So what's the tonearm equivalent of a Shure V15VxMR?

Hi. You guys know how the V15VxMR (and its brother the M97xE) is regarded around here as being very neutral, very faithful to what's pressed on an LP.

I've been told a couple times already that a certain arm (the Grace 707) ' ..doesn't look like anything special but it seems to let a cartridge just do it's thing'.

So, what tonearms are known for having a 'neutral' sonic haracter? And, on the opposite side, what tonearms are known for coloring the signal and how?

Steve, I'd appreciate your opinion, .. you were very much single-handedly responsible for about half of the Forums population buying V15VxMRs (are you a stock-holder? ). I noticed you don't seem to care that much about turntables as long as they work and have a V15VxMR, but I'd appreciate an opinion.

Just curious

 

This tonearm looks pretty sweet!

 

Hola Damián.

A low-tracking force cart such as the Shure will be less sensitive to the arm and the TT it's been used in.

The "standard" arm for a V-15 is an SME Series III, readily available at ebay and very popular in its day maybe in Argentina too. Be sure you get one with the black wand, not the first version with sub-optimal geometry.

The combination will be very gentle on your records and, ho hum, very neutral.

 

Gracias Pablo. I've actually got the Grace already. About the SME Series III, I've been told some original-series 3009s made it here back in the day, but other than that I don't know.

 

While it's true the Shure V15VxMR and M97xE are less sensitive to the cartridge/tonearm interface, it's because each employs a (defeatable) dynamic stabilizer brush that allows for compensation of the high compliance when used with tonearms of a higher than optimal mass. Without that, they'd be just as sensitive to proper tonearm matching as every other cartridge. The two Shures are the only cartridges that employ this system AFAIK.

What's important is making sure the resonant frequency of the cartridge's cantilever falls in the range of 8-12Hz, above the frequency of outside interferences and below our ability to hear. So, a high-compliance cartridge needs a low-mass arm, medium-compliance...medium-mass arm, and low-compliance...high-mass arm, generally speaking. Any combination still needs to fall in the 8-12Hz resonant frequency range, though. Even then, it's no guarantee, though 99% of the time that's enough.

Lots to consider when finding a cartridge for your arm, or vice versa. I agree with Pablo, the SME Series III would be a fine match for either Shure, as would the old Series II variants...although the detachable headshell versions hover around the lower 8Hz limit of the resonant frequency range when mated to either Shure.

 

Yes, those were tough days for y'all there. Dollars were so hard to get and customs was criminal.

 

Any of you fellas know much about the Schroder arms? Looks like they can be built with quite a few combinations of components. Mr Schroder certainly seems to have a lot of satisfied customers.

Admittedly, I've drooled over the Schroder Reference a time or two.

Seems the Wheaton Triplanar arms pull a pretty good disappearing act, too.

 

Some time ago I came up with an idea for a DIY tonearm and .. turns out I was very much thinking about the Schroeder.

I might give it a try at some point.

 

That was THEN?

 

I'm sure it was worse in the late 80s.

 

You Bet.

Back to the subject, I've been trying to wrap my head around some homegrown physics, .. need help from you guys with 'real' physics knowledge.

Will a lighter arm (ie. less mass) coupled with a higher-compliance cart make for a better-tracking combo than a mid-to-high mass arm with the same cart? Or rather, it WILL. That's known.

The question is, why? I'm thinking it might have to do with the higher inertia the heavier arm probably has -- when the stylus is 'pulled' to one side or the other by the groove, the arm should follow.

But if the arm is still pulling in the opposite direction (inertia), a high-compliance cantilever will uh.. comply along with the arm, maybe even minutely lifting the stylus from the groove for a split second.

That's I believe the reason why lower-compliance (stiffer) cantilever assemblies are recommended for use with higher-mass arms. Yes? The way I see it, a stiffer cantilever won't 'yield' as much to the inertia pull of the arm.

What I'm saying, in short: I've replaced a Thorens TP-14 arm which is a mid-to-high mass job with a Grace 707, which I understand is a low-mass design.

The question is whether I will find the Grace coupled with a handful of mid-line Shure carts (M55E, M91ED, etc.) a better tracking combo than I had with the Thorens arm.

Sorry about the rambling post

 

Right.

I think you pretty much said it, Damian. Consider the vertical movement, as well.

More mass creates more momentum, so a stiffer (lower compliance) suspension is necessary to control it. Alternately, more compliance is used with low mass due to less momentum. Think of it as an automobile suspension. A heavier car needs a stiffer suspension to keep it from swaying excessively and from bottoming out when hitting bumps and dips in the road. Lighter car...more compliant suspension.

Definitely. The Grace is a significantly better arm.

Love that table, BTW.

 

Well, you don't want the arm to follow but to resist the movement, as you want all the movement induced by the groove to become cantilever motion.

You need a proper match between the arm's vertical and lateral mass and the cart's compliance so you don't get:

1) Large straneous movement caused by arm/cantilever resonances and movement.

2) Loss of bass response due to the arm moving along with the cantilever.

 

Thanks. That was a useful analogy .

Love it myself, too. Now if I could only do a good job of mounting the Grace, I'd be set. I can't wait to play WL/WH on this baby .

 

Lots to tweak on a 125. Springs, armboards, damping, mats...yada yada yada. Sounds fun!

Great looking table, too. If I ever came across one that was really clean, I'd probably snatch it up just to have it around...Mk I or II. A classic.

 

I don't think there is any question that the Rega 300 rewrote the book here. It is functionally minimalist, and one has to set the height through the use of spacers, and the arm lift is awkward. But the rest is a rock solid bargain.

You would have to put up a very good case to suggest that there is a better buy in low-cost tonearms. Roy Gandy did a great job on this one, and they have sold thousands. A well deserved thumbs up from me.

 

Pablo, you might find this interesting if you haven't read it yet.

I just found it and it reminded me of what you say about 'wanting all the movement induced by the groove to become cantilever motion'.

 

I think the copy at Rega's WWW site about their top of the line arm mentions something to the effect of "makes your cart work harder".

Vertical mass has been around forever but now it is being used as a marketing tool.

BTW, playing with the SIIIs damper paddles, and perhaps the viscosity of the silicone fluid, might achieve the same effect as augmenting vertical mass and is easier to implement and tweak.