Curved and Straight Tonearms

@lewm : " " I tend to use whatever alignment was in the mind of the person who designed that particular tonearm.. "

that is what you posted here but in your latest post you said:

" For my 505, I do not use the Dyna spec; ""

the 505 designer gaves the set up specs but you are using diferent set up parameters ? ? ! ! ?

R.

Btw, hysteria?, not really only very high ignorance and frustration levels. That's all.

Dear @lewm : What you like it is not the main subject here, as I pointed out before. 

In the other side I already posted all the facts around Stevenson A alignment. Useless to repeat again.

Higher quality performance levels mainly depends to mantain the audio system distortions ( every kind. ) at minimum. Stevenson A preclude to achieve that critical target but is up to you.

Regards and enjoy the MUSIC NOT DISTORTIONS,
R.

Dear @lewm : In all japanese vintage tonearms and even today the set up specifications are jus totally non-accurated. Dynavector is a clear example on that when states 15mm. for overhang and even that is near Stevenson A calculations is out of it as is too the offset angle stated by them and it’s does not matters if we choose IEC or DIN for the calculations.

Obviously that these kind of facts tell us that if we are following the tonearm manufacturer set up specs then we are totally wrong and what we have are higher distortion levels.
Of course that’s not our fault to follow the manufacturer instructions. We assume that what they tell us is what we have to do.

I already check all the information from the manufacturers on all the japanese vintage tonearms and no one is accurate about.

All those facts along the " terrible " misunderstood on the subject by that reviewer ( MF. ) confirm that " people " ( including audiophiles. ) do not cares seriously about and maybe they did not because they do not understand the 1938 Löfgren great mathematics studies, its premises and critical importance.

Again, accuracy is the name of the game in TT/tonearm/cartridge alignment with any kind of tonearm design.

Regards and enjoy the MUSIC NOT DISTORTIONS,
R.


lewm, I don’t know if you remeber that I told you that for my 505 set up I used Löfgren alignment with better results than whit the Dyna set up specs. Well, there are very good facts/reasons about.

All those facts can tel us that maybe don’t exist two analog rig set up that gives same distortion levels using same TT/tonearm/cartridge with the same alignment type due to those inaccuracies on the overall set up. Where differences in set up means different quality performance levels.

Dear @lewm : Even that is out of my mind and that today makes no sense to me ( but I can be wrong and that's why I ask you about. ) that a tonearm design be designed around a specific kind of alignment type y found out that the vintage Japanese tonearms stays around Stevenson A alignment and why mI said " around " because things are that the alignment numbers they gave are non perfectly accurate but only near the precise/rigth alignment calculations. I think only the SAEC 8000 is near LÖfgren A calculations but non-accurated one.

So, seems to me that they did not took enough care about and this kind of fact only says that tracking distortion levels are higher that what you could think.

It's no surprise for me that I found out these kind of non-accurate tonearm set up numbers in almost all japanese tonearms and only confirm what I posted here and that in the " old times " there were a not very clear of the importance of accuracy in the tonearm/TT/cartridge overall set up alignment.

Regards and enjoy the MUSIC NOT DISTORTIONS,
R.

@bimasta: Btw, LT tonearms are not free ( in more or less way/levels. ) of the influence of those parameters I mentioned.

R.

Dear @lewm : "   I tend to use whatever alignment was in the mind of the person who designed that particular tonearm.. "

Lewm, sorry for my ignorance and if you can please explain me the direct relationship between tonearm design and choosed alignment. How that choosed alignment can helps to stay with overall lower tracking distortions against other alignment type?

Knowing you it has to exist something extremely critical that you are aware of and that I'm taking in count and always is a learning day and as always I'm willing to improve my ignorance level.

Thank's in advance.


Regards and enjoy the MUSIC NOT DISTORTIONS,
R.

bimasta: I forgot other parameters that has influence on those inner groove " problems: one is how good is cleaned the LP, other the stylus tip condition/wear leavels and clean level ( this clean level of stylus tip is important because after the first 20 minutes on playing a LP side the tip has not the same clean level that when started that LP side and when arrives to the inner grooves there is a true problem of the accumulated dust at the tip in the inner grooves. ) and other is the room temperature/humidity levels.

