Pivoting Linear-Tracking Tonearms

[RoyGregory]

How well does that arm track? I use a linear tracker and find that the drag of the stylus will pull forward a bit so if you try setting up so the stylus just lands at the edge of the inside of the tracking line, the pull of the record forward may pull it into a better alignment. With a linear tracker, even a small error seems somehow more pronounced than a pivoted arm, which one would think is counterintuitive but is real imho.

I have had both the Thales Simplicity II and the Statement tonearms for review, listening to them both side by side and on a number of different 'tables. I would agree with those posters who find the Simplicity II to be a beautifully fluid, spatially correct and rhythmically articulate tonearm - but I'd also agree that it has slightly limited bottom-end weight and a resulting loss of dynamic impact and authority. In some ways this mimics the performance of the TTT Compact 'table and also Micha Huber's own listening tastes, which tend to small scale, acoustic works and voice.

However, the Statement is a completely different beast. It has the musical virtues of the Simplicity II combined with a natural sense of weight, bottom-end energy and absolute dynamic authority. This generates a much more clearly defined and explicit soundstage, natural perspectives and impressive dimensionality. The uninhibited sense of flow and dynamic discrimination (at both ends of the range) combined with the immediacy, intimacy and beautiful tonality and textures of the Simplicity II reproduces recordings with a wonderfully natural sense of musical engagement and communication - and where appropriate, purpose and intent. Set up and adjustment is far better/easier and more precise. It is even possible to adjust VTA on the fly, as long as you have a stable turntable and a steady hand. If the Simplicity II majors on delicacy, precision and perfect musical manners, the Statement is its big brother with serious attitude. It's a genuinely great arm and in my experience, one of the most musically enjoyable and convincing available - as well as one of the most beautifully crafted.

I would also like to echo Mr C's comments regarding alignment, especially effective length. Thales supply a mounting jig that accepts the removable sled/cartridge from both the Simplicity and the Statement. A typically clever design, it corrects for optical alignment and makes mounting your cartridge 'simplicity' itself. It also protects the precision bearings in the tonearm from excessive torque. What it doesn't do is load the cantilever when you are viewing its position. Micha Huber says that the jig incorporates compensation for this, but obviously that will be an arbitrary judgement. In reality, the deflection of the cantilever will depend on compliance. cartridge mass and VTF. That means that although the jig IS really useful when it comes to mounting the cartridge, it ISN'T the last word in alignment. Tiny adjustments in effective length are clearly audible with significant musical results. Get it exactly right and with the right records the Statement can conjure some of the most lifelike and convincing musical reproduction you're likely to hear. Fortunately, the jig does make such incremental and repeatable adjustments far easier to achieve. Anybody who uses a Statement arm or the Simplicity II who hasn't experimented with this alignment parameter is likely sitting on a massive, free musical upgrade, an upgrade that makes the Statement - in these days of spiralling inflation when it comes to arm prices - an even bigger bargain.

On a final note, the slender arm-tubes and short overall length mean that many people assume that the Thales 'arms are relatively low mass. It ain't so. Although Thales are reluctant to state an effective mass (the calculation of such being something of a moveable feast) using two tonearms in parallel - even if they are quite light individually - makes for a mass-y structure. The Statement definitely has a medium to heavy effective mass and is most comfortable with low (and even really low) compliance cartridges. It's no coincidence that Thales also builds the EMT pick-ups! While I found the Lyra Etna Lambda SL to be an excellent match, there was no ignoring the special musical affinity between the Statement and the lower compliance and higher mass of the Fuuga. If you run a Thales arm - or are tempted to do so - look to pair it with a cartridge from the lower compliance school if you want to hear the tonearm at its best.

 

[Ron Resnick]

Thank you very much for telling us about your experiences with these tonearms, Roy!

Purely out of curiosity have you had occasion to compare directly either of these tonearms with the Schröder LT or with the Reed 5T?

 

[XV-1]

I have had both the Thales Simplicity II and the Statement tonearms for review, listening to them both side by side and on a number of different 'tables. I would agree with those posters who find the Simplicity II to be a beautifully fluid, spatially correct and rhythmically articulate tonearm - but I'd also agree that it has slightly limited bottom-end weight and a resulting loss of dynamic impact and authority. In some ways this mimics the performance of the TTT Compact 'table and also Micha Huber's own listening tastes, which tend to small scale, acoustic works and voice.

