Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 14, 2014 21:55:02 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by ChrisB on Sept 14, 2014 22:21:22 GMT
That looks interesting. Don't you just love a good tonearm?
|
|
|
|
Post by MartinT on Sept 15, 2014 6:09:06 GMT
Very nice indeed, that appeals to my sense of aesthetic.
|
|
|
|
Post by MikeMusic on Sept 15, 2014 14:22:48 GMT
Son of Dynavector !
|
|
|
|
Post by danielquinn on Sept 15, 2014 14:52:56 GMT
we machined if from a single billet of aluminium and then we stuck a detachable head shell on it After that we stuck a £44 jelco lift arm mechanism in it  |
|
|
|
Post by DaveC on Sept 15, 2014 15:41:34 GMT
And a Jelco mounting bracket, a Jelco headshell, and ..................
Dave
|
|
|
|
Post by MikeMusic on Sept 16, 2014 7:59:34 GMT
Dear oh dear
|
|
|
|
Post by MartinT on Sept 16, 2014 8:55:11 GMT
It's a bit like when Ford used to use some ordinary switchgear in Aston Martins when they owned them. Does it matter or is it all snobbery?
|
|
|
|
Post by DaveC on Sept 16, 2014 10:13:26 GMT
It would matter if Ford had built the Aston................. ??
|
|
|
|
Post by danielquinn on Sept 16, 2014 11:09:26 GMT
It dont matter to me , however what did matter was the unsubstantiated hyperbole they had written about the arm . In view of what they said , i thought it was appropriate to say what i said . Twas not snobbery , as always with me it was merely highlighting the fallacy of what had been written  |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 16, 2014 11:22:28 GMT
Well some of their claims for superiority need to be taken with a pinch of salt especially as they think an SME V is a low mass arm. I do appreciate that this was designed for Denon and SPU but they can't then claim universal superiority using an AT moving magnet design. This arm looks pretty high mass to me. I also resent premium pricing using standard mass produced (cheap) parts in places.
|
|
|
|
Post by MartinT on Sept 16, 2014 15:09:25 GMT
Compared with my Dynavector, the SME V is a low mass arm  |
|
|
|
Post by danielquinn on Sept 16, 2014 15:12:56 GMT
What is a low mass arm - I can recall seeing any agreed defintion , thats part of the problem , these terms get thrown about and in essence they dont actually mean anything .
|
|
|
|
Post by dvh on Sept 16, 2014 16:42:42 GMT
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 16, 2014 17:48:17 GMT
Posted by danielquinnyesterday at 3:52pm
"After that we stuck a £44 jelco lift arm mechanism in it"
Posted by DaveCyesterday at 4:41pm
"And a Jelco mounting bracket, a Jelco headshell, and .................."
Posted by classicrock5 hours ago
"Well some of their claims for superiority need to be taken with a pinch of salt especially as they think an SME V is a low mass arm. I do appreciate that this was designed for Denon and SPU but they can't then claim universal superiority using an AT moving magnet design. This arm looks pretty high mass to me. I also resent premium pricing using standard mass produced (cheap) parts in places."I find it quite amusing when those who are pedants about unqualified statements start making their own It's also quite sad when an engineer I respect duos the same; although to be fair, I understand that the arm was designed by Sibatech and outsourced for manufacture soit could have been to Jelco although the mounting collar looks more akin to Ortofon or EMT than anythig Jelco makes An SME V has an effective mass of 10 - 11g wheras the AS1 is 20g so I know which statement I would take with a pinch of salt.  As for pricing it's probably around the £1.5k mark so not cheap, but certainly not a premium price product. This tonearm was brought to my attention by a Korean fried who has an amazing collection of hifi, both vintage and new. He has been using one with a number of cartridges, old and new and he is so impressed that it has displaced an FR64S on one of his turntables. Personally I just like the look of it as it has overtones of the old Gray Research and General Electric tonearms from the 50's. 
|
|
|
|
Post by danielquinn on Sept 17, 2014 9:03:45 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by daytona600 on Sept 17, 2014 12:30:37 GMT
yes looks like a jelco arm lift me me , why design one when you can just buy in a Oem unit
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 17, 2014 17:55:05 GMT
No but are you saying it is? Without a qualification such as 'looks like' you made a definitive statement that they stuck a £44 jelco lift arm mechanism in it, how can you be so certain it was made by Jelco? It may well be, but it also looks like one in the Acos Lustre so who knows, unless of course you know more and can enlighten us. Also, and forgive me if I am wrong but you seem to be implying that a detachable headshell is a design faux pas and that the tonearm lift is somehow inferior beacause a similar one can be purchased for £44. How do you know that they were not chosen because they happen to work very well and that the money and effort was expended in the areas that reap the most rewards such as the bearings and novel arm wand. |
|
|
|
Post by danielquinn on Sept 18, 2014 8:21:59 GMT
I am saying it is . I have neither to time or inclination to establish this definitively .These are generic tonearms lifts used on many tonearms , indeed my own roksan tonearm uses one , but if you buy a replacement from them , they will charge you £70 .
I advocate the hypothesis that a detachable headshell is a ] cheaper to make b ] sonically inferior .
The rest of your post put words in my mouth . I have explained my motives for juxtaposing these facts against the tonearms claims , deal with that or be quiet please . Ta .
|
|
|
|
Post by MartinT on Sept 18, 2014 15:13:34 GMT
I don't think that is provable as there are very few arms made in detachable and non-detachable versions enabling direct comparison. In fact, I can only think of the SME 3009-II and in that case both versions sounded identical to me. |
|
As for pricing it's probably around the £1.5k mark so not cheap, but certainly not a premium price product.
