Fozgometer V2

j-wall, Adjusting for azimuth has very little effect on "channel balance" per se. It only affects crosstalk and the fact that it affects crosstalk is the only reason to obsess over it. So, don’t conflate "channel balance" with setting azimuth so that crosstalk is equal on both sides. I say this with conviction, because not only have I read it but also I have personally confirmed the minimal effect of azimuth on channel balance, using my Signet Cartridge Analyzer and an appropriate Shure test LP. Very extremes of azimuth angle in either direction had at most a 1-2db effect on channel balance, as defined by the signal voltage in channel R as compared to the signal voltage in channel L (not crosstalk). Furthermore, you would never want to play records at any of those extreme settings, because doing so would damage the cartridge and the LPs.

I can see why you might have been confused by what I wrote earlier, but I tried to be clear I was talking about crosstalk; some like to set crosstalk equal, so that leakage of R channel signal into the L channel is equal to the leakage of L channel signal into the R channel, in db. In my experience, when you set that goal, you have to sacrifice to some degree the level of channel separation you potentially could otherwise achieve, which is to say that the absolute value of crosstalk you can get to is greatest if you just shoot for minimum crosstalk, regardless of whether the numbers are equal. To illustrate, maybe you can achieve 25db of separation on both sides (the signal voltage applied to the R channel that leaks into the L channel is down by 25db vs what appears in the R channel and vice-versa) , but if you just adjust for best values in each direction separately, you might achieve -30db on one side and -27db on the other. I’ve read arguments for either end point, but I think the Foz is designed to achieve equal crosstalk. So also, all of this is about setting azimuth electrically. Korf and others have made a good case for setting azimuth so the stylus sits squarely in the groove, without regard for the numbers game. You could call that the mechanical method. It requires some degree of faith in cartridge manufacturers, but at least you know you are not wearing out your stylus aberrantly (by having it at an angle to the groove walls) and that you are not damaging LPs. I have moved over to that side of the argument; I no longer use electronics to set azimuth. See also what Larry wrote above.

@lewm this is what I needed to hear. Thank you for spending the time. So essentially, I should be wasting my time focusing on other factors such as VTA and Maybe fiddling with a Wally Tractor? I might have possibly skipped a few steps in the learning curve looking at a new gadget. 

I use a Wallytractor to do the basic alignment and I use a 10x magnifier to see the markings.  The Wally Tractor is not the easiest tool to use, but it gives you more ways to confirm your alignment is good than other protractors and it is the best thing to use for my Vector arm which is a little bit hard to locate the precise center of the pivot.  I also have a SmarTractor (donated to my local dealer) which is far easier to use and I highly recommend it where the pivot point is easy to find.

I use a mirror of the right thickness and the magnifier to confirm proper optical azimuth setting.

VTA/SRA I set by first establishing thar the arm is parallel to the record surface (a ruled index card set just behind the arm makes this easy.  From there, I just experiment by listening.  If the pivot is raised too high, the sound is thin and sibilant, too low and it sounds dull. 
I have a USB microscope, but I never use it for alignment because it is a pretty fussy thing to set up and aim properly.

@larryi awesome stuff. I've been checking out the Wally gear and Dr Feickert protector as well. I guess I'll start here and see where it takes me. 

My understanding is that the Foz (V1 and V2) uses channel balance and channel separation/crosstalk to set azimuth, but does not take into account phase angle to set azimuth. The Foz assumes the best channel separation/crosstalk will be at the same point where there is zero phase angle, which is what it should be in theory but, given manufacuting variability, is not always the case in actuality. But the Foz is better than some.of the other ways of adjusting for azimuth.