However, the Statement is a completely different beast. It has the musical virtues of the Simplicity II combined with a natural sense of weight, bottom-end energy and absolute dynamic authority. This generates a much more clearly defined and explicit soundstage, natural perspectives and impressive dimensionality. The uninhibited sense of flow and dynamic discrimination (at both ends of the range) combined with the immediacy, intimacy and beautiful tonality and textures of the Simplicity II reproduces recordings with a wonderfully natural sense of musical engagement and communication - and where appropriate, purpose and intent. Set up and adjustment is far better/easier and more precise. It is even possible to adjust VTA on the fly, as long as you have a stable turntable and a steady hand. If the Simplicity II majors on delicacy, precision and perfect musical manners, the Statement is its big brother with serious attitude. It's a genuinely great arm and in my experience, one of the most musically enjoyable and convincing available - as well as one of the most beautifully crafted.

I would also like to echo Mr C's comments regarding alignment, especially effective length. Thales supply a mounting jig that accepts the removable sled/cartridge from both the Simplicity and the Statement. A typically clever design, it corrects for optical alignment and makes mounting your cartridge 'simplicity' itself. It also protects the precision bearings in the tonearm from excessive torque. What it doesn't do is load the cantilever when you are viewing its position. Micha Huber says that the jig incorporates compensation for this, but obviously that will be an arbitrary judgement. In reality, the deflection of the cantilever will depend on compliance. cartridge mass and VTF. That means that although the jig IS really useful when it comes to mounting the cartridge, it ISN'T the last word in alignment. Tiny adjustments in effective length are clearly audible with significant musical results. Get it exactly right and with the right records the Statement can conjure some of the most lifelike and convincing musical reproduction you're likely to hear. Fortunately, the jig does make such incremental and repeatable adjustments far easier to achieve. Anybody who uses a Statement arm or the Simplicity II who hasn't experimented with this alignment parameter is likely sitting on a massive, free musical upgrade, an upgrade that makes the Statement - in these days of spiralling inflation when it comes to arm prices - an even bigger bargain.

On a final note, the slender arm-tubes and short overall length mean that many people assume that the Thales 'arms are relatively low mass. It ain't so. Although Thales are reluctant to state an effective mass (the calculation of such being something of a moveable feast) using two tonearms in parallel - even if they are quite light individually - makes for a mass-y structure. The Statement definitely has a medium to heavy effective mass and is most comfortable with low (and even really low) compliance cartridges. It's no coincidence that Thales also builds the EMT pick-ups! While I found the Lyra Etna Lambda SL to be an excellent match, there was no ignoring the special musical affinity between the Statement and the lower compliance and higher mass of the Fuuga. If you run a Thales arm - or are tempted to do so - look to pair it with a cartridge from the lower compliance school if you want to hear the tonearm at its best.

Hi Roy

thanks for your thoughts re the Thales Simplicity II and Statement. I own the Simplicity II and love it, and I play a lot of modern music and use it with the Lyra Atlas Lambda SL.

In specific reference to the effective length. Are you stating if you slightly decrease the effective length in the jig, this may compensate for the lack of loading the cantilever ( that happens in normal alignment )and result in better sound?

That is something I will have to try.

regards

 

[ddk]

I have had both the Thales Simplicity II and the Statement tonearms for review, listening to them both side by side and on a number of different 'tables. I would agree with those posters who find the Simplicity II to be a beautifully fluid, spatially correct and rhythmically articulate tonearm - but I'd also agree that it has slightly limited bottom-end weight and a resulting loss of dynamic impact and authority. In some ways this mimics the performance of the TTT Compact 'table and also Micha Huber's own listening tastes, which tend to small scale, acoustic works and voice.

However, the Statement is a completely different beast. It has the musical virtues of the Simplicity II combined with a natural sense of weight, bottom-end energy and absolute dynamic authority. This generates a much more clearly defined and explicit soundstage, natural perspectives and impressive dimensionality. The uninhibited sense of flow and dynamic discrimination (at both ends of the range) combined with the immediacy, intimacy and beautiful tonality and textures of the Simplicity II reproduces recordings with a wonderfully natural sense of musical engagement and communication - and where appropriate, purpose and intent. Set up and adjustment is far better/easier and more precise. It is even possible to adjust VTA on the fly, as long as you have a stable turntable and a steady hand. If the Simplicity II majors on delicacy, precision and perfect musical manners, the Statement is its big brother with serious attitude. It's a genuinely great arm and in my experience, one of the most musically enjoyable and convincing available - as well as one of the most beautifully crafted.

