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
In fact for your Denon DL-103 with its conical tip the alignment method is absolutely irrelevant! Why? Because the stylus is CONICAL. Before you will twist your cartridge in the headshell to align it with something else like Baerwald please try to understand what is conical tip and what it the result of all that tricks with alignments with this conical tip (absolutely not worth the effort) **
This is not correct.
Just because the stylus is conical, does not mean alignment is irrelevant.
Offset angle affects tracking and tracking distortion - correct alignment will minimise tracking distortion caused by offset angle.

@lewm

Chakster, In your parlance, does "NG" mean "No Good", which it would mean in colloquial English? I have the old original Feickert, made of white plastic with black markings, where the platform is the full size of an LP.


"NG" is for New Generation

You’re using an old version, right. That version is no longer available.

New version is metal, no platic parts. This is "Next Generation".

@dover

Just because the stylus is conical, does not mean alignment is irrelevant.
Offset angle affects tracking and tracking distortion - correct alignment will minimise tracking distortion caused by offset angle.

When you choose between Stevenson, Baerwald or Lofgren with any cartridge the offset angle is correct for each alignment after adjustment is done. The OP having problem with cartridge in the headshell, it is all the way forward with Lofgren alignment, so he can use Stevenson instead, with FR tonearm Stevenson is correct and no need to twist a cartridge in headshell in this case, cartridge will stay parallel to the headshell with Stevenson only (on this tonearm without changing PS distance). This tonearm designed by Ikeda for use with Stevenson geometry/alignment using correct PS distance (230mm) from the manual. Trying to altering factory setting is irrelevant for Denon DL-103 with conical tip on this tonearm, i would like to read OP’s comment to make sure if he could actually HEAR the difference between correct set up for all 3 methods such as Stevenson, Baerwald or Lofgren. But he does not have a proper protractor to re-align correctly between all 3 methods.

Does it make sense to try the FR tonearm like it was designed by IKEDA first ? Not altering anything.

@chakster 
u have it right. I have one clearaudio guage - thats it.
the denon is not my only cartridge - just for initial testing. I have a paratrace tipped shelter 501 and a transfiguration temper at my disposal.
i’ve always aligned using my guage - i have never just put a cartridge into a headshell and put parallel as i thought that was too imprecise
Yeah, i'm not trying to say you have no idea how to set-up and align a cartridge, i just said that Conical tip is less sensitive to everything (to errors in adjustment of antiskating, vta, vtf etc) than for example Paratrace or any LineContact type of the stylus that require precise alignment and adjustment of everything (or they just don't play well). 

For this reason Conical used for professional needs on radio stations and in the clubs where everything can be off. 


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?