Amadeus tonearm geometry

hesson11 · « **on:** 19 May 2010, 05:17 pm »

I've become very interested in the Amadeus (I'm not an owner—at least not yet!). A current discussion on Audiogon got me thinking about the tonearm geometry. From the WTT blog and the Amadeus owner's manual, it's obvious that the idea is to simply mount a cartridge in the fixed headshell and start playing records, with no further adjustment of the cartridge.

But the blog also says that the arm is designed for an overhang of 0.5". It does not state, though, which cartridges produce that overhang when mounted in the fixed headshell. The lateral distance between the cartridge mounting holes and the stylus varies greatly among the cartridges I'm familiar with. So different cartridges will produce different overhang measurements. Mr. Firebaugh states that the geometry was based on various cartridges in his inventory. But they can't all have the same distance between the mounting holes and the stylus, can they?

Does anyone know which carts will, in fact, produce the intended overhang with the Amadeus? Or is it Mr. Firebaugh's opinion that overhang/offset angle is really not that critical and that any cartridge will work fine?

THANKS.
-Bob

VSV · « **Reply #1 on:** 21 May 2010, 03:11 am »

I really hope there is an answer to this problem. A list of cartridges with appropriate distance between stylus tip and mounting holes is critical.

Mike, any word from Bill on this issue?

Mike Pranka · « **Reply #2 on:** 22 May 2010, 03:08 am »

Hi,

The good news is that there isn't a problem. Bill addresses this w/ the "Tone arm Geometry" and "Tracking Angle Error" posts at the WTL blog. Don't mind the stylus to mounting hole distance of your particular cartridge. Just install it and go (at least w/ the Amadeus tone arm). Again, this is addressed specifically on the blog. Bill asks questions that others don't... then he answers them through an understanding of mathematics and physics. At the end of the day, we're playing records. You don't have to believe a bit of Bill's calculations or solutions. Just install a cartridge on the 'arm as directed and judge for yourself. The proof's in the pudding and in the music that dances through the cartridge..

Mike

hesson11 · « **Reply #3 on:** 22 May 2010, 04:32 am »

Thanks so much for the reply, Mike.

I didn't mean to imply there was a problem. It's just that I'm very interested in the Amadeus and in Bill's unconventional (perhaps brilliant) approach. But this is killing me!

It's like reading a mystery novel, but finding that the last chapter has been torn out of the book. If the blog just said, in effect, overhang doesn't matter, just mount the cartridge and go, I'd say fine. But it says the arm was designed for an overhang of 0.5". And it says that figure was determined by several carts in Bill's collection. If the design calls for a specific overhang, don't we need to know which carts will achieve that overhang when mounted in the fixed headshell? Not all cartridges will do that because they vary in the lateral distance between the mounting holes and the stylus.

I know you say that all this is addressed in the blog, but the blog leaves this question unanswered. I'm not trying to be a pain in the butt, Mike, but as I said, I'm just curious as hell. It's like trying to solve a math problem that's missing one critical piece of information. How do you solve 2 + X = Y?

Then again, maybe I am just a pain in the butt! Again, Mike, thanks very much, and sorry to be a bit obsessive.
-Bob

threadkiller · « **Reply #4 on:** 23 May 2010, 04:41 pm »

Hi Bob,
do you have a particular cartridge in mind that you would want to pair with an Amadeus?

hesson11 · « **Reply #5 on:** 23 May 2010, 07:47 pm »

Quote from: threadkiller on 23 May 2010, 04:41 pm

Hi Bob,
do you have a particular cartridge in mind that you would want to pair with an Amadeus?

No, but I'd like to have some idea of which ones will get you in the ballpark in terms of alignment. OR...

If the WTA theory is that precise alignment is not critical, I'd like to see some acknowledgment of that, too.

But right now, we're in no-man's land, with a statement that proper overhang is 0.5" yet no information as to what cartridges produce that overhang when mounted in the fixed headshell.

Actually, aside from the practical aspects of my questions, I'm trying to satisfy a purely "intellectual" curiosity. As a vinyl guy of many years, I've always been interested in tonearm/cart geometry. And while I hold Bill Firebaugh's ingenuity in high esteem, I want to understand it more completely.

-Bob

threadkiller · « **Reply #6 on:** 23 May 2010, 10:14 pm »

"no man's land" is right.....

I'm not remotely technically inclined, although I can say I did set up my Amadeus by myself, with a few fellow onlookers...I even hammed it up and wore the white gloves.

so Bob, good luck with your quest. Sorry I can't be of any further help on the technical side....

