lini wrote:ld: Difficult to achieve? Uhm - why should it? I'd assume wiggling a cantilever in an elastomer suspension to be similar to moving a spoon in a honey pot. But not all suspensions are equal, hence doubling the 100 Hz compliance or halving the static compliance sometimes are only pretty rough estimations. That's why I'd suggest to look at the recommended tracking force as well, 'cause that can also Help to zero in on the 10 Hz compliance...
Hmm. Spoon in a honey pot is not springy, that's drag, a measure of damping factor. Damping force is proportional to velocity and therefore naturally varies with frequency for any given amplitude.
BUT damping factor is not compliance.
Compliance is a function of the spring constant of the suspension i.e how springy it is, how much force resists compression or extension. So for compliance, spring force is proportional to amplitude
(compression or extension dimension
) which in principle is independant of velocity and hence independant of frequency. It would be hard to make a spring with a frequency dependant compliance, it's not natural !
Unless compliance is non-linear (which would be bad), compliance should also be independant of VTF.
Different lateral and vertical compliance is a different proposition. It simply means a different spring constant in vertical and lateral planes, so would be readily achievable with an asymetric profile for suspension material, for example. But that's not
frequency dependance !
Here's a plot I recently made (for different purposes) that shows vertical and lateral resonances being very similar on an OM2 Red. But that depends on cartridge type, and where it varies it is usually specified. Just for interest, and illustrates how easy it is to see the resonance peaks from a normal recording without a test disc.