soundproof wrote:

as I can use different tonearms with it.

I meant to ask before...

What is the fundamental difference between the 9" and 12" arms? I assume that they must impart some sort of tonality difference?

Assuming this -is there some sort of guideline that suggests which length is more suited to a particular type of recording?

(i.e.) Classical = 9" and Rock = 12" or is it simply by ear? Which do you prefer?

Thanks!

Hi Jaff,

The chief advantage of a longer arm is that the overall tracking angle difference, from outer to inner tracks, is reduced, because the radius produces a circle segment that is "flatter" than with a 9" arm. You therefore get a truer contact of the stylus with the groove walls, throughout the side.

I found this illustration - ideally you want the stylus to follow the straight track from the PU-head to the center of the record, but the arm will draw a circle segment that never really coincides with the sound carrying portions of that straight track. the longer the tonearm, the flatter the segment however, corresponding closer to the straight track.

Of course, B&O later solved it elegantly by developing the tangential tonearms, that follow a straight track, because the base of the arm moves relative to the stylus position, thus securing perfect contact between the stylus and the two groove walls.

Potential problems with a longer arm is the introduction of resonances, but that is damped through various techniques.

My 9"-tonearm is excellent for opera, I really like how voices come across with it - this may, of course, also be due to its SP 8/9 PU; the 12"-tonearm gives a very wide and airy soundstage, wider than the 9" - but is more prone to transmit surface noise from vinyl that isn't quiet - this may be due to the longer arm. However, it delivers amazing punch to percussion, and I have a blast playing a variety of music with it. The 12"-arm is also more sensitive to small changes in tracking weight, and I feel I can almost "tune" the music by adjusting the weight, with it. I have a digital scale which I can use, but it's fun how well it corresponds to the numbers on the vintage tonearms.

A longer tonearm plays truer, and creates less inner-groove distortion.

I'm going to mount a Schick tonearm with an Ortofon SPU pick-up on the deck, on a shouldered tonearm board - the vintage PUs I have now have trouble resolving past 13.5kHz, on some records cramping high-hats, cymbals - so I'll have to get something non-vintage, as an alternative, while retaining the elegance. 

I think the Schick arm will look stunning on the Beogram 3000 Thorens. This is also a 12"-tonearm.

I should mention that I now have the Beogram 3000 very nicely set up, the mechanism is completely silent - I spent some time silencing it, after getting it home. Something that one should expect to have to do, in spite of it being newly refurbished. Just working with the set-up, the perfect leveling, lubrication, the belt. For instance, I had the power cord in contact with the motor casing, and that transmitted noise that was picked up by the stylus. Little tweaks and adjustments that in the end resulted in a completely silent Beogram - I can now place the stylus on the chassis, and only pick up the faintest hum from the motor, even at loud amplification - which has me wondering whether I really want to move the chassis to a slate plinth. I like to keep it "original".

macjonny1 wrote:

Here's a picture of mine!  I had to delay shipment for a bit but it will come soon! 

Have you received your Beogram 3000 macjonny1? Would love to see more photographs of it!

soundproof:

Thanks for the reminder.  I do indeed have it and have been enjoying it very much, although my time is limited these days it seems.  I will definitely have to post some pictures of it soon.  The black color is amazing and Frede has done an incredible job.  Unfortunately, you have set the bar very high with your photography so not just any picture will do!  

I'm so pleased with the sound from my Beogram 3000 Thorens, Beolab 5000 and Helsinki Gradient speakers that I moved the whole setup into my main listening room. And the sound is reference quality - I'm decompressing into analog and vintage, even looking for a vintage reel-to-reel, such as the Revox PR99.

Even removed the television set - this room will be for listening to music from vinyl, via harddisk>DAC>Beolab 5000, and possibly from tape.

Very "chuffed" with how this is playing now, and grateful to Frede Kristensen of Classic Audio, Renato Rivo, and Axel Schurholz for the assistance I've received with getting these wonderful vintage components to as new condition.

''I'm so pleased with the sound from my Beogram 3000 Thorens, Beolab 5000 and Helsinki Gradient speakers that I moved the whole setup into my main listening room. And the sound is reference quality - I'm decompressing into analog and vintage, even looking for a vintage reel-to-reel, such as the Revox PR99.