Mike Pranka · « **Reply #7 on:** 24 May 2010, 06:37 pm »

Bob,

You're no pain at all. The technical explanations on the blog do answer the questions. I can't say I understand all of it, same as yourself.. I'm not a physicist or engineer. But, to put it simply: with the Amadeus geometry, overhang doesn't matter for any cartridge that you'll mount. "Doesn't matter", meaning that it will not negatively affect the cartridge's ability to trace the groove and both play music and sound great. Some are more interested in theory than practice and will disagree.. but they will likely not have heard their cartridge on the tone arm.. and I'd bet they certainly don't understand Bill's questions/investigations and solutions. Bill has relieved us of the need to mess with tangency and overhang, because with his carefully considered combination of head shell angle, tone arm length and pivot to spindle length.. overhang does not affect your cartridge's ability to play music effectively.. within the range of stylus to mounting hole distances the tone arm will encounter. I've set up everything from a $50 MM to a $9K MC on the tone arm.. in addition to many others and I'm completely convinced by his solution.
In my opinion, Audiophile 'culture' involves a great deal of dogma and incomplete technical explanation. Bill operates outside of this and his work reflects it. Thankfully.

Mike

hesson11 · « **Reply #8 on:** 24 May 2010, 07:13 pm »

Quote from: Mike Pranka on 24 May 2010, 06:37 pm

But, to put it simply: with the Amadeus geometry, overhang doesn't matter for any cartridge that you'll mount.

Thanks so much, Mike! That's the kind of clear statement I was hoping for. I think the thing that leads to the confusion I experienced is the statement on the blog that the arm is designed for a specific overhang. But if Bill Firebaugh says it's not critical, well, I'm guessing he knows a tad more about physics, math and turntables than I do! (Then again, so did Bearwald, Lofgren and Stevenson, but that's a topic for another day.) Perhaps an easier-to-understand, more straightforward statement on the blog would prevent you from being shamelessly harassed by drudges like me!

Long-time vinyl guys have just had the importance of precise setup drilled into us for so long, that we take it as a given, kind of like gravity. So any new approach is bound to raise questions.

In any case, thanks so much for your reply.
-Bob

Wayner · « **Reply #9 on:** 24 May 2010, 07:41 pm »

Quote from: Mike Pranka on 24 May 2010, 06:37 pm

Bob,

You're no pain at all. The technical explanations on the blog do answer the questions. I can't say I understand all of it, same as yourself.. I'm not a physicist or engineer. But, to put it simply: with the Amadeus geometry, overhang doesn't matter for any cartridge that you'll mount. "Doesn't matter", meaning that it will not negatively affect the cartridge's ability to trace the groove and both play music and sound great. Some are more interested in theory than practice and will disagree.. but they will likely not have heard their cartridge on the tone arm.. and I'd bet they certainly don't understand Bill's questions/investigations and solutions. Bill has relieved us of the need to mess with tangency and overhang, because with his carefully considered combination of head shell angle, tone arm length and pivot to spindle length.. overhang does not affect your cartridge's ability to play music effectively.. within the range of stylus to mounting hole distances the tone arm will encounter. I've set up everything from a $50 MM to a $9K MC on the tone arm.. in addition to many others and I'm completely convinced by his solution.
In my opinion, Audiophile 'culture' involves a great deal of dogma and incomplete technical explanation. Bill operates outside of this and his work reflects it. Thankfully.

Mike

While an incorrectly placed stylus will play both channels of music, there are several other factors that will be ignored, if tonearm geometry is not addressed.

First, is the matter of tracking error, which leads to tracking distortion. This is a physical result of incorrect stylus placement. With certain types of stylus, this will also induce pre-mature record wear, as will incorrect VTA. The second issue is time alignment. Because the master lacquer was cut on a linear lathe, the cutting head traveled in a straight line. With a single pivot tonearm, the stylus now travels on an arc, thru which a straight cut was made. This causes the left and right channel time alignment to be off as well as tracking error. The result is a poorer sound stage and lack of musical engagement. In another thread, we have been discussing SRA with Michael Fremer, which is another aspect to proper cartridge alignment.

Few people have the technical knowledge to appreciate this and fewer people have the tools and skills to dial in their tables. It will make the difference between sound good, or even great, to jaw dropping.

For what it's worth.

Wayner

Wayner · « **Reply #10 on:** 24 May 2010, 07:48 pm »

BTW, I do enjoy the unique design of the Well Tempered TTs. I just have different opinion on the criticalness of cartridge alignment. Would love to own one one day.

Enjoy.

W

ssegrub · « **Reply #11 on:** 26 May 2010, 07:17 am »

Well I am sorry to throw the cat amongst the pigeons here, however I made a small prototype cartridge extension platform out of 3 mm acrylic, which bolts onto the Amadeus cartridge platform and extends my cartridges overhang. It was installed as a trial to see if I could get better tracking across the entire record. It is easily retrofittable, however the sound has improved, so I have left it on, and am more than happy with the overall performance.