Some f all those parameters we can think are not important but all of them has influence about and makes a difference.
Example: stylus tip dust has its own distortion levels per sé, it does not matters if the cartridge is playing at the middle or inner grooves LP side but after 20 minutes of accumalation of dust at that stylus tip the problem is not only the self distortion levels but that that accumulation of dust at the tip makes that the cartridge tracking abilities goes really lower than what we could think and this facts produce higher distortion levels and mistracking.

R.

Dear @bimasta: The whole inner grooves " problem " ( if any ) depends on many parameters where perhaps the more critical to avoid the problem or to live with are: " zero tolerance " through the TT/tonearm/cartridge alignment set up, self cartridge tracking abilities, " perfect " match between cartridge/tonearm, tonearm damping levels and tonearm bearing design.

If any one of us takes enough care on those parameters you can be sure that that problem will stay at minimum and you will not aware of its existence.

Now, there are several classical compositions/recordings withpassages recorded at very high velocities in the middle of the LPs or before it where we can listen the same inner groove problem because those paremeters I metioned are not up to the task.

Stevenson A gives not real advantage over the other alignment types ( including the Stevenson B. ) and goes against the MUSIC experience but it's up to you if you can live with 20 minutes of higher distortions levels in favor of the last 1-2 minutes, fine. As I said is up to you.

Obviously that's not my target but stay as nearest I can fulfilling all those parameters I mentioned.

Regards and enjoy the MUSIC NOT DISTORTIONS,
R. 

Dear @clearthink: In 2014 ( not in the 70’s-80’s. ) that same gentleman had these kind of misunderstood on the whole alignment overall critical and important subject ( for an audiophile nothing is more critical and important that this alignment subject in the analog experience alternative. ). Somewhere some one asks this when comparing different kind of ( Löfgren/Stevenson A and the like. ) alignments for a tonearm/cartridge:

"" I can’t see a pattern in the graphs ........ How can you the second null point be different if the first is the same unless you are comparing ... """

then he answered this:

"""
Not sure what "pattern" you are looking for in the graphs. ................ Remember that each one puts the stylus tip at a different distance from the pivot point, thus producing a different "overhang". That different position produces the two differing null points. """


that is a huge misunderstood on the subject. Of course that you already know why as many of the audiophiles in this board know and I know they know because I know very well some of them. As a fact I learned from some of them.

Some time now I would like to say the same from you in this special subject.

One thing you are not taking in count that happens every day at every internet different forums is that always com,es " newcomers/roockies " that ( different from you that born with the subject knowledge level. ) just does not have any single idea not about different kind of alignments but that has not idea how to set up the cartridge/TT/tonearm set up and the audiophiles in all those boards are the ones that can help them when ask about and they ask all the time.

Regards and enjoy the MUSIC NOT DISTORTIONS,
R.

Dear friends: This kind of discussion ( pivoit tonearm alignment subject. ) always makes me to look over the information I have and that I learned through the years to find out if something I learned is wrong and rectify it or to confirm " things " are ok.

Well, in these kind of discussions almost always I learn something from other gentlemans and this time was not different.

The comment from genesis 168  ( refering to Stevenson A alignment. ): 

"""  Higher on the outer grooves so what? The outer grooves are easier to track..... """

I gave an answer to that and the answer came in that precise moment:

way before the stylus tip hit the first LP recorded groove Stevenson A  approach tell us its inherent high distortion levels on those grooves against Löfgren approaches where the Stevenson A and Löfgren equations solutions are what numbers says with a zero tolerance in the overall cartridge/tonearm parametrs set up . 

That's what mathematics says but is almost impossible to make any of those set ups with zero tolerance and this fact means that " things "/distortion levels always will be higher that what the solutions says and we have to remember here that distortions generates harmonics too and that over the LP play exist IMD too.

For years I posted here the critical importance of accuracy in the cartridge/pivoted tonearm set up subject and now is more clear why.

