watercourse wrote:So, how are you thinking that the brace and plinth may not work together?
I understand about the looks aspect, but all of my mistakes are covered up by the arm itself. If I had access to a CNC machine, you bet I'd use it!
Thinking that the P5 plinth, beeing the complex structure that it is, is constructed to be used like that. The braces on the new models are there to fix a problem, the less than complex P3-24 plinth used...?
Aluminum vs. CF: I think we'll just have to compare. I doubt that Al would have the same ability to drain energy, but again, I'm basing this on my experiences in the biking context: Al frames have the harshest ride of all of the bikes I've had, in between steel and CF in lightness and rigidity in bike frames. It may be "just right", but someone needs to compare.
Don't know much trigonometry, or physics, but is the brace's job to drain energy, or to make the connection between the armbase and bearing more rigid?
Again, the P5 plinth may do a better job draining energy on it's own?
In the VTAF, the arm is rigidly mounted not to the plinth, but to the brass and bronze mount material, which minimally contacts/interacts with the plinth. Putting a more rigid, more energy-dissipating material at that interface seems to parallel Rega's philosophy of light and rigid. I guess I am not seeing how it would be contraindicated with a three-point mount, given that Rega themselves are using the braces now in this context?
Three-point screw fixing compared to the VTAF seems to be difficult to predict.
Not shure if the plinth may be too stiff, or how it affects the sound?
Still, a very cool project!