shibata or microline, pls respond ONLY if you specifically have tried both.

"Azimuth on the fly".  THAT I would like to see.I say this because the only proper way to adjust azimuth is to rotate the headshell (or the end of the tonearm that is offset at an angle) around its axis.  If you rotate the whole tonearm back near the pivot, you are not only changing azimuth; you are also changing zenith (too complicated for me to explain here).  My Triplanar is guilty of that minor sin; azimuth is adjusted by rotating the arm wand back near the pivot, so when you do make an adjustment, it also affects the angle of the plane to which the cartridge should be perpendicular (zenith). So, I am the happy owner of a 10.5-inch Reed 2A, an older model that precedes the 3P.  My 2A permits azimuth adjustment by rotation of the permanently fixed offset headshell, as it should without affecting zenith, but I cannot imagine doing that while playing an LP.  Chakster, can you say how the 3P manages to permit azimuth adjustment on the fly, without all sorts of danger to the delicate parts of a cartridge?

as for comparing micro line and shibata, this can now be done with JUST the shaped diamond stylus itself being the single differential, for proper single cause analysis.

that is in the VM95 series of cartridges and styli from audio technica.

If one buys the shibata version and the micro line version, this single cause analysis can actually be done. It’s not perfect as tests go, but it is as good a single cause test that you’ll ever get to. In this audio technica example set, the single difference is the diamond. The motor, the mounting the gluing the cantilever the suspension, etc, all the same.

I’ve got both right here and have done exactly that, but have additionally owned and used multitudes of each type stylus as equipped on various cartridges, over the years.

lewm

... If you rotate the whole tonearm back near the pivot, you are not only changing azimuth; you are also changing zenith (too complicated for me to explain here). My Triplanar is guilty of that minor sin; azimuth is adjusted by rotating the arm wand back near the pivot, so when you do make an adjustment, it also affects the angle of the plane to which the cartridge should be perpendicular (zenith).

I don’t understand what you’re saying here. When you align azimuth, the goal is to have the stylus/cantilever assembly perpendicular to the groove, which is essentially in the plane of the record. Whether you make that angular adjustment by rotating the headshell or the pickup arm, it’s the same adjustment and objective. In this context, azimuth and zenith are the same thing.

if you think I’m mistaken, please explain how the "zenith" - as you call it - would be measured independently of azimuth, and how those two angles could possibly be different when measuring a single cartridge on a single pickup arm.

Cakyol, with the Linn, the armboard and platter (record surface) are mounted to the same suspension platform and those should be parallel AND level.  Not sure why your armboard would not be parallel with the platter.  I am assuming your use of the term arm plate is synonymous with armboard.  Please disregard if this is not the case.

Hi JC,

Thanks for writing.
Yes, on the Linn, those SHOULD be absolutely parallel. But as you know, since the armboard is not an integral part of the suspended sub chassis plate which has the main bearing, due to some anomaly, those are not absolutely flat in my case. There is about 1.5 mm warp. And as a result, I am not able to balance the table perfectly. It may be a defective sub chassis.

I may upgrade to an ’integral’ unit where both the armplate & the bearing plate are just one machined piece, like the Keel or something cheaper.