That accuracy level ( ideal: zero tolerance. ) is even more important because all the imperfections of the LP it self as in the cartridge too and because of the different recording velocities recorded over the LP surface.

As you know my target is to be/stay nearer tothe recording but as you know what is in the LP recorded surface is not what is in the recording, far away from there.

In theory we can have what is in the recording when the phono stage applys the inverse RIAA eq. where the magnified set up " errors " ( non-zero tolerances. ) during the LP play along the distortion levels of each kind of alignment are magnified again on that inverse severe eq.

Taking all those in count Stevenson A is the worst of those kind of alignments and seems to me with out today facts that can justify it use for many audiophiles in the world as some of you in this forum.

The alignment cartridge/pivoted tonearm has to live inside of what is surrounded with and not only taking in count the inside grooves alone as and island in the earth because exist a whole relationship with all what surround the overall analog alternative.

Stevenson A approach is an extreme approach with extreme consequences due that he puts the inner null radius ( zero wte. ) at r1. I already explained the " terrible "consequence about that for me preclude the use of this kind of alignment or similar one.

Now, I can be wrong and if I'm I would like that some one of you clarify this subject for me. Thank's in advance.

Regards and enjoy the MUSIC NOT DISTORTIONS,
R.

Dear @clearthink: Unfortunatelly you are wrong in your assumptions of what I posted. Maybe becfause English is not my native language. am I confused, how?

I and you can ask to audiophiles ( even today professional reviewers ) in this board what were their knowledge levels on the precise and critical understanding the different cartridge/pivoted tonearm alignments in the middle of 60's early 70's.

Which kind of true accurate protractors were they using and what level of accuracy had the own tonearm pick-ups? and not only that but in how many of those vintage protractors they read a precise explanation of the importance of accuracy on that st up or the type of alignment the protractor showed or in the case of tonearm manufacturers that explained it along the protractor accuracy its protractor had?

In which of those protractors came perfectly explained that what the audiophile has to align is the cantilever and not the cartridge sides?

Even in 2015 M.Fremer when was " talking " of the tonearm cartridge importance of precise set up posted ( somewhere. ):

""" 

If you buy a  ‘table that’s been pre-drilled and fitted with a secondary manufacturer’s arm, it’s a good idea to check the P2S distance either by using a protractor that has a measuring beam (Feickert, Dennesen, etc.) or if you don’t have one of those, by using a ruler marked in millimeters....................................................................................

Fortunately, there is some room to compensate for P2S distance error here in the form of head shell slots........ """"

imagine how good could be the today clear understanding on the subject by us audiophiles ( not you. You are an " expert ".  ) when MF has that kind of misunderstood and in this thread there are clear examples of different kind of misunderstood by more than one gentleman that posted here.

Of course that for you is very clear where is that MF misunderstood, rigth?

Anyway, I re-read twice your two posts here and just can´t find out your " expert " level on the alignment pivot tonearm subject.

You only post part of stereo recording history but you did not shared nothing on the pivot tonearm alignment subject, that's what I'm talking in my last posts.

So, what are you talking about? what do you want to prove and where are precise facts that can prove what you think (?) can prove?

Please show us who you are ! ? ! ? ! ?. Every day is a learning day.

Regards and enjoy the MUSIC NOT DISTORTIONS,

R.

Dear friends: Almost all the time when I ask to other gentlemans that enrich or provide/contribute with real information that can help us in the subject we are under a dialogue those gentlemans ( that posted a critic or not so good opinion in the subject. ) just disappears, no additional post in the subject only " dead silence ".

Make no sense to me that kind of attitude because if I come to any audio subject dialogue is because I have something not to say but something that can help or enrich our learning level.

In this alignment on pivoted tonearms audio critical subject at least two gentlemans ( genesis 168 and clearthink ) decided no additional coments, yes this is their privilege.

Btw, Stevenson A alignment solution today is totally out of question. It gaves NOTHING to improve the quality performance level on any cartridge or any system or any tonearm. Similar alignment approaches today helps to NOTHING.
Stevenson maybe works in the old times but not today, contributes only to listen way higher distortions due to its inherent higher tracking distortions level.

