Fidelity Research FR64s Headshell dilemma


Dear FR64S users can you help me please. I have an FR64S that i bought without a headshell. I have only just got round to getting it mounted. I did pivot to spindle distance of 231.5 (the alternative distance' I also have an armboard for 230.
I tried a Sony headshell that i had - it was 2mm short of correct alignment. So I bought a new Jelco headshell it was also too short. 
CAn you tell me what headshell does work to allow other cartridges to work. I'm just using a DL103 for alignment first as I fettle the rest of my front end.

thanks
lohanimal

Showing 28 responses by nandric

Not only geometry but also the arm mass is important. For this
aim you have two possibilities. The added counterweight (170g)
as well the headshell weight. To reduce  arm mass lighter
headshells as well lighter weight (than 250 g standard) can
be used. As chakster I prefer( heavy ) Orsonic AV-101 and 
lighter and cheaper Sumiko (Jelko). So there is not one
specific criterion for the headshell. 
Referential opacity. How does one know that ''Ikeda headshells'' 
are Ikeda's? How does one know that retip by Van den Hul is
done by Van den Hul? As we should know no cart producer
produce his own cantilever/stylus combo. Why should this be
the case with other parts? My opinion is that all FR or Ikeda
headshells are worthless. This also apply for FR phono cables.
But there is this illusion about ''original parts''. Americans seems
to attribute some special ''quality '' to the word ''original''.
Old cars with original parts are sold for millions dollars.
But then one also talks about ''improved versions''. How is
any improvement  possible  without  changing any original
part?  What about ''Japanese wonder''  Deed they not improved 
Western products by improving their parts? 
Addition, Typical example of referential opacity is Orsonic.
There are 3 versions : AV-1 ; AV 11 and AV 101. Those are 3
different ''animals'' to which is referred with the same name.
So those who don't like ''Orsonic'' probably mean the first light
version AV-1 . Its rigidity is obvious problem. But AV 101 weight
14.5 g and looks very sturdy (aka very rigid). 
The other way round is the case with Jelco HS-25 . This one is
offered under different names but with  the same bearer . Sumiko
HS- 12 is identical with HS-25 and some other. All with different
prices. So when one has not idea to which object an name refers
one can't know what he is talking  about.  I have seen Sumiko
for $30 and Jelco for $80. 

karl_desch, I think that you are confusing ''effective length'' with
''overhang''. Effective length is the distance between the stylus 
and the pivot which is by Bearwald 231, 5 mm. On your Ortofon 
headhshell there are slots along which you can move the stylus
in both directions in order to get the right distance to the pivot.
 
Dear dover, what does ''I have acute angina'' means for an
deaf person? Some foreigners among us have no idea why the doctor ''in casu'' lost his ,uh, license. 
In the article written by Kessler and Pisha (Audio, Januari 80)
''Tonearm geometry and setup'' there is an chart with all adjustment
parameter for the most tonearms of this time . The possible errors
by the construction are also mentioned. The most errors are made
by ''offset angle''. The ''optimal offset'' is also mentioned.
By FR-64 S the Stevenson geometry is assumed . As we all (?)
know the spindle - pivot distance is different for Bearwald. This
geometry provide the best AVERAGE values for the record surface.
Stevenson give better results for the ''inner groves'' which distance
to the spindle is not clear. Besides the most records in my collection
have no ''inner grove problem'' at all. Only few records are ''cut'' 
near the spindle. For Stevenson geometry the ''effective length''
is 245 mm . For Bearwald 246. 
BTW by the most protractors the spindle dimension( thickenss) 
is not taken in consideration. Well by Mint tractor. As chakster
mentioned Mint tractor is meant for one tonearm only. I use 3
tonearms and ordered 3 Mint tractors. Those are very easy to
use. As far as I know only Dertonarm protractor has this
''spindle adjustment'' possibility. 
Dear chakster, the assumption that manufacturer ''knows better''
is based  on sand. By Ikeda's FR-64 S the offset angle is 21.930 
while the optimal offset angle is 22.421. By overhang the values
are 15.948 (Ikeda) and optimal 16.863. 
Being member of an authoritarian society does imply belief
in authorities (grin).  
advanced&karl_desch, Assuming that you are not familiar with
Arche you can buy extra insert pieces on which the cart is installed.
This way you can use the frame as base and pre-adjust as many
carts as you like. It is like owning many headshells in one.
Dear chakster, what you overlook is difference between zero (0)
points on the record surface between those two geometries.
Bearwald has the best áverage values for all surface places
while Stevenson has better value for the inner groves. You may
have records hith inner groves which ''ask'' for Stevenson. But 
the most people prefer better solution (values) for all groves. 
As I mentioned before you attribute to manufacturer to much
''authority'' with illusion that they know better,
By scientific arguments used by Kessler and Pisha all 22inspected
tonearms  have sub-optimal solutions for prescribed parameter.
I hope you can find their .article (Audio Jjanuari 1980) and see
for yourself. ''Belief'' is not an scientific argument. 


