Anti skate. I think something's wrong

I guess we shouldn't post any longer to this thread, because Inna is bored, but I was rather surprised to read that go4vinyl and Raul suggest the problem of unequal gain in one channel vs the other could be due to azimuth maladjustment.  In fact (this has been said many times too, Inna, so you can stop reading here), azimuth has very little effect on channel balance and adjusting azimuth is not a good way to address channel imbalance.

As to why the OP perceives that AS is affecting channel balance, it could be because badly out of whack AS is inducing distortions that are perceived as more or less output on the affected channel.  Just a guess. Cleaning all mechanical contact areas, as Raul did mention, is a good idea.

I agree with a few others who stated that AS should be adjusted while playing music with the stylus in the groove, not on the run-out or grooveless surface of an LP.  Since skating force is due to stylus friction in the groove, a smooth patch of vinyl does not generate a force that is representative of the problem.  Almarg's method for adjusting AS seems fine; I just don't have the patience or the visual acuity for that.  I am not quite in Stringreen's camp, either. I just set AS to the most minimal value possible, and then I forget about it.

Peter Lederman probably has forgotten more about vinyl set-up than I will ever know, but I do have to disagree with him on one small point; the genesis of the skating force begins with the fact that 95% of tonearms are mounted so as to have the stylus overhang the spindle (by, typically ~15mm).  This is done to obtain two points on the surface of the LP where the tracking error can be null, but the trade-off is that (without also introducing headshell offset angle) the cantilever can never be parallel to the groove.  This is proven by the Pythagorean theorem, where the tonearm is side A of a right angle triangle, the radius of the LP from stylus to spindle is side B, and the P2S distance is side C.  Because you start out with a situation where A>C, due to overhang, then the Pythagorean theorem that governs the size relationships of a right-angle triangle can never be met (C-squared = A-squared + B-squared). Headshell offset angle, in conjunction with overhang, allows for two points on the LP surface where the cantilever IS parallel to the groove, but some skating force is present even then, because of headshell offset angle.  Those two null points for tracking error are the only points where ALL the skating force is due to headshell offset angle. Otherwise, it's both overhang and headshell offset that cause skating.

Flieb, Thanks for saying exactly the same thing that I said in fewer words and without the physics lesson.  If my point(s) were moot, your points are moot-er.  I realize that an experienced person such as yourself would have the facts well in hand. My post of 4-13 was aimed only at those who might not.

The RS-A1, and any other tonearm designed for "underhang" and lacking any headshell offset, WILL achieve zero skating force at the one (not two) points across the LP surface where it also achieves tangency. (Because the stylus underhangs the pivot, there can only be one point on the arc where tangency to the groove is achieved. However, at that one point, there is no headshell offset to generate skating force.)  I know you know this, Fleib.

Why is there no skating force on a linear tracker? The whole idea, as you know, is that there is ALWAYS tangency to the groove, and there is never headshell offset angle. Thus, no skating force. However, in practice, if there is even a minute error in set-up; if the stylus is not exactly on the imaginary line that describes the radius of the LP, then there will always be that tiny amount of skating force.  Also, if there is any play in the bearing such that the stylus can describe even microscopic arcs as it travels across the LP, this too will generate a small skating force.  The Rabco/Goldmund linear tracker actually depended on its loose bearing to periodically activate a servo motor that dragged the assembly across the LP.  That was not a good design, IMO. I know you know this, Fleib.

I suspect that there is always a tiny amount of tracking error and a tiny amount of skating force and that both are so small in magnitude and so relatively constant across the LP surface that these two qualities (small and constant, compared to a pivoted tonearm) account for why we hear linear trackers as sounding different from pivoted tonearms, although not perfect.

mmakshak, In your post of 4-15, I am not sure what you are referring to.  I took no issue with anything PL said about stylus wear.  I only noted that his brief reference to headshell offset angle as being THE cause of skating force is not quite accurate.  Otherwise, I would never dare to doubt anything he says about cartridges, especially one he personally has examined with his own eyes.  

By the way, it's Lew M (or Lewm), not Lew N.  You're not the only one who misreads the "M".  Thanks.

I am curious about a long length, underhung tonearm.  None seem to exist, yet it would appear to be an interesting option, curing one of the problems with the available underhung tonearms (they tend to be short in length which increases the tracking angle error on both sides of the single null point) and at the same time avoiding the necessity for headshell offset.  Something like 12 inches with no headshell offset angle.  Seems to me that Nottingham made a 12-inch tonearm with no headshell offset, but it was not "meant" for under hanging.  One could try that though.  Probably there is nothing like that on the market, because of the fact that it would require quite a lot of real estate back at the pivot point. It might require a custom-made plinth/arm board.