@larryi gaves very good reasons about and you read information ( not just an opinion. ) I posted here and through the years in other treads.

So make your self a favor and a favor to the MUSIC: staying out of STEVENSON alignment. Of course it’s up to you.

Regards and enjoy the MUSIC NOT DISTORTIONS,
R.

Dear @g_nakamoto: Who can't remember it? when The Zero ( for zero tracking error. ) was and still is a TT design with a truly extremely special pivoted tonearm with " zero " tracking error that when designed in the 70's was " thousands " of years a head on pivoted tonearm designs even for today top designs.

Regards and enjoy the MUSIC NOT DISTORTIONS,
R.

Dear @larryi : Agree with you.

Regards and enjoy the MUSIC NOT DISTORTIONS,
R.

Dear @clearthink: """  This is absurdly incorrect and misleading although it is revealing because it shows that raulruegas discovered the importance of proper phono cartridge alignment in a Music Reproduction System fairly recently.... """


totally wrong assumption. Way before no one in this forum ( that I remember. ) talks in deep about the different alignment solutions I posted several times on that critical audio subject y through the time along other audiophiles we discuss in deep the overall subject.

""" 
he now portrays himself as an expert on the matter when it is actually clear that he is confused ... """

first than all I never portrays as an expert on this issue. Through those years I posted where came those solutions for overhang and offset angle in the cartridge/tonearm set up. I don't want to repeat what I posted several times years ago ( not recently as you assumed. ) and only for your records and way before those linear tracking tonearm you name it was in 1908 when Harsanyi touched for the first time the subject on pivoted tonearm designs, Wilson followed him in 1924 and Löfgren in 1938.

You just came here trying to hit me in anyway but as many other gentlemans you just failed.

Instead of that why don't share to us why I'm wrong and with out know-how as you said. Please prove it not only post it with out true foundations or precise facts. Please enrich not only my ignorance level but the knowledge level of all other audiophiles.

Thank's in advance for your " ligth ".

Regards and enjoy the MUSIC NOT DISTORTIONS,
R.

Dear @genesis168 : All we know the Stevenson reasons but thank’s to confirm it.

Now, in the old times the protractors or the ones that came with tonearms was not really accurated and people did not to much care making the cartridge/tonearm set-up because they ( including me. ) was only starting to understand the importance of that set up, even the profesional reviewers not talked about in their reviews. No one cares about and the " trouble " for some cartridges at the very end grooves was magnified.

Today thinks changed and almost no one has true problems at the end of inner grooves and when they have it’s only that the set up is not accurate. Every thing is continuous movement/changes and for some reasons I can’t understand we never change and stay sticky to very old " fashions " that only goes against our hobby that is MUSIC.
My advise is to change and try to live in 2017 and next year in 2018. Is up to each one of us.

Many of those gentlemans with that kind of trouble bougth the great MINT LP protractor and the tracking trouble just vanished and MINT LP use regulary Löfgren alignment.

I have several LPs with very hard/high velocity grooves to track it and not only at the inner groves but at the first third part of the LP grooves and I tested all those tracks ( that are part of my personal test process. ) using those 3 normal kind of alignments and if you try it you will listen very clearly what Stevenson alignment in those " easy " ( this is what you said or I understand from your post. ) begining grooves shows you against either Löfgren alignment and what you will find out is higher distortions/colorations.

But I tested too with LPs at inner grooves and in specific the Telarc 1812 where MC and MM cartridges makes its works with no dificult at all and tested these tracks with those 3 alignments and through Löfgren you can’t hear any additional coloration/distortions.

To be sure about we have to experience it making those kind of tests.

Now the measured tracking distortion levels of those 3 alignment solutions stay always if the alignment is " perfect "/accurate it does not matters the cartridge. Those numbers are the ones that always we have but because there is no perfect set up those distortion numbers goes up.
So, it’s really important accuracy and try to have the lower distortions as we can in the major LP surface.

At least for me is critical, numbers speaks for it self. I always want to be nearer to the recording and Löfgren puts me nearer way nearer than Stevenson.

