Fremer says 9" arms are inherently superior?

[carolus]

Yes, it's Vic's famous TA concept, in full "home made" .... (4 units).

You know, I am living in Brussels (centrum Europe) ... & I measure in SI ....
I (re-)confirm, it's 5,5cm (not inches).

Believe me ... its music.

(sorry, we are out of Fremer's topic)

Karel

 

[Mike Lavigne]

Here is what Michael Fremer wrote in his review of the 12" SME 312S arm as copied from the electronic version on AnalogPlanet:

"To sum up: A 12" tonearm has some minor theoretical advantages, as well as a few disadvantages that, if not properly addressed, will probably outweigh the advantages, in my opinion. SME has adequately addressed these issues, producing, in the form of the 312S, a tonearm that has all of a 12" arm's theoretical advantages and none of its disadvantages. Whether it's worth spending the extra money for those advantages is another issue."
Read more at https://www.analogplanet.com/conten...e-amp-312s-tonearm-page-3#Gzmw3LZiIGj6Q8dI.99

It seems to me that MF thinks (as stated it is his opinion) that the 12" SME arm is not hampered by its extra length and that his conclusion would seem to infer that the 12" would have some advantage, and thus sound superior, to the 9" variant of the same arm. I find it interesting that the premise of this thread seems to imply that MF thinks the opposite. This very review counters that claim in the OP.

but that review was written 9 years ago in May 2009...…certainly prior to the Fremer's SAT experiences.

I know my viewpoints tend to evolve over time, why not his?

 

[PeterA]

but that review was written 9 years ago in May 2009...…certainly prior to the Fremer's SAT experiences.

I know my viewpoints tend to evolve over time, why not his?

Of course viewpoints can evolve or even change completely over time. Mine certainly have. However, I remain confused by MF's conclusion about the 12" SME arm. My point is that MF implied in this nine year old review from 2009 that the disadvantages of longer tonearms CAN BE overcome with good implementation: "a tonearm that has all of a 12" arm's theoretical advantages and none of its disadvantages." But, as was pointed out earlier, he also stated that he preferred 9" over 12" arms before he heard the SAT arm. We have this post from awsmone which further suggests that MF's review of the 12" SME arm was a clear exception to his preference for 9" arms at that time.

Also it would seems MF preference for 9 inch arms predates the SAT till at least 2013, I think SAT didn’t start producing arms till 2015?

http://www.whatsbestforum.com/showthread.php?9295-Oh-no-MF-is-not-a-fan-of-12-quot-arms!

Perhaps this review of the 12" SME is an anomaly or outlier, and at that time MF preferred all other 9" designs over their 12" counterparts. Interestingly, MF did not comment about the sound of the 12" arm relative to the SME 9" version in that review. No direct comparison seems to have been made for the review. That would have been very helpful to support his claim in the conclusion. Absent any comments about the actual sound differences learned from a direct comparison, we are left to discuss theory. And here we are.

I have made the direct comparison. I have a clear preference for the longer arm, as does ddk for a different series of SME arms. That does not mean that everyone will have the same preference, nor that one length is inherently superior to the other. They do sound different.

 

[ack]

Of course viewpoints can evolve or even change completely over time. Mine certainly have. However, I remain confused by MF's conclusion about the 12" SME arm. My point is that MF implied in this nine year old review from 2009 that the disadvantages of longer tonearms CAN BE overcome with good implementation: "a tonearm that has all of a 12" arm's theoretical advantages and none of its disadvantages." But, as was pointed out earlier, he also stated that he preferred 9" over 12" arms before he heard the SAT arm. We have this post from awsmone which further suggests that MF's review of the 12" SME arm was a clear exception to his preference for 9" arms at that time.

Perhaps this review of the 12" SME is an anomaly or outlier, and at that time MF preferred all other 9" designs over their 12" counterparts. Interestingly, MF did not comment about the sound of the 12" arm relative to the SME 9" version in that review. No direct comparison seems to have been made for the review. That would have been very helpful to support his claim in the conclusion. Absent any comments about the actual sound differences learned from a direct comparison, we are left to discuss theory. And here we are.