Dear chakster, your ''theory'' imply that one can chose spindle
to pivot distance as one like. But pivot to spindle distance determine
eff. length. By Stevenson 245 mm by Bearwald 246 mm. If one 
could chose eff. length as one please we would not need tangential
arms because all points on the record would have zero angular error.
Your Feickert can't correct all the errors manufacturer made. 
As I mentioned by Kessler&Pisha all 22 inspected tonearms have errors. 
BTW there are 9'', 10'' and 12'' tonearms. My Kuzma is made
for 9'' while my SP-10 does not allow 9'' tonearm. For tonearms
with different length different spindle to pivot distance are
needed. Ergo: one can't  chose this distance as one please. 
bukanona, the problem of the inner grove distortions is not invented
by hypothesis. The problem can be easy solved by reduction of
playing time on each side of the record. That is to say to avoid
critical part of the inner grove. People don't buy records depending
from time duration. This also means no need for Stevenson geometry.
Dear chakster, the so called ''zero points'' on the record will be
on other ''points'' by Bearwald than Stevenson. That is the
whole point. Those points determine  the amount of the angle
errors made by each geometry. You may have eff. length right
but if your PS is different you obviously negate their mutual
dependance. Aka PS+ overhang= eff. length .

 . 
''Simplicity and reality'', As Raul Kessler& Pisha start with
assumption of 3 ''simple equations'' needed for optimal
geometry. : 1. the determination of zero points, 2. the optimum
of offset angle and 3, optimum for overhang for a given eff.
length.
The reality, ''in the other side'' , as Raul is used to say,  is that
neither of 22  tonearms inspected has optimal construction.
All have sub-optimal results in the context of mentioned ''simple
equations '' . 
Dear chakster, in addition to ''slots in' or ''on'' headshells there are
also ''movable'' 4 pin connectors which not only allow for the
right azimuth but also  for extra extension for stylus adjustment.
Next to rigidity issue connected with used material those are
important properties of headshells. But also the distance in the
headshell which allows for carts with different dimensions as
well for headshell wire. Your ''short'' headhells are very frustrating
when one need to ''wrestle '' with them in order to get them 
connected with both : cart connectors and headshell connectors .
Add to that different  dimensions of headshell ''clips'' for the
carts as well for the headshells connectors so who would 
understand our hobby except by  masochism assumption?
Assertions or opinions? Do people think different? If so with
which organs? We all think in the same way. That is we start
from some  assumption which we think is true and then deduce
in the assertion entailed sentences or propositions or statements.
But the first logical rule is that if assertions are not true than
deduced propositions are also not true. 
However ''being right '' is some kind of psychological reword or
being the winner which prevent us to ''change our mind'' when
we learn or must admit that our assertion are not true. 
So defending assertion at ''any cost'' can be understood in this,
uh, ''sense'''. Chakster is an example but in the sense that
he believes in Ikeda's authority. In the Western ''civilisation''
this confusion between ''veritas'' et ''auctoritas'' was the reason
for Aristoteles domination of Western education for more than
2000 years. Despite the fact that he was refuted in physics by
Galileo and by Frege in logic and scientific methodology. 
In some social 'sciences'' he is still present . Recognizable as
''essentialist''. Those who search for ''essential meanings of
notions''. But notions are linguistic expressions so speaking
about notions is speaking about language. The so called ''reality''
is ''extra linguistic'' . There are unknown many languages but
truth is universal  irrespective in which  language expressed.
But now back to headshells and their assumed ''qualities'' (grin). 


