Actually, it turns out that in practice it is fairly linear. The headshell center of mass is more toward the rear so the entire weight doesn't add to the effective mass, but since the heavier headshell causes the counterweight to change position and increase the effective mass, the net result is usually pretty close to just adding the headshell weight to the effective mass. It's easy and informative to play with the calculator I posted, juggle things around and see what happens.
if the radius involved are constant it is linear. The confusion is Assume total r = 20 Point of mass 15 (15/20)^2 = 0.56 If we add 1 gm eff mass changes 1 x 0.56 = 0.56 Add 2 2 x 0.56 = 1.12 Linear ... if 20 and 20 1 and 2 gm Linear linear with mass although the r affects mass distribution Not proportional
Agreed, the gold / 8MZ sound was not that great compared to a decent AT MM cart but it did sound better than the stock gold !
My fun with Ortofon MM is more plebeian. I rock a Reloop by Ortofon Concorde ProS. And there's a Stylus 10 when I want a little more audiophile, and a bit lighter tracking. Adaptable as I am.
Original Grados were sold with nude mount diamonds of varying cuts. Even Joe was tight lipped about specific cuts…some speculate to keep from having to pay royalty’s to Shibata or Van den Hul, etc. So he called them names like Grado cut, or twin tip. But they were nude mount, much lower tip mass than a bonded diamond. Sometime in the 00’s the 8MZ stylus itself became bonded. I wouldn’t be typing this if on a whim I hadn’t bought a G1 with nude Ogura off Joseph’s eBay store. Shocked I was… YMMV
seems reasonable and notes that the mass of the headshell does in fact contribute the most to the overall effective mass (as it should) being so far from the pivot, counterweight the opposite. In effect a heavier headshell would contribute to the effective mass significantly.
Sure, if the radius = point of mass, then add the right amount of weight to each end to keep the proper that pivot / balance point, then sure, it will be linear relationship as your maintaining the pivot / point of mass. But that's not what happens in real life, most are adding weight to the headshell and not the back, or vice versa, moving that point of mass as a result. THEN, as you pointed out, and from what I've read and understand from the formulas, it's not linear anymore and effect on EM is less than the mass added, relationship is exponential, and the further you get from that point, the worse it becomes. (you're squaring the change in distance from the pivot point in your example above?) On another side note - In theory, you can maintain the pivot point on the system but adding the correct amount of weight to each end (note I didn't say the same amount of weight, as the pivot distance is different from the headshell compared to from the back). But at some point you're adding more than the tonearm was designed for, and that is now having deleterious effect on the system outside of the EM change. So maintaining pivot point by correct weight to each end has a breaking point too, that won't be reflected in the formulas! You could have increased or descreased your EM by more than recommended for the system, the formula doesn't care. I'm sticking with you move the point of mass (which is what you're doing by adding more weight), EM not 1 to 1 with the weight added. But as always willing to learn.
It also compounds by having to move the CW back assume adding 2 gm at HS X 20 cm, moment = 40 Must move cw to balance ~ 40/100 ~ 0.4 cm If cw was at 5 cm, eff mass portion 4.7 gm At 5.4 cm ~ 5.5 gm if HS goes from 8 to 10 gm Eff mass portion 6 to 7.6 gm, net 1.6 gm totals (ignoring arm) 10.7 to 13.1, 2.4 gm increase adding 2 gm
That's a short short list! Have you ever tried a Hana cartridge? I never have as the output was never a good match for my phono stage(s), but your 20/20 is right in there for that with 58db option, and you've run an ART9 with similar output before... I just hear so many strong testimonials it seems interesting.
Did you try out either of those vintage SAE 1000LT carts you got yet? It's a little different sound, not sure I'd label it as more fun, my normal OC9XML is pretty dynamic and fun, but it's maybe a touch less refined and a little rolled off through upper midrange and on top (in comparison) so sounds very nice.
Tony, I'm thinking with the Delos as an option, and one table, no matter how fun the new cart is going to be, something tells me the Delos is going to be vying for time. (and the Art9) Clearly, the thing you need is a second turntable.
Technics uses a Ortofon 2M Black on their 1200g's at Audio Shows, not sure if stated compliance for a 2M, 22 um/mN, is at 10 Hz or 100 Hz either way way it is a medium to light cartridge. I asked Soundsmith the same question, if I replace my headshell with a lighter one how much of that weight can I subtract from my effective mass? They responded to subtract the difference from the two headshells from the stated effective mass. @Ingenieur & @TheVinylAddict I agree it is not totally 1:1 at the headshell but it is close the nearer you get to pivot point is were things start behaving as you have described I took a close close look at Jelco tonearm specs and noticed the same thing. (https://audiosensibility.com/blog/faqs/what-is-the-effective-mass-of-the-jelco-750-tonearms/) you see that 9" tonearms effective mass is heaver than a 12" tonearms consequently going from light counterweight to a heavier counterweight reduces effective mass of the respective tonearms. OP nobody has mentioned Soundsmith cartridges or vintage Stantons up to this point so consider them both recommended.
Just saw this listing and nothing says "musical and fun" more than a London Decca: London Decca Maroon Cartridge
I just saw this video of Jack white's Third Man Records pressing plant in Detroit. It is another record pressing plant which uses the Shure M97xe for listening to the records they press. Shown mounted on a Pioneer PLX-500 turntable, they just aren't listenning for defects or judging pressing quality but they are critically listening to the record itself, playing each record through and making notes. So, if you want to hear the records as the record companies intended for them to be heard, pay attention to what these record companies are using to critically listen to their records.
Really interesting and a little cleaner than some pressing plants I've seen videos of but a lot less attention paid to particulates and abrasions that might introduce surface noise. Maybe the average consumer doesn't care but I sure wish more effort was expended to create dead silent records.
Quick update on my DL-103 experiment. A few days ago I changed from the LH13H (13gr) headshell to the LH18H (18gr) headshell and the heavier aux weight. Not a massive change, but definitely tightened everything up a bit, also noticing a bit more air up top - a nice tweak for sure. Then today I swapped in a Hashimoto HM-3 SUT (1:20) which loads the cartridge at 118ohms - which according to many is right there at the sweet spot. If I had any quibbles about this cartridge before, they're gone now. Still all the body and warmth from before, but with a more 3d presentation and a snap to snares and presence to vocals that rivals the best I've heard in my system. You can now count me as a full-fledged member of the DL-103 cult!