I have made the direct comparison. I have a clear preference for the longer arm, as does ddk for a different series of SME arms. That does not mean that everyone will have the same preference, nor that one length is inherently superior to the other. They do sound different.

I don't see anything out of the ordinary here - it wasn't until the SAT that someone actually proved that 9" can be superior, and Fremer relayed that. And who knows, maybe yet again in the future, Gomez or any other may prove again that a 12" is superior at that point. I am not sure where we are all going with these discussions. First and foremost, products evolve, and consequently many people's opinions evolve as well.

 

[GMKF]

Speaking of omelette, the 12” omelette turner is definitely better than the 9” one.

Tang

Depends on the size of your omlette i.e. the size of your pan

 

[Pb Blimp]

I don't see anything out of the ordinary here - it wasn't until the SAT that someone actually proved that 9" can be superior, and Fremer relayed that. And who knows, maybe yet again in the future, Gomez or any other may prove again that a 12" is superior at that point. I am not sure where we are all going with these discussions. First and foremost, products evolve, and consequently many people's opinions evolve as well.

I agree. As I said on another thread: Is not the answer to this question a function of the execution? At some point doesn't execution reduce the detrimental resonance effects of more length to the point the inherent alignment benefits of greater length prevail?

When you look at the material science today versus even 10 years ago and the technology used in manufacturing (like SAT or Gunther's approach in the Acoustic Signature TA-9000) its hard to believe such improvements will not eventually (if not already) result in a length greater than 9" being superior.

 

[TrackingAngle]

My reasoning is not "meaningless". I'm sure making such a dismissive comment makes you feel better so enjoy the moment.

You write "those are the reasons why" but you don't cite the reasons do you?

 

[TrackingAngle]

Maybe you can explain what you mean by "...this titling perhaps sloppy use of language ' top of the line' ?" which is not English. Not sure to what you are referring but for Gomez English is a second language.

He was obviously saying the CF 1 12" is his "top of the line" in that it is the most costly. There's also a 9" version and there are 9" and 12" versions of his two new less costly arms.

I also find this incomprehensible : "Also it would seems MF preference for 9 inch arms predates the SAT till at least 2013, I think SAT didn’t start producing arms till 2015?"

Are you trying to say that my preference for 9" arms dates back to at least 2013? I bought the Caliburn with 9" Cobra arm in 2006. But I also bought the Kuzma 4 Point 11" arm some years later.

The Cobra's tracking and sonics convinced my that overall a 9" arm performed better despite increased tracking error. The SAT cinched the deal for me.

That said, I never wrote that a 9" arm was "inherently superior". The person who started the thread made that claim (for me). What I wrote was that IN MY OPINION, when all performance aspects are considered, I prefer a 9" arm. That's hardly the same as saying a 9" arm is "inherently superior."

Nor am I trying to tell anyone else what to think or what to buy. However, off the record most of the tone arm manufacturers agree with my position and make longer arms to satisfy the marketplace desire for them.

 

[PeterA]

I agree. As I said on another thread: Is not the answer to this question a function of the execution? At some point doesn't execution reduce the detrimental resonance effects of more length to the point the inherent alignment benefits of greater length prevail?

When you look at the material science today versus even 10 years ago and the technology used in manufacturing (like SAT or Gunther's approach in the Acoustic Signature TA-9000) its hard to believe such improvements will not eventually (if not already) result in a length greater than 9" being superior.

I agree also and think that this will actually happen. This seems to be what MF wrote in that review nine years ago: that we will essential have arms with the advantages of lower tracking error and none of the disadvantages that longer length implies. It will be interesting to read how people describe the differences they hear when comparing Marc Gomez' new generation of 9" and 12" arms. I would be very surprised if the new SAT 12" arm costs more but sounds worse than his new 9" arm. However, it may simply sound different, cost more to produce, and therefore cost more in the end. Some listeners may end up preferring it and be willing to pay more for it, and others may prefer the sound of the shorter arm and be happy to save some money.

