What is more accurate: magnetic anti-skating, or barrel weight attached a fishline?
I have seen turntables from Project, Music Hall, and a few other brands that still incorporate a small barrel weight attached to short fishline string which is stretched across a hooking loop to set ANTI-SKATING. It seems to be an artifact from the 1960's and 1970's tonearm design. It is also easy to lose or break
My question is how accurate is that "device" compared to magnetic anti-skating employed by many turntable manufacturers Thank you
Thanks to all the members who responded. I never expected such an impassioned discussion over the anti-skating used on many turntables. I believe one of the responders ask me what tables have I seen using the wire suspended anti-skating device. On most Project tables, and also on the Music Hall 5.3 and the new MH Ikura table. To John-Tracy. Never watched Kung-Fu. However, I could retitle the thread title to: "HOOK. LINE, AND SINKER" ANTI-SKATING".....etc. I once forget to apply anti-skating, and the stylus while in play just skated right across the record. I might try it on the Thorens I currently own to see as some have suggested if it improves the sound quality. |
In a conversation I had with Tri Mai of Triplanar he pointed out that there is no industry standard for how much anti-skate to apply. Further, it does appear that the amount of skating force is dependent on the geometry as well as the shape of the stylus tip. I have a Triplanar and can confirm that only a small amount of anti-skate is needed. I usually use a single very small rubber O-ring on the anti-skate arm. Something that has occurred to me over the years is that the position of the arm on the LP is an issue! You have the maximum skating forces at the beginning and end of the LP; at two places in the middle the cartridge should be perfectly aligned and so no skating force in those two locations. As we all know, linear tracking arms generate no skating forces if properly set up. That suggests that in the middle of the LP the skating forces would be opposite of what they are at the beginning and end. This would make all anti-skate systems erroneous.... Since the end of the LP is the most problematic area that is where I hope that my anti-skate setting is correct. At any rate, I've yet to find any LP that can cause distortion or mistracking of the cartridge at any point, so it must be all good, right? |
Sunnyjim 8-1-2016 2:20pm edtJim, my perception over the years has been that questions about anti-skating almost invariably result in lengthy and impassioned discussions, often involving many of the same members, repeating the same things they’ve said in the past. So I’ll do likewise :-) First, to add a bit of quantitative perspective to the many comments about the fact that skating force is different at different points on the record: I use a vintage 1980s Magnepan Unitrac tonearm. (Which BTW uses the fishing line/weights in a bucket approach to anti-skating, with the weights being a fairly large quantity of tiny lead pellets). Over the years I’ve used a variety of cartridges all of which have relatively high compliance. Presently an Audio Technica AT-ART9 low output moving coil cartridge, and previously various incarnations of the Grace F9E and F9E Ruby moving magnet cartridges, as well as a Grado Reference Sonata moving iron. In every case I set the tracking force in the upper part of the range recommended by the manufacturer. In every one of those cases I have found that a modest change in the applied anti-skating force (e.g., removing or adding something like 15% or so of the number of lead pellets) will result in easily perceivable left or right deflection of the cantilever as viewed from the front of the cartridge, while the stylus is in the groove of a rotating record, compared to the nominally straight ahead position the cantilever assumes when the stylus is lifted off of the record. (This assumes that a lightly modulated/soft musical passage is being played). (Too little anti-skating will result in deflection to the right, toward the outer edge of the record, while too much will result in deflection to the left, toward the center of the record). Yet in every one of those cases I have been able to readily find an anti-skating setting that results in NO perceivable left or right deflection at ANY point on a record. All of which would seem to say that the variation of skating force at different points on a record is not as great as some perhaps believe. And would also seem to say that the fact that skating force does not remain the same at different points on a record is not in itself a rationale for setting anti-skating to zero, or for ignoring it altogether. Jim, related to all of that is the procedure I have used to set anti-skating over the years, which I described in my two posts dated 4-11-2016 in this thread. If your cartridge has medium to high compliance you may want to consider using it. (I suspect this procedure may not be useful for many or most cartridges having low compliance, because the cantilever may not deflect readily enough to make the procedure useful). At a minimum, though, I suggest that you perform the visual check I describe to help confirm that the adjustment you settle on is not severely out of whack. Best regards, -- Al |
Dear Ralph (Atma-sphere), I beg to differ slightly with your analysis. For a typical pivoted tonearm that is mounted such that the stylus overhangs the spindle and the headshell has an offset angle, there will always be some skating force, even at the two null points on the surface of the LP, because at the null points, the headshell offset angle per se will still be a cause of some skating force. Although the cantilever/stylus is, at those two points, tangent to the groove, the tonearm itself is not, due to the headshell offset. |