Mike Pranka · « **Reply #12 on:** 26 May 2010, 06:02 pm »

There are loads of different geometries for cartridge set-up. Some people even calculate their own and play with slightly different set-ups, indefinitely. It's a way that some relate to all of this. I can't imagine (even very politely) arguing over different geometries, though (I would rather take a nap...). I've played with different samples of Amadeus tone arms that have a range of overhang specs and have come to the conclusion that Bill is correct. His chosen set-up does not compromise the sound or music-playing abilities of the turntable in any way that's important to me. The assertion that set-up geometry has been ignored, simply because it doesn't comform exactly to what others accept, is false.

Wayner,
Your post is an example of cartridge set-up 101. Perfectly reasonable and accepted basic information. What you're missing is that Bill did not ignore anything with regard to his geometry. Far from it.
Again, everyone should carefully read Bill's blog posts regarding tone arm geometry and tracking angle error. Who wants to debate Bill on the accuracy and relevance of his Tracking Angle Analyzer? .. or his studies involving the linear velocity of grooves? There is both math AND physics involved with all of this.. and in my opinion, a lot of psychology with audiophiles.. and I include myself in that comment. Having set up many different turntables with many different protractors over the years, I know from personal experience the psychology of turntable set-up. We want it to be 'perfect' and have everything line up the way we're told it should. Some will see Firebaugh's solutions as ignoring what they accept and some will appreciate them for their deeper understanding of the issues involved and the liberty they bring to set-up and playing records.

Mike

hesson11 · « **Reply #13 on:** 26 May 2010, 08:11 pm »

Mike,

A little bit off topic, but what if an Amadeus owner wanted to switch cartridges frequently, say to strap on a mono cart from time to time? Are additional tonearms available separately, like the VPI arm wands? Or would it even be practical to switch arms relatively quickly? Thanks.
-Bob

j beede · « **Reply #14 on:** 30 Sep 2010, 05:52 am »

I have read the blog entries and can say that WF is suggesting that lateral alignment is not worth the trouble. His argument is based on the small difference in 2nd order harmonics between fixed alignment (Amadeus) and ideal alignment (linear tracking). I find this ironic since the "classic" WTAs that I have owned were particularly well suited to setting proper overhang and complying with Baerwald or Lofgren parameters. Odd. I have already commented on the WTA having too much skating compensation. VPI provides none. Was it Tiefenbrun (Linn) or Gandy (Rega) who doesn't believe in cleaning records? For myseld, I prefer Baerwald, finger lifts and clean records.

threadkiller · « **Reply #15 on:** 30 Sep 2010, 06:30 am »

What I glean from the blog is that Bill F has done it for you, and (thank god for that) it is an entire rethinking of his old arm designs. The new arm is much, I repeat, much better sounding than the old.
I do love clean records, but thankfully now I can abhor finger lifts...

it's a whole new world out there...

j beede · « **Reply #16 on:** 1 Oct 2010, 03:09 am »

I just spent 30 minutes in my hobby listening to a difficult to track basso performance. For this session I had my WTT on my desk so I could do some lateral and vertical tweaking. The difference in playback quality was easily discernible between VTF of 1.45g, 1.70g and 1.99g. The difference in tracking of the most difficult sections was audible with the pick-up set horizontal versus +1° and +2° "forward" (nose down). I hate to do it, but the next experiment will be to decrease/increase overhang in 0.5mm increments to observe that effect. I think the Well-Tempered "zero clearance" concept is proved. I also think that ignoring the differences in cartridge geometries is not defendable--save for the p-mount specification. I wonder if WF considered p-mount so he could fix the counterweight as well as the cartridge location? If they are not doing so already, I am sure that the usual sources will be modifying these arms to enable optimized geometry.

ssegrub · « **Reply #17 on:** 1 Oct 2010, 05:04 am »

After reading all the latest interesting opinions on these threads about overhang etc I am going to rise to the challenge and remove my acrylic over hang extension and remount my Koetsu Rosewood Signature Platinum back onto the Amadeus arm as per the manual. Watch this space for the results over the next week or so. I am going to aproach this task with an open mind and let my ears decide which is better.....

michael w · « **Reply #18 on:** 2 Oct 2010, 02:54 am »

A small correction re: VPI's no anti-skate.

No so, the leadout wire on VPI arms introduces a minimal amount of anti-skate, enough for most applications.

j beede · « **Reply #19 on:** 2 Oct 2010, 11:28 pm »

Quote from: michael w on 2 Oct 2010, 02:54 am

A small correction re: VPI's no anti-skate.

No so, the leadout wire on VPI arms introduces a minimal amount of anti-skate, enough for most applications.

oops... looks like VPI realized that they forgot to include anti-skating on their arms. I see they now they offer a kit to add "mechanical anti-skating" to their arms. I thought that's what the "cord" was for? Anyway, I stand corrected, anti-skating is now standard--at least on the JMW-9 "signature" edition. I guess their other arms must be wired with cables having higher spring constant