Frank Dernie about the mechanical quality of this arm.

 

[JP]

I once came upon someone who offered replacement of the jewel bearings with standard steel. I've long ago lost that link. Those Technics arms were very 'exotic' from a materials standpoint. Sometimes I wonder whether it was engineering inspired, or marketing? In any case, for the long term most people want something that isn't going to break with routine handling.

Those tonearms were not that common, but the bearing problem seems to be a common problem with them. At least from the posts one often comes across. If I was in the market for a second hand tonearm, I'd really shy away from an EPA 100 because of that. I don't recall how the EPA 500 'modular' tonearm system used jewel bearings.

I've six 100/100MK2 and only one had a detectable bearing issue, though I bought it that way intentionally to refurb it. I don't find them fragile from a routine sense, but definitely far less tolerant of accidents and mishandling. I can't recall anything of note that Technics did with those products lines in that era that wasn't engineering inspired.

In addition to the ruby balls the 100's have spring loaded, polished, and hard-chromed pins. The springs are rather stiff so it seems that was an attempt to absorb impacts. The 500 system uses steel balls and the pins aren't spring loaded or polished. I've one in the project pile that I'm converting to polished pins and Si3N4 balls.

 

[Frank Dernie]

At least it's not fancy looking. I do like the understatement look of my 1994 vintage LP12 with used Lingo PS, used Ekos arm and a used and retipped Van den Hul MC1 special. But I rather don't ask @Frank Dernie about the mechanical quality of this arm.

Well you have now. I used an LP12 Ittok Troika for years. I never saw why the Ekos was so much dearer than the Ittok though
.