I'm contemplating the purchase of this brand of protractor.
Over the years I have relied on a good friend to mount cartridges and set up the few tables that I have owned in the past. Relying on someone else to do this was for good reason.
I would never make it as a watch maker or any other profession that requires a fine touch and skill with steady hands. The time has come where I will have to do this totally on my own.
My question to you owners of the Feickert protractor is what is your experience with it regarding ease of use and accuracy compared to other protractors?
Secondly, the disk has strobe markings for speed set up, does the Feickert package come with a strobe light for the $250. selling price?
I asked these question of a dealer sent via a e-mail and have not received a reply as of yet.
This discussion has turned out to be a very productive one.
Again ,thank you everyone. Thom, welcome, your views are always of interest.
For those familiar with the Phantom B-44
Graham's alignment spindle adapter method and cartridge alignment jig both adjustments can be made secured in detentes in the tonearm headshell.
Puttering around with it, with my new Dynavector cartridge in it I found with a bit of dexterity and coordination that I could align the cantilever and stylus with the Baerwald position, dead nuts as Swampwalker puts it...I have not heard that line in years.
However,the engraved target lines on the cartridge alignment jig run parallel with the cantilever with a period mark to the right indicating where the stylus should end. Thinking about it , if there were a tiny dimple where the stylus tip it self could rest into, another detente except on a minisquel level, I think this would be an improvement on an already well designed jig.
What I,m getting at, unless you know somehow , the jig and cartridge is square to your line of sight while viewing through a magnifying glass, there is room for error...Do Zeiss make magnifying glasses?
All I want to try to do is get the best performance out of my new table arm and cartridge.
I have ordered a Best Tractor from MintLp and should have it by the end of the week.
So , I have the Feikert, Graham's factory jigs and the Mint Lp tractor. I'll let you know...
This is an excellent thread. It is a good chance to exchange advice, experiences and views.
I have been using the Feickert, and I find it easily accurate to 1/10th of a millimeter, and able to do things that none of the others can...to explain..
I needed the Feickert on a table\arm combo that called for 210mm pivot to spindle distance. The problem was that this particular cartridge had a short stylus to mounting hole distance.. so you could not slide it far enough out in the slots for the proper overhang. (Pivot to spindle distance can be changed of course, but you have to compensate everywhere else.)
I went to 106.5mm to get a nice fit on this combo. If I had tried to use an arc protractor made for 210mm pivot to spindle distance, I would have been out of luck - no good at all. Instead I set up the Feickert for exactly 106.5 mm.
Until I used this protractor, I did not realize just how accurate the Feickert is. Read this paragraph completely and then CLICK HERE to see a composite picture showing the Feickert accuracy. You will see that you can get a perfect setup for any combination of arm and table, with this one being setup for 222.8 mm. (make sure to view the pic full size to see it clearly)
In picture 1 you will see that it is extremely easy to center the rod over your pivot. (& get a measurement that is exact..not just close, but perfect.) Rulers will not get near this kind of acuracy.
In picture 2 you can see that the measurement markings are crystal clear and easy to read the exact distance..(this one is 222.8mm - if it were 223 you would see half of the next black line)
In picture 3 you can see exactly where the stylus needs to meet the line on the platter for the perfect overhang.
Do you think anyone would order an arc protractor for 222.8? No way... but you just did a perfect setup with the Feickert.
Once you have the Pivot to Spindle distance "nailed" like this perfectly and the platter taped, the Feickert can do wonders.. and you are basically using a platter template that has ALL the arcs on it, not just one..
(I guess you can tell I like this tool.)
Thanks to all our Audiogon members contributing to this thread.
For an SME or a Schroeder (Reference and DPS), I'd use either a conventional, two-point protractor and sweat through the details, or alternatively I'd figure out the effective length for my favorite cartridge and order an arc-style protractor for that combination.
I'd obviously hope to live with that cartridge for quite some time if I committed to this solution.
Frank Schroeder has observed a statistical norm for stylus position centering around the stylus landing 9.25 mm in front of the cartridge mounting bolts (from his tonearm manuals). SME might presume a number slightly different than this to arrive at their specified effective length.
Your XV-1s cartridge comes in at 8 mm (from the engineering drawings on the Dynavector website). From SME's website, the Model V has an effective length (pivot to stylus) of 233.15 mm. We'll hang onto this number as a reality check.
I'd get my ruler out and draw a line connecting the two cartridge mounting bolts and then measure 8 mm forward of this line to see where the XV-1s stylus lands. I'd then measure the straight-line distance from the center of the bearing pivot to this stylus position I drew. This is your effective length. Perform a reality check against the 233.15 mm specification. You shouldn't be too far off from this, and likely a mm or two shorter than 233.15 mm.
Now, here's where it takes commitment (as in dollars). You're faced with ordering a protractor for this effective length. Assuming you got it right, you now have a protractor for one tonearm and one model in Dynavector's cartridge line (double ouch).
There's one other challenge with the SME V. Not only can't you change the effective length (it has mounting holes, not slots), but you can't vary the offset angle by much - only by whatever play there is in the headshell holes. Some people (another thread) have reported that they've opened up the holes in their headshell slightly - to permit some offset angle adjustment.
If it were me, I'd probably keep with the two-point affair and sweat through the process - assuming I didn't have access to a drawing tool which allowed me to try a variety of effective lengths for the cost of a few pieces of card-stock paper.
The thought of being wrong in my measurements (described above) would likely freeze me in my tracks - ordering without feeling comfortable that I measured the effective length with enough precision.
Thanks for the comments, Stiltskin. I find these conversations to be productive for all concerned. Every time I try to describe something, I think about it slightly differently and learn something. If I only had more time for this.