The only German joke I  have ever heard and is curiously 
connected with my post about''simplicity'' and ''reality'' is
as follow:: ''If theory and practice coincide than both are
probably false''.
What Kessler and Pisha discovered is that by te most tonearms 
the offset angle and overhang were wrongly chosen . That is
to say not optimal according to the  3 mentioned equations. 




Dear chakster, You forget to post the picture of the ''linear carrier''
of this Yamaha invention. Should we ask all 4 owners  of
ET-2 (long) thread for explanation? Chris is my other Slavic 
brother always willing to answer any question. I assume that ET-2
is better arm otherwise there would be no such long thread about
this one. 
Dear chakster, I hope you are not refering to me as the person
who knows everything better(grin). 
In order to get your simpathy I want to mention to use the
same SAEC mat. In addition and by assumption that my memory
still function I think to remember that SAEC tonerams are made
by only considering the arms themselfs in particular regarding
their ''balance''. They were not interested in records and their
peculiarities. Probaly by an attempt to avoid toenearm geometry
disputes . As you can see this attempt is ignored in order to
keep those disputes alive. BTW I have chosen hedshells in which
any cart can be adjusted exactly according to their effective length. 







Dear chakster, I am not (yet) blind. I was joking abou ''linearity''
because this Yamaha is straight. 
I hope chris wii be more humorous than you. 
Dear chakster, Shakespeare was the first who asked the question:
''what is a name?'' He thought about the rose as example because
whatever the name the ''object itself'' will be recognized by its sent.
Later logicians declared that names miss ''predicative function'' and
only refer . Aka they don't have a meaning .
However we ofthen hear that someone has an ''nice name''. Anyway
we all are suposed to have an ''user name'' otherwise we can't
participate in this forum. Well I personaly think that ''chris'' is an
''nice name'' but chris himself prefer , say, chemical or medical
kinds of names so he has chosen :" ct 0517''. Nobody can remember
such ''name'' and you are proving this whitout knowing that you do.
I have seen many threads in which you both participated. So you
kind of know who chris is without knowing his real name. For me
it is more easy to address him as chris than to check every time 
his ,say, ''chemical name''.





 
Dear chris, Back then it was not usual to mention the number of
contriburions after one's name. I can add 2007 to my user name
but the number of my contribuions is much higher . So I will not
follow your example (grin). 
Stylus shapes.  By way of introduction. Peter wanted to impress
his friend John with his new swimmming pool. After some time he
asked: ''and what do you think?'' John; ''well how should I put
it but is 3x3 m, not to small?'' Peter: ''you idiot the pool is 30 m.
deep!''
Now assume that you can hear , say, 14 Khz.  Assuming that
you are not from Mexico so not able to hear with you bones
what sense makes to you that your stylus can reach 40 Khz? 
Because of my age I can't hear anything above 11Khz.
I think that I can live with even conical kind which btw is in
my Magic Diamond. Reto Andreoli  the desigenr of Magic diamond
is in the busieness of cart making since his 15 year of age and 
learned the trade by Australian brothers. Nobody ever complained
about hight frequencies of this cart. To assume to know better one
should show his accomplishments not verbal capabilites. 

I use an plastic caliper to determine stylus distance in any
of my headshells. The measured distance can then be used
by each headshell. To check the result I use Mint tractors for
each of my 3 tonearms. No problem at all to get this within
1mm value.