I would also like to echo Mr C's comments regarding alignment, especially effective length. Thales supply a mounting jig that accepts the removable sled/cartridge from both the Simplicity and the Statement. A typically clever design, it corrects for optical alignment and makes mounting your cartridge 'simplicity' itself. It also protects the precision bearings in the tonearm from excessive torque. What it doesn't do is load the cantilever when you are viewing its position. Micha Huber says that the jig incorporates compensation for this, but obviously that will be an arbitrary judgement. In reality, the deflection of the cantilever will depend on compliance. cartridge mass and VTF. That means that although the jig IS really useful when it comes to mounting the cartridge, it ISN'T the last word in alignment. Tiny adjustments in effective length are clearly audible with significant musical results. Get it exactly right and with the right records the Statement can conjure some of the most lifelike and convincing musical reproduction you're likely to hear. Fortunately, the jig does make such incremental and repeatable adjustments far easier to achieve. Anybody who uses a Statement arm or the Simplicity II who hasn't experimented with this alignment parameter is likely sitting on a massive, free musical upgrade, an upgrade that makes the Statement - in these days of spiralling inflation when it comes to arm prices - an even bigger bargain.

On a final note, the slender arm-tubes and short overall length mean that many people assume that the Thales 'arms are relatively low mass. It ain't so. Although Thales are reluctant to state an effective mass (the calculation of such being something of a moveable feast) using two tonearms in parallel - even if they are quite light individually - makes for a mass-y structure. The Statement definitely has a medium to heavy effective mass and is most comfortable with low (and even really low) compliance cartridges. It's no coincidence that Thales also builds the EMT pick-ups! While I found the Lyra Etna Lambda SL to be an excellent match, there was no ignoring the special musical affinity between the Statement and the lower compliance and higher mass of the Fuuga. If you run a Thales arm - or are tempted to do so - look to pair it with a cartridge from the lower compliance school if you want to hear the tonearm at its best.

I had similar experience with the Thales arms, Simplicity was simply too dull and not particularly excelling at anything. Statement was better but IMO still lacking compared to some of the better arms like Graham and 3012--R. I didn't set the alignment for those setups but did the final VTA and I could hear that they were slightly off using their jig. So in the end the purpose of the design which is superior tracking is defeated by the ergonomics of the arm.

david

 

[RoyGregory]

Thank you very much for telling us about your experiences with these tonearms, Roy!

Purely out of curiosity have you had occasion to compare directly either of these tonearms with the Schröder LT or with the Reed 5T?

The short answer to your question is no. Nor, frankly, would I necessarily seek such direct comparisons. I have heard both the Schroder LT and the Steve Dobbins/XACT Audio version of that arm in a number of different systems and situations, although never in my own set up. It has never failed to impress and I find it one of the most intriguing designs out there. I have no serious experience with the Reed. However, your question does raise an interesting issue. You asked whether I have compared these arms directly: contrary to popular wisdom, such comparisons are far more difficult to perform than it might at first seem.

But didn't I say that I'd directly compared the Simplicity II and Statement? Indeed I did - and it's a perfect illustration of the point.

In order to make that comparison, it was necessary to simultaneously assemble two identical turntables (TTT Compacts in this case) and both arms. The shared geometry and removable cartridge sled meant that it was possible to swap the same cartridge between the two rigs in around a minute or so - all while maintaining optimum adjustment of all parameters in each case.

Now consider trying to execute that comparison with two different tonearms. One option would be to use two nominally identical cartridges - but anybody who has compared supposedly identical samples of any high-end cartridge will now just how variable they can be. Twenty-five years (or so) ago, I took home five Clearaudio cartridges with a view to selecting one for my own use: three Insiders and two Accurates. Which sounded the best? One of the Accurates! That's not to disparage Clearaudio. In my experience similar variation exists across most cartridge ranges. These are hand-built, micro-engineered, artisan devices, so it would be a miracle if they achieved total consistency. In a similar vein, I witnessed A.J van den Hul build two versions of the same cartridge - one for me and one for another reviewer. Neither sounded like the standard model (or each other) but each was precisely tuned to our individual tastes! Bottom line - even if the differences between cartridges don't swamp the differences between two tonearms, they are big enough to seriously impact the results of any AB-type comparison.

So swap the same cartridge between the two different arms... That introduces a host of different variables. First and most obvious is the question of alignment. As Mr C has already observed, tiny differences in alignment can have a disproportionate musical impact. When really getting the best out of a cartridge means dialling in tracking force with a degree of accuracy below the resolution of digital stylus balances (and don't forget that each and every time you adjust one alignment parameter, it also alters all the others!) trying to achieve equivalent performance in two different tonearms is a tall order. Then there's the question of cartridge/tonearm compatibility: you'd need a cartridge that worked equally well in both arms, irrespective of variations in effective mass, materials, friction levels etc. Finally, what about differences between the two arms themselves. How old is the internal wiring? Has it even run in? Are their any issues with the continuity or resistance through any of the joins in the wiring harness? Have any of those joins deteriorated as a result of environmental considerations? The list could go on, but you get the picture...

