Say Wayne; I remmembered your post concerning the mass of the tonearm and any effects it has on tracking the groove. The compliance of the stylus is only part of the story; no? Does the spring action of the stylus decouple the arm from the stylus/arm/groove system? Lateral force is exerted by the groove rotating against the stylus that must move this mass of the arm; is that correct?
Wayne Parham Messages: 18793 Registered: January 2001
Illuminati (33rd Degree)
If you mean the movement required to bring the arm inward towards the center of the record, yes, tone arm mass comes into play there. But it is a very slow movement, and acceleration is almost zero because the speed is constant. I would expect the force to overcome friction would be greater, and with good bearings, it is pretty small too.
Yeah; thats a point but also during the tracing of the groove the stylus compliance is exceeded periodically due to groove modulation and as a result the arm must respond to that exception. If it is too massive for the stylus; would that not have a negative effect causing groove damage? Whats your take on that?
Wayne Parham Messages: 18793 Registered: January 2001
Illuminati (33rd Degree)
I can see what you mean; When a record is warped or off-center, then the tone arm moves to track the groove. So that would create more force on the groove and also make a very low frequency audio component. We've all seen the low frequency part - woofer flutter. It might also cause increased record wear from some tone arms.
Agreed; considering the lateral tracking error built into all tonearm geometry the potential for damage may be pretty serious. Still mulling this over but as of now I would suggest following the lowcompliance massive arm rule.
Posting Rules
Members
Search
Help
Register
Login
Get a T-Shirt!