I suspect that the longer arms will not just have longer arm tubes like some of the recent designs. They will be more developed designs that deal effectively with the challenges of less rigidity and higher inertia. In other words, "all things will not be equal". The best arms will be different designs. Perhaps new, easier to use and more precise protractors will also be developed to increase the likelihood of proper alignment with the longer arms. I think Mr. Gomez knows what the challenges are and how to address them. The evidence will be judged by those lucky enough to listen to both arms in a direct comparison. I hope Mr. Fremer will be one of those lucky listeners.

 

[DaveyF]

Begs the question...how many manufacturers are actually making inferior sounding products that they know sound worse than their less expensive wares....simply because they 'perceive' a marketplace desire..hmmm???

 

[TrackingAngle]

Begs the question...how many manufacturers are actually making inferior sounding products that they know sound worse than their less expensive wares....simply because they 'perceive' a marketplace desire..hmmm???

What I wrote doesn't 'beg' any questions. Commerce has always been about keeping the customers satisfied and giving them what they want.

If you initially make a 9" arm and declare it the best dynamic performer in the groove and then launch a 12" version because customers ask for it (and in the case of SAT many owners have them on Air Force One TTs and wish to put a longer arm on the back mount), why not give it to them? This isn't ideologically driven.

As for sonics, it will be interesting to compare the 9" and 12" versions and I hope to do that and perhaps post 96/24 files "blind"

 

[Ron Resnick]

. . . especially coz [sic] you only joined the forum recently.

We are grateful and very excited that Michael has begun posting here. The fact that Michael began posting here only recently is not relevant. It is the opposite of the situation where a new member who is unknown to us is introducing himself to us gradually and we are getting to know him gradually.

It is no surprise whatsoever that somebody with Michael’s decades of literally unmatched experience in evaluating and comparing vinyl playback components may get a bit frustrated by the comments of members the vociferousness of whose opinions may exceed their underlying knowledge or experience.

 

[DaveyF]

What I wrote doesn't 'beg' any questions. Commerce has always been about keeping the customers satisfied and giving them what they want.

Regardless of whether or not that request has any validity or merit. Yes??
Do you think that a 'reputable' company would conduct business this way? Knowingly supplying an inferior product at a higher price simply because they 'perceive' a demand. You tell me...

BTW, please don't run away from the forum,as Fsonicsmith has suggested, we are a tough lot here, ( well some of us) but I think we are all pretty fair.

 

[Pb Blimp]

Regardless of whether or not that request has any validity or merit. Yes??
Do you think that a 'reputable' company would conduct business this way? Knowingly supplying an inferior product at a higher price simply because they 'perceive' a demand. You tell me...

BTW, please don't run away from the forum,as Fsonicsmith has suggested, we are a tough lot here, ( well some of us) but I think we are all pretty fair.

Yes Mike I for one am honored by your presence. Always respected you as one of the really good guys in this business both as far as you insights and approach. Not trying to flatter just calling it like I see it.

 

[Fsonicsmith]

We are grateful and very excited that Michael has begun posting here. The fact that Michael began posting here only recently is not relevant. It is the opposite of the situation where a new member who is unknown to us is introducing himself to us gradually and we are getting to know him gradually.

It is no surprise whatsoever that somebody with Michael’s decades of literally unmatched experience in evaluating and comparing vinyl playback components may get a bit frustrated by the comments of members the vociferousness of whose opinions may exceed their underlying knowledge or experience.

I am in complete agreement. I have lurked here regularly for years but ironically, I am the new poster who needs to mind my p's and q's. I meant to say that I think Mr. Fremer would be well served to post with information and thoughtful debate, but with less anger and passion.

 

[Ron Resnick]

. . . However, off the record most of the tone arm manufacturers agree with my position and make longer arms to satisfy the marketplace desire for them.

I find this very interesting, and telling.

How many of us are in actual contact with “most of the tone arm manufacturers” as is Michael? This is why I find Michael’s statement authoritative.