With products and signals this delicate, direct comparison is too often too blunt a tool to offer any real conclusions. There are exceptions to this, just as there are exceptions to any other rule. But even in the case of the Thales tonearms, which eliminate a whole host of significant variables, there are still more than enough to cause concern. Which is why the direct comparison was interesting but my conclusions actually rest on far longer periods of listening to both arms, each in turn.

What is true of tonearms is equally true of other components in the chain - although in some cases it is at least easier to work with the variables. As an example, for years, reviewers have operated on a 'reference system - one in, one out' basis. You have your known system: you swap out the power amp for a new unit in for review: the differences you here must be down to the new unit. Well - yes and no. The differences you hear are certainly the result of the 'new' system, but unless you looked at optimising the set-up of the incoming amp (its support, grounding, interface to the line-stage etc) then the comparison is harmless apples to apples. More to the point, unless you adjust the position and set up of your speakers to accommodate the new amplifier (specifically any difference in damping factor, bass weight, bottom-end control and overall spectral balance) then the playing field goes from gently sloping to a vertiginous cliff. But instead, you hear reviewers arguing that you should only change one thing at a time and the DUT is it.

Surely the object of any review (or comparative listening) should be to realise a product's potential before making any kind of judgement. Especially, when it comes to tonearms and cartridges, that's a lot more involved than it seems...

 

[Ron Resnick]

The short answer to your question is no. Nor, frankly, would I necessarily seek such direct comparisons. I have heard both the Schroder LT and the Steve Dobbins/XACT Audio version of that arm in a number of different systems and situations, although never in my own set up. It has never failed to impress and I find it one of the most intriguing designs out there. I have no serious experience with the Reed. However, your question does raise an interesting issue. You asked whether I have compared these arms directly: contrary to popular wisdom, such comparisons are far more difficult to perform than it might at first seem.

But didn't I say that I'd directly compared the Simplicity II and Statement? Indeed I did - and it's a perfect illustration of the point.

In order to make that comparison, it was necessary to simultaneously assemble two identical turntables (TTT Compacts in this case) and both arms. The shared geometry and removable cartridge sled meant that it was possible to swap the same cartridge between the two rigs in around a minute or so - all while maintaining optimum adjustment of all parameters in each case.

Now consider trying to execute that comparison with two different tonearms. One option would be to use two nominally identical cartridges - but anybody who has compared supposedly identical samples of any high-end cartridge will now just how variable they can be. Twenty-five years (or so) ago, I took home five Clearaudio cartridges with a view to selecting one for my own use: three Insiders and two Accurates. Which sounded the best? One of the Accurates! That's not to disparage Clearaudio. In my experience similar variation exists across most cartridge ranges. These are hand-built, micro-engineered, artisan devices, so it would be a miracle if they achieved total consistency. In a similar vein, I witnessed A.J van den Hul build two versions of the same cartridge - one for me and one for another reviewer. Neither sounded like the standard model (or each other) but each was precisely tuned to our individual tastes! Bottom line - even if the differences between cartridges don't swamp the differences between two tonearms, they are big enough to seriously impact the results of any AB-type comparison.

So swap the same cartridge between the two different arms... That introduces a host of different variables. First and most obvious is the question of alignment. As Mr C has already observed, tiny differences in alignment can have a disproportionate musical impact. When really getting the best out of a cartridge means dialling in tracking force with a degree of accuracy below the resolution of digital stylus balances (and don't forget that each and every time you adjust one alignment parameter, it also alters all the others!) trying to achieve equivalent performance in two different tonearms is a tall order. Then there's the question of cartridge/tonearm compatibility: you'd need a cartridge that worked equally well in both arms, irrespective of variations in effective mass, materials, friction levels etc. Finally, what about differences between the two arms themselves. How old is the internal wiring? Has it even run in? Are their any issues with the continuity or resistance through any of the joins in the wiring harness? Have any of those joins deteriorated as a result of environmental considerations? The list could go on, but you get the picture...

With products and signals this delicate, direct comparison is too often too blunt a tool to offer any real conclusions. There are exceptions to this, just as there are exceptions to any other rule. But even in the case of the Thales tonearms, which eliminate a whole host of significant variables, there are still more than enough to cause concern. Which is why the direct comparison was interesting but my conclusions actually rest on far longer periods of listening to both arms, each in turn.

