I am trying to give the best shot to a Thorens TP16 thonearm. The official mass is 16.5g. I am confused and curious about a few things:

1. Does 16.5g include in the calculation the mass of the TP 60 headshell?

2. If one removes the back screw-in extra weight, does tonearm mass reduces to 16.5g - 5g = 11.5 (5g being the weight of the screw-in extra weight at the back)? That would make the TP16 a proper medium compliance tonearm even without further tweaking!

3. Has anybody noticed real sonic advantages in removing the (plastic) rotating VTF mechanism from the tonearm? Is the advantage (if any) the (a) additional reduction in mass, or (b) the elimination of undesired vibrations? I appreciate the idea, but ... is it a detectable improvement?

last question:

4. In the case if the TP16 and TP60, when calculating the resonating frequency, i.e. f = A/sqrt(C * mass), In calculating total "mass" should one add also the headshell: i.e. (arm + HEADSHELL + cartridge + screws) ? Many web-based pages do not ask you headshell info.

As in:

RF = A ÷ √ (M × C)

A = 1.000 ÷ 2*pi = 159.23

M = Total mass (arm + headshell + screws + cartridge)

C = compliance (at 10 Hz)

Obviously, including the weight of the TP60 in the calculation make a massive difference in the resulting RF. For instance consider a cartridge DL-110 which is 4.8g, which has a Compliance of about 14@10Hz (i.e . 8@100Hz). We have the following rather different scenarios:

Setting = [TP16 + TP60 + Denon DL110]

Case 1 (with Headshell in the calculation and no modifications to TP16)

M = 16.5+

**10**+0.5+4.8 = 32.3 (that would be huge!)

RF= 159.23/sqrt(14*32.3) =

**7.43**Hz

Case 2 (without Headshell in the calculation + and no modifications to TP16)

M = 16.5+

**0**+0.5+4.8 = 22.3 (very reasonable already)

RF= 159.23/sqrt(14*32.3) =

**9.01**Hz

Case 3 (without Headshell + tonearm weight diet)

M =

**11.5**+

**0**+0.5+4.8 = 17.3

RF= 159.23/sqrt(14*32.3) =

**10.23**Hz

Thanks for your help

Best, Andy