The sellers that are behind those inner grooves alignment in reality are only sellers.

I agree with you that any one can choose whatever he wants.

Now, the ones that are using 231.5 P t S value and have 246.324 as the effective length of the FR that kind of numbers means are using Stevenson alignment and the ones that have 248.135 as effective length are using Löfgren A ( Baerwald. ). Obviously with thr rigth offset angle figure for each kind of alignment solution.

Btw, that's why what you posted is wrong:

"""  Nandric, you are correct. """  The P to S distance does not define a kind of alignment.

It’s clear that the gentlemans that are sticky to Stevenson or similar are unaware of the higher distortions are listen it and they like what are hearing. Maybe are unaware of it because they did not tests against other kind of alignments with a rigth test overall process.
I know that people do not likes I tal about distortions but again and again the posts confirm that many of us like higher DISTORTIONS ! over lower ones. That goes against MUSIC.

When I learned about those kind of alignments and its real importance along accuracy on it my set ups were and are around Löfgren solutions. No more Stevenson A or something similar.

Regards and enjoy the MUSIC NOT DISTORTIONS,
R.

Dear friends: Stevenson made two different alignment solutions, one was A and the B that coincide with LÖfgren A ( Baerwald. ).

Almost all Japanese tonearm manufacturers choosed Stevenson over both LÖfgren alignmente solutions because  they want that distortions at inner LP grooves goes lower and audiophiles took it at the " best " alignment when IMHO it's not and makes no real sense.

Stevenson A reduce distortions at the very end inner grooves but in the other 9/10 of the LP grooves distortions goes a lot higher than both Löfgren solutions. For some of you this makes sense and that's what you like and is the way you are using the FR.

My take here is: why and how is it that any one could likes higher tracking distortions ( 9/10 of LP. ) ( this is a fact a measured fact not an opinion. ) than overall lower distortions with both Löfgren alignment solutions?

Any one can put some ligth about?  @lewm  @genesis168  or some one else?

@lewm / @genesis168 , a little help to understand: both of you are using 231.5 on P to S distance. The overhang that you are using is: 14.8 with an offset angle : 21.15°? or these parameters are different?

Thank's in advance.

Regards and enjoy the MUSIC NOT DISTORTIONS,
R.

Dear @genesis168 : When you change the P to S tionearm distance ( in any arm. ) you are changing too the effective length and between some limit range on that alignment parameter number what you are doing is to increment or lowering the tracking distortion figure and tracking error too.

Using Löfgren A ( Baerwald ) and going from 245 ( FR spec. ) to 248.13 ( 231.5 ) means that you have a little lower distortion levels but you can play with those parameters and test for example: 256 on EL and this again will gives you lower tracking distortions figure and any one can do it. Obviously that we can do it between some limits due that the tonearms has a limited length and headshells too, so it’s only to make some tests to see where you can go with better results and I repeat you can do this for any tonearm that permits it.

We can do that it does not matters if we are using Löfgren A or B or Stevenson alignments.

Regards and enjoy the MUSIC NOT DISTORTIONS,
R.

Dover : I can see that you return for more more and push me to give an answer, good.


"""  This is not the first time that you have made big mistakes in setting up your equipment, I previously highlighted to you that you had installed your Dynavector Karat Nova ..... """

what you have in your link it was not a SET UP in my system. Even in the other pictures in that Agon advertasing ( where you took your link. ) the cartridge was mounted ( just for the sale pictures. ) in a tonearm that was not mounted in my system or a TT. So the only purpose of your link is to " hit " me but you can touch me with that no-sense post.

"""  In this post you were wrong when you advised people to "not use" the lateral balance """

I'm not given an advise for not use it but only what is in the manual that maybe Lewm did not read ( I know now that he had not the manual. ).


"""  headshell provided with the Dynavector Karat Nova is "terrible" when you say that you never used it. """

Use something for me is to do it regulary and I never used the 13D with that headshell. Was enough when I received it to mount just as it came to decided to mount in other headshell. In those times I was convinced of the importance to mate a cartridge with the rigth headshell. but you did it the same because you used the Karat Nova with an Ikeda headshell in the Dyna tonearm. 


