That’s true, but all we know for sure is that the package is limited. We know that the new 332 preamp has a dedicated connection to supply the NVC TT phono stage, which they presumably wouldn’t have added if they though it was a dead duck. For all we know, Naim might be planning to release the Solstice, or a variation of it, for standalone purchase at some point.
Obviously they will need to see sufficient demand before deciding to do so, and this thread ain’t helping there. Still, I find it hard to imagine that Naim went to all the trouble of developing Solstice from scratch just for a one-off batch. That would be a hard one to sell to their venture capitalist owners.
The turntable can be a dead duck but the phono stage can go on. Really no different than having stageline and superline in the product lineup before with no turntable. Powering from the preamp was supported in the classic series as well.
Hope springs eternal that Naim will issue a corrected Solstice but i really doubt it.
1 Like
What is the compliance of the Equinox cartridge and what is the effective mass of the new Aro tonearm?
And are these compatible with lower mass cartridges, which may or may not have a higher compliance? Ie adding mass may not be the best idea if one wants to optimize cartridge-tonearm matching.
1 Like
Naim have told me that the effective mass is 11g.
People often try to match the compliance of the cartridge with their arm. Mantra is that low compliance cartridges need high effective mass arms.
Or not – as there are numerous reports of people who love Koetsu cartridges on relatively low mass arms despite the cartridges’ relatively low compliance.
There is no “one way” to do any of this I have learned, despite opinions often being VERY strong.
This puts it a the class of most modern, high-quality tonearms in that regard, and – design/implementation constraints notwithstanding – it should support the majority of mainstream high-end cartridges from the likes of Clearaudio, Dynavector, Lyra and so on.
1 Like
Agreed. Certainly room to operate and in vast majority of cases, the typical guidelines are used to avoid gross mismatches. Yet, I think those specifications should be known, particularly in the case of end users considering adding additional mass. 11 grams would seem to offer wide margin of flexibility.
Btw, the effective mass of the old Aro was 11 grams. The new Aro then is constructed of different material yet the same mass, which is interesting.
Many modern arms are in that range. My tonearm (Clearaudio Universal) has an effective mass of 10 gr.
1 Like
I know. What I find interesting is that the new Aro is reported to have exactly the same effective mass as the old Aro, yet constructed of different material and with that heavy counterweight.
What are the new ARO II materials? My arm is a carbon fiber wand in three segments, machined aluminum base and bearing housing, and SS counterweight (85 gr for the 12", 66 gr for the 9"). I imagine the ARO II has some design cues from my Universal (the anti-skate adjustment sure looks similar).
1 Like
I don’t know other than the arm wand is carbon fiber, which is new. Maybe that is how the weight of the heavy counter weight is offset to stay at 11 grams as in the previous version.
Agree JasVerlen
I just hope they produce a new classic Superline that can be used with the new classic NPX 300 PS
Suit me fine
1 Like
Good job you didn’t buy one then isn’t it?
1 Like
Because there’s no easy way to do this without adding issues. The headshell part is incredibly sensitive. That finger lift should go for a start, if one is concerned about quality. Just lift the head shell with your fingers.
I don’t have a Solstice to check, but if you wanted to reduce the mass of the counterweight, my first thought would be to stick it in a lathe and remove a 5mm (estimate) ring of material concentrically around the arm, from the back.
By design - or a typo…? Answers on a postcard…
1 Like
A Zu Audio DL-103 would likely fit at 14g? Starting from USD599
5 Likes
It’s the principle:
Heath-Robinson solution to poor design.
Also, lack of integrity in the mechanism…there as to be a joint somewhere.
Some might be happy with this…would be a deal-breaker for me.
SPU Royal N - 13g and c. £2k compatible?
I apologise for my earlier Koetsu suggestion, was trying to be a bit light hearted @JasVerlen And I do get it’s the principle you’re making a point about here
I was never in a quandry over this.
I had an Infinity Black Widow carbon fibre tonearm almost 50 years ago. It was very stylish, but got slated at the time for lack of torsional rigidity. Have things changed?
And it can’t be right that the ARO2 has the same mass as the original ARO, because I have read reports on here, claiming that the ARO2 is too heavy to fit to a Linn LP12.
There does seem to be an extraordinary lack of clarity about the ARO2. Surely someone at Naim should know?"
Effective mass. It’s the total weight of the arm minus the counter weight and the cartridge.