I'm not sure it's really that big a deal, people seem to get along fine not knowing the exact value, but it is kind of silly that Technics decided not to specify it
I would just be looking for a better number than 7hz. I think Davey clarified the EM issue pretty well, at least for the GR it is more than likely the stated 12g.
As alluded to, so now we believe this (12g) and not the HiFi News 8 or 9g and what avanti has stuck to?
You want fun? I've owned a few carts, replacing each time with something better. That includes (not in chronological order): Ortofons VMS30, OM30FGS, SPU#1E, 2M mono/78 Grace F9E Grado Prestige Gold Dynavector DV10x5 Benz Micro ML Hana ML SAE1000LT A-T VM35 Shure V15III/HE ADC XLM My heart, ears and chin have all been satisfied along the way but the first cart that satisfied my boogie was the Dynavector DV10x5. When I couldn't afford to buy the next one up, getting another 10x5 was just fine with me. They offer a trade-up deal as well, should you decide to stick with Dynavector.
Good news is the mass of carts made are purposely made to match the mass of the medium mass tonearms out there - so many times just throw a dart with modern choices and you'll probably be fine. It's the outliers though, the ones at extreme ends of the spectrum, either high or low compliance that you still have to pay attention to. Whenever the discrepancies between EM estimates come out, or mismatches, you can expect the "don't worry about it" inputs, but again, the only reason you'd think about it is if you're in clear mismatch territory. I'm not used to you taking "it's not a big deal" stance to data and matching! There are a lot of different numbers / views on this on the board still wrt to this topic. Who do you believe?
I'm not certain he "clarified" it, he offered a view, one which I happen to respect... But still different than others I respect too - as much as 33% different, and that's not trivial, especially when matching an already fringe cart like the DL-103....
There is a paper on the web On the Mechanics of Tone Arms Dick Pierce I weighed the arm tube The cw d was measured in static balance The difficult estimate is the arm tube length for inertia A tube of constant dia. is 1/3 x l Ours is tapered with heavier at the collar and pivot. It's total l - HS ~ 20 cm, I used 8 But since it contributes only 1 gm, 7-9 would not make much difference.
There's another "paper" on the web, Hifinews, they've data also. They say 8 or 9g. Please advise. PS- I could really care less honestly, but it's always been the elephant in the room, we never get closure, but I guess that comes with the territory. And I'm not doubting your work, only pointing out the discrepancies you know I'm just eternally in search of the facts, it's not personal.
I've seen those tests, 2 of them, and it was a reputable lab. But I can't convince myself it is that light with a ~7.6 gm that contributes over 6 gm everything else is only 2-2.5 but who knows The paper I referred to is a general mechanical engineering analysis, not a review http://www.cartchunk.org/audiotopics/ToneArmMechanics.pdf
interesting cart, never saw this one before. in stock at LP gear for reasonable money. the idea of retipping a replaceable stylus is different and will easily double the cost if not more. are there any plug in upgraded stylus available? i did this on a Grado gold by adding an 8mz stylus for example.
As stated, I've leaned towards your findings, I'm actually asking for the OP's sake as he's stuck with the HiFiNews. I'm just plumb not sure as a result, not too different a situation with my 1200G also, not sure who I believe.... but I still get a lot of enjoyment out of it!
But circling way back to the original point too, if you thought the 103 was on the fringe with a 12G EM tonearm, then you really shouldn't consider it for one 33% less in mass, no?
the effective mass calculation has a moment of inertia component and does not have a one to one relationship to mass.
not stuck on it but it is the only somewhat reliable data i have found. using 9g in resonance calculations for cartridge picks has worked well. it would be a perfect world if technics published the spec and all cartridge manufacturers spec'd dynamic compliance at 10hz but what fun would that be?
To make matters worse some Japanese cart makers (AT mainly) use a different way to measure compliance, which makes using an online calculator tricky at best. When I look at the AT line I see dynamic and static compliance figures but they are calculated differently than what would be considered typical and people say it's not so easy to calculate the AT numbers into typical compliance numbers. I usually just compare their numbers as I go through them and guesstimate high, medium or low. Edit: and I definitely use the KAB damper on the GR...
Due to everything we've discussed, we're all kind of left with "incomplete / questionable" data, devoid of Technics telling us what it was when they designed it, it will continue to be the case Yes, not a perfect world, and doesn't need to be! That would suck. They told us with the MK platform and variants... it's 12G and that seems accepted... maybe they'd just figured we'd all know it didn't change? And yes, like you, despite all of the mystery I too have found carts I like.... but due to the mystery, I do steer clear of the outliers too, easy to do with so much choice.
Well, I found a good body with original stylus on EBay for Bin $50, Joseph’s boron cantilever and Ogura brought the total to $425. I like it as well or better than my Sonata 2. The 8MZ will indeed work well in all those vintage bodies, albeit with a bonded diamond. And good luck getting an answer out of Grado what size elliptical is mounted. At least with Joseph you know what you’re buying.
I have an old Grado Gold1 that I put an 8mz stylus on, it never got over 30 hours on it because it just sounds very meh. I think all those Grados are bonded styli (the Grados below the $300 mark anyway), even the 8mz, the next one up might be nude mounted though (xcz?). Outside of all that having a good Grado (preferably any wood bodied variant) retipped with a better cantilever and nude microline or whatnot seems like a killer idea, people are doing it and the results should be really good, there is magic in that moving iron generator.
Interesting question but as I've used a few turntables on this journey, each has satisfied me on a different level. It's quite hard to quantify out of 1-10 but these are my immediate thoughts. (First table was a Thorens TD165 Mk2, then a Linn Sondek, now a Garrard 301.) Of the Ortofons, only the OM30FGS was a bit meh. I generally like their house-sound: detail with punch. The SAE and Grace were definitely saying, "you are now entering hifi land" - and in that order. I found the Grado Gold meh. The A-T VM35 is great fun, I prefer it to the Shure V15III but the XLM is fun too - quite high output! I really liked the Benz but the Hana ML is the one I've loved the most, so far.
The moment of inertia I is proprtional to mass and the square the radius The effective mass at a given point is I / r^2 at the center of mass. For a given radius(s) I and eff mass are linear with mass. gm x cm^2 / cm^2 ~ gm
Most certainly, and why when you add more or subtract more headshell weight compared to the stock headshell, you don't add the same / linear amount to the EM reduction or increase. Just like the 1.5 - 2 rule of thumb though, there are rough estimates to add when changing the headshell or counterweight greater than or less than the stock weights it was measured, because it is *not* a linear relationship. Good catch Tony.
I don't know what most people believe, I was just reporting the measurements made around here that point to about 12g.
your conclusion being, as supported, it's not linear, actually quite complex (the relationship). Plus this touches on the distance from the pivot and deliniates the difference between front and back, another complexity.