Your recrimination posts proves nothing of what you want to prove.

Instead of follow losting your time with those kind of posts try to be a better audiophile growing up to do it. I know is not easy for you when exist one or more tubes in your system, with no future here but you can follow enjoying your " terrible " FR. Great combination: tubes and FR !

R.

Dear @halcro : """  At any rate....analogue-lovers willing to pay these prices for 35 year-old tonearms will do so knowing what these arms can do,..... """


that's the " trouible " with FR owners that like you: DID NOT CATCH YET WHAT THESE ARMS CAN DO ! ! ! ! 

but I hope that before any one die can learn about. Don't be too late halcro.


Btw, @lewm : I used for a while the FR 66/64 and Ikeda tonearms since ( through the time. ) I learned the critical importance to mount a cartridge always in a well damped tonearm because is what any single cartridge asks for it can shows us its real and true quality level performance.
FR are totally all metal undamped design and additional has that " terrible " VTF resonant mechanism that preclude its use with a cartridge. This is just common sense and if you have a decent well damped design with the rigth audio system comparisons in between is really easy. You know very well when I say: " rigth audio system "..
I can't use any more a single piece of audio that I know for sure that in inherent way  does not helps to lower distortions/colorations in the system but the other way around. 
Lewm, knowing you I'm sure that if you already have ( that you have not, yet. ) that kind of knowledge/experiences you will do the same than me.


Regards and enjoy the MUSIC NOT DISTORTIONS,
R.

Dear @dover : Of course I know exactly how to set up that arm.

My post to @lewm was taking in count what the manual says:

""" Note 2): the lateral balance device is provided to correct for the sideways tendency in tonearm movement that occurs when the TT cabinet is not used on a horizontal stand. Practically speaking no problems will occurif the TT is installed level. Therefore, you ordinary don’t need to pay too much attention to this adjustement ".

yes the manual speaks about that 5mm.. In that same post I said that other tonearm designs use a lateral weigth for different reasons than FR.

@lewm well I just found out the manual:
https://www.vinylengine.com/library/fidelity-research/fr-64.shtml

In the other side and I repeat it again because for you never had clear the explanation behind those pictures in an ad here in Agon and at very opportunity you have just come and try to hit me in any way, this only shows ( again and again. ) the very high level of frustration you have with me for long time because because many times showed you level of ignorance in discussions. That level of ignorance is different from my ignorance levels. Btw, you can’t hit me in that ridiculous way with the pictures or with the FR " unknowledge set up level ". Try to lead/surpass that high frustration levels in benefit of your self.

For the people that unknow what’s behind those Dyna pictures here it is:

I owned the Dyna Karat that comes with a " terrible/poor " dedicated headshell and I never used the cartridge with that headshell . When I put on sale I have to took pictures for Agon and I don’t care too much if the headshell position and that’s all.

Who cares, cartridge sold but you took that pictures as a tool for your very high frustration levels. Good for you, live with.

Regards and enjoy the MUSIC NOT DISTORTIONS,
R.

Dear @lewm : You are rigth, it's a J shapped design. Now, FR designed that lateral weigth balance mainly to compensate a non-perfectly leveled TT.  Normally in the FR design that lateral weigth is not used if the TT is rigth on level. FR explained in its manual.

Other tonearms designs use a lateral balance for different issue. 

Regards and enjoy the MUSIC NOT DISTORTIONS,
R.

Dear @ericsch : I'm not an expert oon your Rega model but I know that exist an after market source where you can buy the VTA mechanism dedicated for your Rega tonearm.

Regards and enjoy the Music Not Distortions,
R.

Dear @ericsch : In reality there is no true/real advantage on those kind of tonearms. The real advantage belongs to tonearm design and excecution quality levels of that design and that's all.

Pivot bearing type can be a difference. Unipivot against fix ones. I prefer fixed ones.

How many cartridges do you own?


Regards and enjoy the Music Not Distortions.
R.