Even removed the television set - this room will be for listening to music from vinyl, via harddisk>DAC>Beolab 5000, and possibly from tape.''

Stein,

I'm intrigued.  Where are your Beolab 5s?  Have you now 'regressed' completely to analogue sources for 'serious' music listening?

I know nothing about the Gradient speakers, but given how you have set them up in your room, your love of Wagner (I am looking for Culshaw's book on recording 'the Ring' with Solti, although I don't expect to get a full boxed set of the cassettes with it) and the fact you have a copy of 'Kind of Blue' lurking on the floor, did you think about a pair of Quad electrostatics as an alternative to the Helsinkis?   

Cleve

Hello Cleve,

With the Beogram 3000 and the Beolab 5000, I wanted a pair of passive speakers, that still were able to engage with the listening room, in a manner reminiscent of what happens with acoustic lenses. I did consider electrostats, but wanted a broader listening area, and greater distance to the speakers, than those ordinarily allow for.

The sound from the BL5s is more complete than what the Helsinkis deliver - but it didn't seem right to connect a vintage analogue front end to BL5s (does sound wonderful, though - I tried it out). The BL5s are now in the adjoining room, having swapped places with this setup.

Why have I gone analogue now? I'm not in the "vinyl is better than any digital source" camp. It's not - there's more information in a well recorded and post produced digital file than on any vinyl on the planet. With good loudspeakers in a good listening room, it's no contest.

Yet, I feel i've been in the forefront of digital music since the early 2000s. I may have been one of the first ever to connect a Mac mini to a soundcard to be used as a home music server (which I did the day the first Mac mini was available at the Apple store). I do know I was probably the first to claim that the iPod Touch was going to become the best remote ever. And when the Intel Core 2 Duo version of the mini came out, I never looked back. I did early experiments with room-correction, software for equalization, etc. And I have tried out various high-resolution formats from HD-Tracks, Linn, 2L, etc.

Getting excellent playback that way is something I feel I'm conversant with.

BUT - I do a lot of work at screens, I use computers and mobile devices throughout the day, I'm surrounded by computers. And when I got the Beogram 3000, hooked it up to the Beolab 5000, I felt that I was away from the computer(s), completely. I've hidden everything that's not analogue in the cabinet - I can dial up music from a harddisk when I want to. However, now I'm enjoying putting on a record, the sheer beauty of the turntable, not at all missing the TV which was taken out of the room ...

It's listening bliss. Even with surface noise, the occasional fireplace crackle from the record - the "ritual" is so different from how I use computers that I get to completely and totally submerge myself in something else, when I'm relaxing.

Here's something similar to what my next listening room will look like. There will be harddisk/computer based playback, available when I want it - but the analogue will dominate. 
Good thing I never got rid of my vinyl! 

Speakers to be decided. Of course, there's nothing wrong with having BL5s in such a room, and that may be how things turn out, in the end. But I do know that I will be having turntables and reel-to-reel as my major sources for relaxation. Moving next year, room being planned as we speak!

Stein,

I understand fully the desire to escape the tyranny of the computer and all its paraphenalia.  We are, after all, 'analogue' creatures. 

Having foolishly parted with my vinyl  in the late eighties, I regretted it almost immediately for a number of reasons but ultimately perhaps because I quickly realised I missed the sheer human pleasure of handling a 12'' record and the ritual involved in playing the thing.  Some music lovers insist the pleasure from, and involvement with playing recorded music in the home had diminished with the demise of the wind-up gramophone.

I rember Ivor Tiefenbrum, the founder of Linn writing in the late 70s that digital recording, then in its infancy, would only really be a total success when the storage mediums and the playback chain was completely digital, and now that is the way most people are listening to recorded music.  And yet, vinyl is undergoing a real revival, probably for the very reasons you have mentioned.

My partners son and I have both taken to vinyl - he for the first time.  Given that he has basically grown up with digital music and has always had good equipment (Meridian and a pair of ATCs), he is an absolute convert to the glories of the black disc and the joys of analogue recordings by great musical interpreters of the past.  So as a general rule, we work on the principal that if it was analogue recording, it's probably better on vinyl.  

Regards and when you have your new music room, some photographs would be wonderful!

Cleve

Here's a picture finally of my black Beogram 3000, restored by Frede!

Wow!!