What is true of tonearms is equally true of other components in the chain - although in some cases it is at least easier to work with the variables. As an example, for years, reviewers have operated on a 'reference system - one in, one out' basis. You have your known system: you swap out the power amp for a new unit in for review: the differences you here must be down to the new unit. Well - yes and no. The differences you hear are certainly the result of the 'new' system, but unless you looked at optimising the set-up of the incoming amp (its support, grounding, interface to the line-stage etc) then the comparison is harmless apples to apples. More to the point, unless you adjust the position and set up of your speakers to accommodate the new amplifier (specifically any difference in damping factor, bass weight, bottom-end control and overall spectral balance) then the playing field goes from gently sloping to a vertiginous cliff. But instead, you hear reviewers arguing that you should only change one thing at a time and the DUT is it.

Surely the object of any review (or comparative listening) should be to realise a product's potential before making any kind of judgement. Especially, when it comes to tonearms and cartridges, that's a lot more involved than it seems...

Dear Roy,

Thank you very much for this detailed and thoughtfully explained reply. I agree on each point you make.

I think that people often are insufficiently thoughtful or inadvertently disingenuous about the validity of allegedly precisely direct comparisons.

I think that some people especially are unaware of or ignore the sample-to-sample variation of handmade cartridges. I also think people often overestimate the ability of audiophiles (and audiophiles themselves overestimate their own ability) to align properly cartridges on tonearms.

I concur fully with the myriad practical difficulties of conducting a true apples-to-apples comparison -- especially between cartridges and between tonearms.

Your reply should be textbook reading for anybody suggesting or claiming a valid cartridge-to-cartridge or tonearm-to-tonearm comparison.

 

[Buck_Rogers]

Fluid damped Linear Air Bearing Tone Arm plus Metal platter mat.

100% Linear tracking, Friction-less bearing, Fluid damped cartridge. End game performance!

"Fluid damping" This ultimate design negates arm resonances and eliminates cartridge induced vibrations.

 

[Lagonda]

Fluid damped Linear Air Bearing Tone Arm plus Metal platter mat.

100% Linear tracking, Friction-less bearing, Fluid damped cartridge. End game performance!

"Fluid damping" This ultimate design negates arm resonances and eliminates cartridge induced vibrations.

View attachment 80740

Is the fluid/silicone trough in front of the cartridge or befind ? It looks like there is no arm ! What is the pressure of the air bearing ?

 

[Rensselaer]

Fluid damped Linear Air Bearing Tone Arm plus Metal platter mat.

100% Linear tracking, Friction-less bearing, Fluid damped cartridge. End game performance!

"Fluid damping" This ultimate design negates arm resonances and eliminates cartridge induced vibrations.

View attachment 80740

It seems to me that there are often minor warps in vinyl and that without vacuum hold down a short tonearm would alter VTA much greater than a pivoted tangential tracker, but I must admit I do not know if the fluid dampening eliminates that (or not).

 

[Lagonda]

It seems to me that there are often minor warps in vinyl and that without vacuum hold down a short tonearm would alter VTA much greater than a pivoted tangential tracker, but I must admit I do not know if the fluid dampening eliminates that (or not).

Fluid damping in front of the cartridge puts a brutal level of stress on the cartridge when using warped records, because the fluid tries to keep the cartridge in place. How much stress depends on viscosity and paddle shape. I alway play slightly warped records on my pivoting arm instead, but the linear tracker with front silicone trough, is a great performer!

 

[Colt12]

I'd like to vouch for what is the finest constructed tonearm I've come across, the Thales Simplicity. It brings me nothing but joy and the only tonearm I'd consider swapping it out for is the Statement. I am convinced it does the job of putting the cartridge where it is supposed to be better than any other. The benefits of linear tracking without the drawbacks of non-pivoted designs. It seems to help the cartridge pick everything out of the groove that's there.
No "limited bottom-end weight" over here.

 

[G T Audio]

I had similar experience with the Thales arms, Simplicity was simply too dull and not particularly excelling at anything. Statement was better but IMO still lacking compared to some of the better arms like Graham and 3012--R. I didn't set the alignment for those setups but did the final VTA and I could hear that they were slightly off using their jig. So in the end the purpose of the design which is superior tracking is defeated by the ergonomics of the arm.

david

The Thales tonearms are in a different league, sound wise, to the SME 3012-R and the Graham Phantom. The 3012-R works best with cartridges like the Ortofon SPU and EMT TSD range and gives a big powerful sound, which is impressive especially when listening to good recordings. The Thales Simplicity II on the other hand provides a more balanced sound, allowing superb layering in the sound stage together with excellent detail retrieval. This together with a natural sound balance makes the music sound very realistic, as if it were being performed in front of you. Although the 3012-R is a great tonearm, it is easily surpassed by the more recent M2-12R. I have owned both SME's and use the latter with my collection of Ortofon SPUs.

