Dear @lewm : Not exactly that. What I'm saying is refered to how the MINT LP protractor was/is made it where ( independent of the type of alignment choosed ) the manufacturer takes the P2S distance as his protractor reference to build it.
R.
Mint Protractor. A Pretty Nice Alignment Tool
So when I bought my Triplanar the seller had a Mint protractor for it. It was cut to be used on a Garrard 401. As luck would have it, the spindle size is the same as the one on my Scheu Analog table. So I put it on the table this morning, and fine tuned the cartridge alignment. My overhang was off just the smidgiest of a smidge, and I made the slightest of corrections to the cantilever alignment. Using an overhead light it was very easy to see the alignment lines. Playback showed the efforts yielded positive results. I have to say this is a good product. Nothing magical about it, just a clean execution of an arc protractor.
Showing 5 responses by rauliruegas
Dear @neonknight : " The Mint protractor is built specifically for this arm. "
NO, that’s where you misunderstood strated and belongs because the MINT LP protractors were made not for an specific tonearm ( this does not matters. ) but for an specific P2S distance.
Look, the name in cartridge/tonearm alignment is accuracy and the MINT LP protractor is totally accurated for that specific P2S distance that each owner ask for. Example of that accuracy and your misunderstood, differences in the alignment A and B in Lófgren are this way: same linear offset for both A/B, different null points at each one, same offset angles, different tracking distortion and error levels and different overhang by only 0.8 mm and obviously different P2S distances. Compared any of the A/B Löfgren alignments with Stevenson all parameters are way different ( this is the worst kind of alignment but one choosed by tonearm japanese designers. ) R. |
@neonknight : Please do it a favor and don't insist in something where you have a clear misunderstood. The designer protractor you own was in specific for a P2S distance to achieve minimum tracking distortions in the designer alignment choosed and that's why you:
" My overhang was off just the smidgiest of a smidge, and I made the slightest of corrections to the cantilever alignment. " So, you have higher distortions down there in your cartridge/Sheu tonearm.
Löfgren equations inputs are the ones I pointed out and the output from those equations gives us: both null points, overhang, offset angle, linear offset and trackind distortion.
Where do you see P2S distance : nowhere. You have to understand the Löfgreen equations. You are not the only audiophile with that similar kind of misuderstood, even M.fremer less than 8 years ago had that same misunderstood till he learned.
Sorry.
R. |
No, it's not. Please make a revise to the alignment Löfgreen equations where the only input parameters are: tonearm EL and most inner/outside distances. Those equations gives to you the overhang and offset angle but it does not calculates the P2S distance that's the EL minus overhang. Maybe I'm wrong and you are rigth.
R. |
Dear @neonknight : The MINT LP protractor is a dedicated one made it for an specific P2S distance and does not works for a different P2S distance. Normally those protractors were made for Stevenson Alignment and under ask by customer for Löfgren A or B.
Regards and enjoy the MUSIC NOT DISTORTIONS, R.
|