Best cartridge for very old worn vinyl

@Howard, good to hear you found a method that works for you. Dieter Brakemeier of Acoustical Systems used to be one of the experts who strongly advised to change the P2S distance of the FR64/66 to facilitate the use of the Baerwald geometry (you can search this forum for his contributions under the moniker dertonarm). Apparently he has now created his own UNI DIN curve, probably a refinement of the Baerwald. Judging from your enthousiasm I might give this geometry a try, as I also have many of those 60's Decca's. Thanks for sharing your experience.

Just curious, but why would you accept worn copies of Argo records? Most titles from this catalogue can be found in NM condition for $10-15.

But apart from that, I agree with chakster that cartridges with advanced stylus profiles are usually most succesful in suppressing surface noise and other signs of wear, provided the record has been thoroughly cleaned (that’s indeed a ’must’).

@howardalex, I'm not familiar with Brinkmann TT, but if you have observed the P2S distance of the FR-66 according to FR's specs, than FR7's and SPU's should be correctly aligned. I have installed the FR-64S according to their spec (230mm) and they all 'hit' the three null points of the Stevensen alignment on the Feickert protector.

I'm aware some people use a different S2P distance on the FR64/66 to enable Berwald alignment, but if you do that all the integrated headshell types - their own FR7 as well as SPU's - will not be correctly positioned.

Your test seems to confirm the observation above that advanced stylus profiles are usually better suited to suppress surface noise on older records. The exception seems to be the FR-7fc, which has a conical stylus. In my experience this is usually the worst sounding profile, but perhaps Ikeda did something unusual with it.....

Howard, there are some heated discussions about alignment on this forum, so I understand your reluctance to go there. I’ll probably get grilled for saying this (or accused of having tin ears) but to me the supposed sonic differences between the different alignments (Löfgren, Berwald, Stevenson) are strongly exaggerated. Many tonearm manufacturers used proprietary alignments different to the established ones mentioned above, so apparently I'm not the only one.

The ’experts’ have a preference for Berward and dismiss everything else as inferior. Yet Ikeda chose Stevenson for the FR64/66, so if you use the P2S specified by FR you get that alignment and the FR7’s (and SPU’s) hit all three ’bullseye points’ on the Feickert. That’s good enough for me, as I use several FR7’s and SPU’s. So I adjusted the overhang on all other cartridges in accordance to this alignment, which delivers excellent results. I did try the P2S distance favoured by these experts to adjust it to Berwald and made comparisons with the Stevenson with several cartridges, but the difference to me is negligable.

If anything I prefer Stevenson, because it theoretically has the lowest distortion in the inner grooves. I happen to like orchestral music and these composer guys usually like to go out with a bang. I like to entertain the thought that Ikeda must have been a Wagnerite.....

I assume that ’turning’ the top plate of the Brinkmann pod shouldn’t be too difficult, but there’s no guarantee you will get the correct P2S distance for the FR66. We must assume the dealer knew what he was doing and tried that. But perhaps you should give it another try, good luck!

Dear Howard,

With the SPU the distance from the collar (of the headshell) to the stylus tip is exactly 51mm. Ikeda clearly designed the FR7 with the SPU in mind and chose that same distance. This is why both these types are correctly aligned to Stevenson geometry when the arm is installed with the P2S specified by FR. Apparently your dealer installed the arm with the Dennesen protractor, which is preset for the Baerwald geometry. That alignment is preferred by ’experts’ and obviously there’s no problem if you have a ’normal’ cartridge that can be adjusted in the headshell. But these fixed headshell types can never correctly aligned in the FR using Baerwald.

Do follow chakster’s advise and get yourself the Feickert tool. If you look up the specified P2S distance of the FR66 and set the ruler of the Feickert at this distance you can figure out if the top plate of the arm pod allows a position that corresponds to that distance. If so, than your FR7 and SPU cartridges will be correctly aligned to Stevenson.

Of course choosing this setting will require repositioning your other cartridges to Stevenson as well. But using the Feickert tool that’s a walk in the park. The experts will advise against this change as they religiously follow Baerwald and dismiss Stevenson. You can judge for yourself: if they are correct the performance of the Koetsu should take a dive after its alignment has been changed from Baerwald to Stevenson. Conversily, by now correctly aligned the performance of your FR7 and SPU’s might improve considerably. Either way, this may prove to be an interesting experiment!

Keep us informed!

Howard, can you measure the P2S distance of the new position you found for the tonearm? According to the FR66 manual the mounting (or P2S) distance should be set at 295mm. Only then will the FR7 be correctly aligned to Stevenson geometry.

You mention that the FR7 and SPU came several mm's short on hitting the 'bull eye' at the previous dealer's position. This seems to indicate that the P2S distance has become slightly shorter in the new position you found. Correct?

If you prefer to keep the arm mounted at this new P2S distance you will need to reposition all your other cartridges, otherwise they will now be misaligned. Basically it means all cartridges should have a headshell collar to stylus tip distance of 51mm, same as FR7 and SPU.

But now for the million dollar question: do those Argo's still have groove distortion with the correctly aligned FR7? Curious minds want to know.....

Howard, good for you! It just goes to show that following the manufacturers recommendation usually pays off, especially with cartridges by the same manufacturer that were specifically meant to be used in this particular arm. Ikeda certainly knew what he was doing. The FR7 and FR64/66 were made for each other and the sonic results speak for themselves.

Ikeda was very consistent in observing the 51mm collar to tip distance. I have 4 different ones (including the MC702) and they're all exactly the same. Ortofon is slightly less meticulous with the SPU and I've noticed up to 1mm deviation in some cases. Not that I can hear it! 

Other integrated headshell cartridges may use a different distance. Some are adjustable, like the Dynavector DV-30 series. Some are not, like the Sony XL44/55 Pro serie. The Sony has a 49mm collar to tip distance to accomodate the proprietary geometry of the Sony arm (neither Baerwald nor Stevenson). But in the manual they explain that even this 2mm deviation from the SPU 51mm norm is still acceptable and will not be audible. I kind of doubt that, but go figure!