One of the finest sounding tonearms I have owned was the Schröder Reference SQ. I had two of these with different armwand materials. They had a naturalness of sound that I have not heard from any other tonearm. Having said that the Thales Simplicity II can get close to this on good acoustic analogue recordings. I would love to hear the Statement sometime in my own system. I have owned several Reed tonearms but that is another story...

I guess the "key" to this discussion is in the word "Tonearm" and why it was named as such...

 

[ddk]

The Thales tonearms are in a different league, sound wise, to the SME 3012-R and the Graham Phantom. The 3012-R works best with cartridges like the Ortofon SPU and EMT TSD range and gives a big powerful sound, which is impressive especially when listening to good recordings.

I'm sorry but a comment like this only shows your lack of experience and understanding of the 3012-R!

As for the the rest people are free to like whatever they like, our opinions differ.

The Thales Simplicity II on the other hand provides a more balanced sound, allowing superb layering in the sound stage together with excellent detail retrieval. This together with a natural sound balance makes the music sound very realistic, as if it were being performed in front of you. Although the 3012-R is a great tonearm, it is easily surpassed by the more recent M2-12R. I have owned both SME's and use the latter with my collection of Ortofon SPUs.

One of the finest sounding tonearms I have owned was the Schröder Reference SQ. I had two of these with different armwand materials. They had a naturalness of sound that I have not heard from any other tonearm. Having said that the Thales Simplicity II can get close to this on good acoustic analogue recordings. I would love to hear the Statement sometime in my own system. I have owned several Reed tonearms but that is another story...

I guess the "key" to this discussion is in the word "Tonearm" and why it was named as such...

Perhaps!

david

 

[G T Audio]

I'm sorry but a comment like this only shows your lack of experience and understanding of the 3012-R!

As for the the rest people are free to like whatever they like, our opinions differ.



Perhaps!

david

On the contrary I worked with SME over 25 years ago and got them to produce a special version of the SME 3012-R which I sold here and also in the USA as the 3012-GTA. It was an improved version of the 3012-R with all the work done by SME exclusively for me. It used a different bearing and also some special internal wiring which I supplied to SME. It was also my work here in Europe with Jean Verdier and Avantgarde Acoustic exhibiting at shows in the UK and in Germany with a Verdier and SME 3012-GTA and SPUs, and the press this received that generated the interest in the SME 3012-R (circa 1997 onwards), because the US Importer of SME at that time wasn't interested in the older designed SME tonearm models. So those interested in the SME 3012 contacted and brought these through me in the UK. At the time, it was mostly to owners of Verdier, Teres, Galibier and Redpoint turntables, but more followed and many went on Garrard 301s/401s. I have lost count at the number of 3012s I have set up and sold both here and in the US and as good as they are, and they are good tonearms, sonically they are never going to compete with a good modern tonearm like a Schröder or Thales in terms of detail retrieval and layering of the soundstage, assuming the appropriate cartridge is used.

 

[ddk]

On the contrary I worked with SME over 25 years ago and got them to produce a special version of the SME 3012-R which I sold here and also in the USA as the 3012-GTA. It was an improved version of the 3012-R with all the work done by SME exclusively for me. It used a different bearing and also some special internal wiring which I supplied to SME. It was also my work here in Europe with Jean Verdier and Avantgarde Acoustic exhibiting at shows in the UK and in Germany with a Verdier and SME 3012-GTA and SPUs, and the press this received that generated the interest in the SME 3012-R (circa 1997 onwards), because the US Importer of SME at that time wasn't interested in the older designed SME tonearm models. So those interested in the SME 3012 contacted and brought these through me in the UK. At the time, it was mostly to owners of Verdier, Teres, Galibier and Redpoint turntables, but more followed and many went on Garrard 301s/401s. I have lost count at the number of 3012s I have set up and sold both here and in the US and as good as they are, and they are good tonearms, sonically they are never going to compete with a good modern tonearm like a Schröder or Thales in terms of detail retrieval and layering of the soundstage, assuming the appropriate cartridge is used.

I've been dealing with SME 30xx for over 35 years and never heard of this special GTA version. Please give us a break with some special wiring nonsense and the cornerstone of 30xx tonearms is their knife edge bearing, what did you come up with? Any specs and pictures on this GTA thing that apparently was commercially available since the 90's and superior to the 30-12-R?

I must have missed your memo, I was an SME dealer until early 2000's in the US and had a steady supply and sales of 30xx-R tonearms until they stopped manufacturing it. I never heard anyone talk of your GTA arm in any of the circles you mention here. The only 3 -R versions I've come across is the standard R, R with steel bearing, R with steel bearing and silver wiring, Gold & Pro versions and all had the same knife bearing design either in steel or nylon, not with a GTA one. I have heard several 3rd party offerings of this bearing in other materials, brass, copper and titanium but none claimed a redesign of the tonearm or some retrofittable GTA one.

