Does removing anti-skating really improve sound?


I know this topic has been discussed here before, but wanted to see if others have the same experience as me. After removing the fishing line dangling weight from my tonearm I’m convinced my bass and soundstage has opened up. I doing very careful listening with headphones and don’t hear any distortion or treble harshness. So why use anti-skating at all? Even during deep bass/ loud passages no skipping of tracks. Any thoughts from all the analog gurus out there?
tubelvr1
I had the job to adjust a Benz LP S (or was it a Gullwing?) on a SME 345 arm in a high class system. I fine-tuned and two colleagues (and me) were listening carefully while optimizing VTF (& VTA) and anti-skating. - I was open to the idea, that no offset might sound better, but we agreed that setting antiskating to a considerable non-zero position sounded best, with fine adjustments being audible in center focus, but also natural timbre. The sound was somewhat more coherent, nuanced and stable with AS. This was a small surprise as I am skeptical to the mechanical compromises of AS devices. But the SME 345 seems to have "a good one".
- amazing was also how minimal changes in *VTF* of 0.05 gram were audible, with a clear optimum. (at that temperature.. :-) this had more sonic effect BTW.
- the weight / string somehow "does the job" too, but there is a certain non-zero friction that hampers (more) on stable centeredness of the cantilever.
- AS tries to center the cantilever, balancing left/right forces on the suspension. This results, as said above, in an optimal position of coils/magnets vs. the magnetic circuit.

- the principal problem with arms with offset angle/overhang is that the friction on the stylus (and the  cantilever that holds the stylus) works in a considerable angle relative to the tonearm center. This friction changes dynamically, with every scratch, every variation of modulation, every difference in vinyl properties or surface debris, even within one rotation.
- longer arms have less offset angle and improve this geometrical aspect.
- AS can’t neutralize the dynamic variations, only the static ones.Strong horizontal damping would optimize that aspect together with AS, but has it’s own set of compromises.
- the Thales arms have much less overhang, though they still have a (lesser) varying absolute offset of the cantilever vs. the stylus/tonearm center line.

- You’d have to go a long way in dis-adjustment on a linear tracking arm to create the normal geometrically generated problems of one of the normal arms. (Even if they can work very, very well :-).
- I’d say from my experience that it is no problem to adjust a linear tracking arm within 0.5mm error in overhang. The offset pull on the cantilever will be very small under these circumstances.

The Ledermann (of SoudSmith) video's mentioned above have a pretty good discussion of skating and how to do the adjustment.  The bottom line is that ANY method employed, and ANY mechanism will, at best, provide only roughly correct compensation, and that compensation will be, at times, too little and at other times too much.  BUT, absent some compensation, you will be subjecting records and the stylus to more uneven wear than is the case if you apply approximately correct compensation.   

This issue has been raised with a number of cartridge manufacturers and I don't know of any who endorse not using anti-skating.  
Genez, Many others have noted, and I agree, that using a groove-less LP may be a good way to demonstrate skating but it is not useful for setting AS, because in real life the cause of the skating force is friction in the groove. Friction on smooth vinyl is different in magnitude. So one should not set anti-skating to oppose skating that is observed on smooth vinyl.
Also centrifugal force, if there were such a thing, has nothing to do with the skating force.
lewm
... in real life the cause of the skating force is friction in the groove ...
We have been down this road before and you are mistaken. Clearly, you are confusing cause and effect.

Consider a properly aligned true, tangential, straight-line tracking pickup arm. Its stylus has friction in the groove, just as a pivoted arm. But the straight-line tracker is not subject to skating force. The reason for that is that the real cause of skating force is the offset of a conventional overhung pivoted arm. A consequence of that offset is indeed friction created by the stylus in the groove. But again, that’s an effect - and not the cause - of skating force.

Consider also that the same exact cartridge will have different skating forces if installed in two substantially different pickup arms. That’s because the greatest factor in generating skating force is the arm, not the stylus - although different stylus shapes will result in different skating forces.