VPI non-Anti Skate Q

@billstevenson 

Hey, thanks for the thanks!

I have two cartridge setups. One is on the SL-1200G table and the other is on a Micro Seiki MA-505L tonearm on an pod outboard to the SL-1200G.

Presently, I have a Hana Umami Red on the table arm and a Benz Micro LPS on the outboard arm.

One setup is: Hana Red -> Custom SUT -> phono preamp (tape out from refurbed ARC SP-6B) -> rumble filter -> Custom transformer based RCA cable to XLR converter -> to line preamp.

The other is:  Benz LPS -> Custom SUT -> phono preamp (tape out from rebuilt Paragon System "E") -> rumble filter -> Custom transformer based RCA cable to XLR converter -> line preamp (same as other cartridge).

Each path is separate from the other. I do not use switches.

I use Vinyl Engine's "Tonearm Calculator" tool for cartridge mechanical alignment. It is a very flexible tool, allowing one to create an alignment gauge custom designed for your table. I print it out on thick paper. The LPS is difficult to align since the cantilever/stylus assembly is very close to the body and does not protrude from the front of the body of the cartridge, but is located about a third of the way in. It is also very fussy. Needs a lot of work to create the low distortion. The Hana is easy and seems to be better aligned by the manufacturer.

The alignment tool is a key. It prints an alignment arc, so that one can check alignment at any radial distance from the spindle. The stylus is set by eye in the normal way. I work to make the stylus tip touch the alignment line to within one mm. This seems very difficult to do, but this tool allows one to see this minor difference.

One can align azimuth and zenith also, but the electronic approach using REW is much more accurate.

By the way, I use the line preamp output as input to the ADC/REW combo. So I am measuring the distortion from the cartridge setup, the SUT, the phono preamp, the rumble filter and the line level preamp. My components are listed in the Virtual Systems page.The ADC is a Benchmark ADC1.

cleeds, I am sure you know that aligning by the cantilever, while a good idea, does not in any way cure zenith error, because a zenith error, besides being created by misalignment of the cantilever per se, is also created by errors in mounting the stylus at the factories that make them such that the contact patches on the stylus tip end up not being perpendicular to the groove walls. I was told by a knowledgeable guru that the companies that make all the stylus/cantilever combinations available allow for a +/-5 degree zenith error. That is their industry standard. This expert also determined that even a 1 or 2 degree zenitherror at the stylus can result in no null points on the LP surface.

Bill, in your post of 5/18 at 12:52 pm, you wrote, "For arms from other manufacturers the answer for Antiskate settings is not universal.  For SME arms, I find the factory settings are accurate and should be used.  For Technics, Antiskate settings seem to result in lowest distortion set at ~50% of recommended settings.  On a Denon DP-3000NE, that I just acquired, the factory settings proved to be accurate.  For most TTs from the EU, I am finding it best to start at 50% of recommended setting and increase only if you hear a slight mis-tracking in the upper mids to highs."

Please define factory settings for SME.  Do you mean to say that their numerical markings (if such exist; I have never handled a modern SME tonearm) are such that if you are tracking at 2g, you ought to set AS to "2"?

For Technics, how would one determine 50% of recommended settings?

And what about the many well loved vintage and even modern tonearms that still use a string and weight or a rigid lever and weight (e.g., my Kenwood, Dynavector, Triplanar, and Reed tonearms) to set AS?  There are no settings, as such.

I also found my SME 3009’s tracking force markings and corresponding anti-skate notches to be accurate (actual force???)

https://sme.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/MODEL_3009_SERIES_II_IMPROVED_INSTRUCTION_BOOK.pdf

There is a presumption of precision, whereas, my long Russian arm has a weight on a string; a notched rod; a wire with a coil of alternate positions, and you are on your own to get it right.

MANY/MOST other arms, using modern digital scale, the dials for tracking weight are NOT dependable, and the corresponding anti-skate dial, including my Acos Lustre GST-801 Magnetic controls are not accurate or consistent.

I recently found, my Vintage JVC Victor UA-7082 arm: both the tracking weight markings correspond with my digital scale, and the delicate, nearly infinite anti-skate spring also (it’s corresponding marks, who knows what force?) to work quite well. I an bewildered by how an internal spring can be this old and remain accurate.

lewm,

"Please define factory settings for SME. "  The ones I have worked with have a string and weight arrangement and a scale with markings.  Set the string on the Antiskate scale to correspond with the VTF.

"For Technics, how would one determine 50% of recommended settings?"  They have a dial with numbers which correspond with VTF in grams.  So, for example, if you set VTF at 2 grams, Technics recommends that you set the dial at 2.  I am finding that number high and suggest setting it at 1.  At least to start.  Admittedly I haven't tried every cartridge and there is variation, so this is a starting point.

"And what about the many well loved vintage and even modern tonearms that still use a string and weight or a rigid lever and weight (e.g., my Kenwood, Dynavector, Triplanar, and Reed tonearms) to set AS?  There are no settings, as such."

I have not set up a Triplanar since obtaining AnalogMagik.  In light if my earlier experience with at least 2 different versions, although I find them to be a challenge to work with, they are exceptional sounding arms and I would be surprised if following their recommendations would be anything but accurate.  Kenwood, it has been almost 20 years since I last played with one, but again a wonderful TT.  But I am out of date.  Zero experience with Reed or Dynavector.  Given their reputation, if I were to address one, I would be inclined to set it up in accordance with the manufacturer's recommendations and give it a listen.  If I hear anything tizzy, a technical term I am sure you are familiar with, back off AS a smidge and listen again.  

Generally, it seems as though the AS force imposed on a lot of TTs is higher than needed.  It is a problem.  Another problem, a much bigger one believe me, is the dirty stylus syndrome.  It never ceases to amaze me that a guy will want me to check his stylus for wear and before I can begin we have an excavation project to uncover the diamond, buried as it is under so much debris.  Very often this stuff is very encrusted and resistant to removal.  I am not telling you about $50-$100 cartridges either, no Atlas and Anna and like that.  

lewm

I am sure you know that aligning by the cantilever, while a good idea, does not in any way cure zenith error, because a zenith error, besides being created by misalignment of the cantilever per se, is also created by errors in mounting the stylus at the factories ...

Of course. But aligning the cantilever still helps minimize the error, and it gets me to a good starting point so that alignment can be further refined with test tracks. Also, a compromise is often what's required. If you align solely to the stylus and not the cantilever, that can have an affect on the alignment to the cartridge's coils.