I don't question the sonic qualities of SPUs and that it's a good match for the 3012-R I question the extent of your experience with this tonearm and nothing that you mentioned above changes my opinion. EMT TSD had a star layout that will not fit in a 3012-R without modification or an adaptor but then the geometry and alignment would pose an obstacle. The matching EMT tonearms have a different tube material and compliance, but one can shoe horn a TSD into the 3012-R. Either way 3012-R certainly isn't limited to these vintage cartridges as you claimed.

david

 

[G T Audio]

I've been dealing with SME 30xx for over 35 years and never heard of this special GTA version. Please give us a break with some special wiring nonsense and the cornerstone of 30xx tonearms is their knife edge bearing, what did you come up with? Any specs and pictures on this GTA thing that apparently was commercially available since the 90's and superior to the 30-12-R?

I must have missed your memo, I was an SME dealer until early 2000's in the US and had a steady supply and sales of 30xx-R tonearms until they stopped manufacturing it. I never heard anyone talk of your GTA arm in any of the circles you mention here. The only 3 -R versions I've come across is the standard R, R with steel bearing, R with steel bearing and silver wiring, Gold & Pro versions and all had the same knife bearing design either in steel or nylon, not with a GTA one. I have heard several 3rd party offerings of this bearing in other materials, brass, copper and titanium but none claimed a redesign of the tonearm or some retrofittable GTA one.

I don't question the sonic qualities of SPUs and that it's a good match for the 3012-R I question the extent of your experience with this tonearm and nothing that you mentioned above changes my opinion. EMT TSD had a star layout that will not fit in a 3012-R without modification or an adaptor but then the geometry and alignment would pose an obstacle. The matching EMT tonearms have a different tube material and compliance, but one can shoe horn a TSD into the 3012-R. Either way 3012-R certainly isn't limited to these vintage cartridges as you claimed.

david

FWIW I have never heard of you, or your company...

I called it the 3012-GTA in the UK mainly to defrenchiate it from the standard 3012-R. As you will be aware analogue was dead back in the late 1990s and apart from a couple of analogue specialist companies like SME, Nottingham Analogue and Michell Engineering, that was about it here in the UK. I am sure you wouldn't have heard of my 3012 version as the web wasn't mainstream back then, but if you have a look through a couple of Sound Practice magazines there is at least one article from me in there, plus a mention from Roland Kraft (Image Hi-Fi magazine) which confirms the Verdier, SME 3012 and SPU I brought to the 1998 Frankfurt Show. Also, Hi-Fi News Magazine where it was covered in the Platine Verdier review.

Regarding worldwide sales: Brian Baker at SME confirmed at the time to me that the only people that were ordering the 30xx series was Japan and our home UK market. In fact, nearly all of the production went to Japan as they were into big horn speakers, Denon 103 and Ortofon SPU cartridges and this combination was popular amongst Japanese audiophiles. I remember seeing a large batch of 3012s when collecting an order at SME. These were all gold plated and were just about to be inspected by Alastair and all were heading for Japan.

I did not say the SME 3012 would not work with other cartridges. I said they worked well with the SPU range. I can confirm that I did use an Allaerts MC2 F1 cartridge on an 3012 at the 1999 HiFi News Show at the Novotel in Hammersmith. At that time the Allaerts F1 was one of the most expensive cartridges you could buy. This was probably the most memorable Hi-Fi show we did as our room was packed to the gunnels for 4 days as we used Avantgarde Trios for the first time and no one had seen such speakers like that before. Jan Allaerts was also in attendance in my room as the F1 cartridge was debuted at that Hi-Fi show.

Anyway, it's all pretty much irrelevant today as the tonearms have long been discontinued, so the used market is the only option for the 3012. However, I am very pleased that SME made the M2-12R because comparing it with the 3012 series the M2-12R sounds superior. Its just a shame they have stopped producing that also. Ortofon have made some interesting 12" tonearm over the years. Most made in Japan and some are excellent.

Note: links are attached in the text.

 

[ddk]

FWIW I have never heard of you, or your company...

There's no reason for you to have heard of my company, you're the big deal here. The one to have had SME invest in new tooling and run a parallel production of GTA branded 3012s with your new bearing bearing and special wiring and your GTA-3012 becoming the defacto replacement of the 3012-R in the US & UK markets !

This was in the late 90's yet no sign of it anywhere? There are plenty of pictures and information on the net for 100 year old audio equipment yet this revolutionary tonearm is missing?

I called it the 3012-GTA in the UK mainly to defrenchiate it from the standard 3012-R.

I don't care what you named it I asked about your novel and new SME made GTA-3012 tonearm that supposedly replaced the most popular and most respected tonearm of the century, at least in the UK and the US.