I am puzzled that anyone thinks there is something nefarious about a manufacturer (in almost any industry*) offering competing products to satisfy the demands of different customers. I would have thought that such a business model would be obvious in almost any industry.

* I might be a little bit concerned about a heart pacemaker company which offers too many varieties!

 

[DaveyF]

Ron, please read my post #193.. Perhaps you too can answer the questions that I posted.

 

[spiritofmusic]

This is one of the more fascinating debates on WBF, and maybe gets more to the heart of art v science than many other aspects of choice in audio.
Tbh, I’ll take Mike’s comment that tonearm designers offer 12” variants more to satisfy market demand than for reasons of impvd SQ.
Unfortunately the rest of us don’t have Mike’s access to off the record comments - no, all we have are tonearm manufacturers’ websites that proudly proclaim the technical and indeed SQ superiority of the longer choice of arm.
I don’t recall many websites of designers offering 10.5”, 12”, 14” in addition to 9”, saying the longer variant is JUST an alternative and not backed up by superlatives.
So, if a bleeding edge 9” arm ie the SAT, that is as good as we’re getting at this length via crazy levels of engineering and use of materials, in Mike’s opinion just sounds better than any other tonearm, incl so-called superior longer arms, and he can demonstrate via his digital files that tracking error is reduced or eliminated as a noticeable artefact, then Mike’s opinion seems totally reasonable and logical.
—
The q I’d like to ask Mike is that if he heard a new direct drive tt that absolutely slayed the opposition, and was in effect an absolutely king of the hill performer (by the same margin that the SAT has over “lesser” arms), would Mike be right if he claimed DD was de facto superior to belt or idler, and that’s just the way it is?
Even if the vast majority of tt users just could not get their heads around this?
Certainly the GPA Monaco 2.0 tt makes some very radical claims for natural superiority of the drivetrain used in possibly the world’s most bleeding edge DD.
Mike, if you heard this one, and really felt it wiped the floor w belt drive rivals, would you proclaim DD as by definition superior?

 

[Ron Resnick]

Regardless of whether or not that request has any validity or merit. Yes??
Do you think that a 'reputable' company would conduct business this way? Knowingly supplying an inferior product at a higher price simply because they 'perceive' a demand. You tell me...

BTW, please don't run away from the forum,as Fsonicsmith has suggested, we are a tough lot here, ( well some of us) but I think we are all pretty fair.

Sorry, Davey, but I think your point can be answered purely with logic. I read this to mean that you are suggesting that one tonearm length is inferior in all respects to another tone arm length? The likelihood of that being clear in a subjective industry is extremely small.

We all talk about how subjective our preferences are in this hobby, so why are you suggesting that a company which is offering different products to satisfy different subjective consumer demands is not reputable?

 

[PeterA]

I find this very interesting, and telling.

How many of us are in actual contact with “most of the tone arm manufacturers” as is Michael? This is why I find Michael’s statement authoritative.

I am puzzled that anyone thinks there is something nefarious about a manufacturer (in almost any industry) offering competing products to satisfy the demands of different customers. I would have thought that such a business model would be obvious in almost any industry.

Ron, I think we assume that the designers in this industry are driven by wanting to develop the highest sound quality at a particular price point. Perhaps it is just to make money, but I doubt it is for most of these small businesses. It seems strange that a tonearm manufacturer would develop a design that sounds worse but costs more, unless it fills a very specific need like a mounting slot on a turntable that can only accommodate a particular sized arm. Most people will probably want to compare, if possible, the sound of two different length tonearms directly to see which one sounds better before choosing to buy one. Or they may just read the reviews. I doubt that a longer, more expensive arm would survive long in the marketplace if it does not sound better than the 9" version.

It would be great to see a study of the various SME, Graham, Kuzma, VPI arms to see which lenghts are the most popular and why. If the prices were the same, would people choose the shorter arms for sonics? I have no idea. I suspect some would and some would not. I wonder if MikeL has talked to Joel Durand about this topic. Perhaps Bob Graham could share his thoughts on the topic by joining the discussion.