As you will be aware analogue was dead back in the late 1990s and apart from a couple of analogue specialist companies like SME, Nottingham Analogue and Michell Engineering, that was about it here in the UK. I am sure you wouldn't have heard of my 3012 version as the web wasn't mainstream back then, but if you have a look through a couple of Sound Practice magazines there is at least one article from me in there, plus a mention from Roland Kraft (Image Hi-Fi magazine) which confirms the Verdier, SME 3012 and SPU I brought to the 1998 Frankfurt Show. Also, Hi-Fi News Magazine where it was covered in the Platine Verdier review.

Regarding worldwide sales: Brian Baker at SME confirmed at the time to me that the only people that were ordering the 30xx series was Japan and our home UK market. In fact, nearly all of the production went to Japan as they were into big horn speakers, Denon 103 and Ortofon SPU cartridges and this combination was popular amongst Japanese audiophiles. I remember seeing a large batch of 3012s when collecting an order at SME. These were all gold plated and were just about to be inspected by Alastair and all were heading for Japan.

I did not say the SME 3012 would not work with other cartridges. I said they worked well with the SPU range. I can confirm that I did use an Allaerts MC2 F1 cartridge on an 3012 at the 1999 HiFi News Show at the Novotel in Hammersmith. At that time the Allaerts F1 was one of the most expensive cartridges you could buy. This was probably the most memorable Hi-Fi show we did as our room was packed to the gunnels for 4 days as we used Avantgarde Trios for the first time and no one had seen such speakers like that before. Jan Allaerts was also in attendance in my room as the F1 cartridge was debuted at that Hi-Fi show.

Anyway, it's all pretty much irrelevant today as the tonearms have long been discontinued, so the used market is the only option for the 3012. However, I am very pleased that SME made the M2-12R because comparing it with the 3012 series the M2-12R sounds superior. Its just a shame they have stopped producing that also. Ortofon have made some interesting 12" tonearm over the years. Most made in Japan and some are excellent.

Note: links are attached in the text.

All I see in the linked articles is a mention of a 3012 the was rewired and writer repeating what you said about a modified bearing and the presence of an SPU but not what it is.

The Thales tonearms are in a different league, sound wise, to the SME 3012-R and the Graham Phantom. The 3012-R works best with cartridges like the Ortofon SPU and EMT TSD range and gives a big powerful sound, which is impressive especially when listening to good recordings.

I question anyone's real experience if they say the 3012-R works best with a couple of vintage cartridges one of which doesn't even fit the arm. Your referenced 3012 wasn't even a production R version. As far as relevance goes the 3012-R is highly relevant, it's one of the best tonearms ever made and because of the large production numbers readily available to audiophiles and at prices that are a fraction of current but sonically inferior tonearms. My interest in this tonearm is purely for it's sound quality and ease of setup, price isn't a consideration.

david

 

[XV-1]

The Thales tonearms are in a different league, sound wise, to the SME 3012-R and the Graham Phantom. The 3012-R works best with cartridges like the Ortofon SPU and EMT TSD range and gives a big powerful sound, which is impressive especially when listening to good recordings. The Thales Simplicity II on the other hand provides a more balanced sound, allowing superb layering in the sound stage together with excellent detail retrieval. This together with a natural sound balance makes the music sound very realistic, as if it were being performed in front of you.

Agree

I own all 3 tonearms and the Thales is the best sounding in my system.

The 3012-R is very good and better than the Phantom imo.

 

[G T Audio]

Agree

I own all 3 tonearms and the Thales is the best sounding in my system.

The 3012-R is very good and better than the Phantom imo.

Yes, agreed. The 3012 is beautifully built and well designed. I never had an issue with any of SME's tonearms. I always used to enjoy visiting the factory. Very old school. Not sure this will continue under the new owners.

 

[Loheswaran]

There's no reason for you to have heard of my company, you're the big deal here. The one to have had SME invest in new tooling and run a parallel production of GTA branded 3012s with your new bearing bearing and special wiring and your GTA-3012 becoming the defacto replacement of the 3012-R in the US & UK markets !


david

Hi David

I greatly respect and value much of what you post - but Graham Tricker is neither a 'babe in the wood' nor somebody that is informing you of a falsehood.

I used to buy hifi from stores such as Walrus Sytems in central London (sadly no longer around) and i know categorically that he could obtain the SME variation from GT Audio who imported the Verdier.

Can it be that you just simply like this arm for what it does in your designs and set-ups more than anything else?

As to linear tracker tonearms - i personally love the automatic Garrard - randomly scratched reecords and sounded rubbish - looked cool though.

Lohan