Tom - I'm probably gonna display my ignorance here so kindly bear with me regarding the SME, ... if the stylus perfectly traces the arc in a Wally or other arc-style protractor, why does it matter that you can't change the overhang because of no slots in the headshell? With my SME V on a Teres I can set up different carts with the same Wally.
(And SOA may be a lifestyle choice for some, but its still a Gartner product living out its own cycle of hype - one man's abstraction layer is another man's pot of beans. :-)
I may have to check out of this thread for a few days ... The short answer is that if you trace an arc (Wally, etc.), then life is good.
A while ago, I performed an extreme-case analysis of using the wrong arc on paper. I've not yet had the opportunity to try this out. I created situation which will never occur in real life - describing three arcs for a Triplanar:
a) a 239 mm effective length - the arc created by a cantilever which is 11 mm too short - in effect a negative cantilever length b) the intended 250 mm effective length - the nominally correct arc c) a 262 mm effective length - an arc created by a cartridge whose cantilever is 12 mm too long
The idea was to "pretend" that the Triplanar had no mounting slots, and that the user would try to align a cartridge in scenarios "a" and "c" whose stylus positions resulted in a too short and too long effective length - changing the pivot to spindle distance (11mm closer and 12 mm farther for "a" and "c", respectively).
The owner of this nominally correct, 250mm arc protractor would try to land the stylus somewhere on its theoretical arc. In use, the only adjustment available to him would be a pivot to spindle distance compensation.
You can see that even in these extreme (and well beyond real world situations), the arcs traced by "a" and "c" are fairly close to the ideal arc. Now, we're told that you need to get to better than 0.5mm of the specified pivot to spindle distance (not the arc, the pivot to spindle distance), and in these examples we've diverged by 12 mm and 11 mm respectively.
So, the question (back to reality here) is that just because we've failed, how much better is our setup (if at all) than that which we can achieve with a two-point protractor? I suspect that our audible results in a real-world error (e.g. a cartridge which diverges by only 1 or 2 mm) would be such that most of us would achieve a better setup with an arc-style protractor (better than with two-point, but not as good as ideal).
I've been planning on verifying this by making up two arc-style protractors for my Triplanar to mimic the SME/Schroeder situation - a stylus whose cantilever is, say 2 mm shorter as well as 2 mm longer than anticipated for the arm's specified effective length - yielding effective lengths of both 248 mm and 252 mm (vs. the 250 mm for the Triplanar).
I'll report back on this, but it may take some time. It will take some long-term listening to get the grok on any differences. Unfortunately, I can't measure the distortion, so this would be a subjective experiment which will take some time. My guess (to be verified) is that these errors will result in less than perfection, but somewhat (on average) better than most of us can do with a two-point protractor (Frank Schroeder and Doug Deacon notwithstanding).
It wouldn't hurt to perform a visual check with a two-point protractor - to see if (upon adjusting with the "wrong" arc protractor) whether we'd consider the setup good enough if we were using a two-point protractor. I suspect that most of us would.
Yes, SOA ... yet another three letter acronym which makes me want to retire to a cabin in the woods (with, of course, Solar PV panels to run my hi-fi with). I think the usability question is a good one of course. All too many geeks in both IT as well as hi-fi lose track of the problem they're trying to solve and get lost in their egos - building more and more complex mousetraps.
Basically, you stepped back analyzed the problem, and came up with a workable solution. Good for you!
Take note of how Joe approached this problem.
You bring up the very good point that, just because a manufacturer specifies certain paramaeters, you are not limited to this and can create your own.
Stated another way, if you're "stuck" with a certain pivot to spindle distance because of tonarm mounting circumstances beyond your control, you may well be able to still achieve (say, Baerwaald) alignment by adjusting the position of the cartridge in the headshell (fore and aft as well as offset angle).
Of course, in your case you ran out of headshell slot, but your approach was still one of "what set of parameters will work if I'm stuck with one that I can't change?".
Yes indeed, someone could easily order an arc that resulted in a 222.8 mm pivot to spindle distance.
Typically, you work backwards from effective length, but if you use John Ellison's wonderful spreadsheet and set the precision level to 4 decimal places, you can (using binary search techniques) derive any number you need in 5 or 6 tries.
Once you have an effective length, tell Yip (Mintlp) or Wally what you need and in 3 weeks (Yip) or ??? (Wally), it's in your mailbox.
It's all just computers and numbers and one number (222) is as good as another (222.8).
Smoffatt - the best way to get a cart aligned in an SME V, imo, is with a Wallytractor. I haven't seen the Mint, but if its the same design and quality as a Wally, then it will work as well. For me, the arc style protractor is much easier than a two-pointer, but those can work. (Say what you will, Wally deserves a boatload of credit for bringing his mirrored arc style tractor to us audiophiles - like many others on this forum, he's a generous contributor to our hobby.)
The fine gradient movement of the SME's sled makes small adjustments simple to dial the stylus in the arc across its length - much easier than manually shifting the cartridge in head shell slots and then tightening the cartridge bolts without changing anything. This, imo, is one of the design's real strengths. Once the tone arm is mounted, the sled makes pivot-to-spindle distance somewhat of a moot point.
If your cantilever (and ultimately your stylus) is at right angles to a line drawn through the headshell bolts, then there should be no need for cartridge adjustment to hit the proper offset on the protractor's grid lines. Otherwise the soft head shell metal makes it simple to *very slightly* enlarge the holes in the headshell enough for minor adjustment. (I did this turning a drill by hand - let me know if you need the bit size, I've got it somewhere in my notes at home.)
Tim, "The fine gradient movement of the SME's sled makes small adjustments simple to dial the stylus in the arc across its length" WouldnÂ’t you be defeating the purpose of a custom protractor by changing the spindle to pivot distance as an adjustment? If you order a protractor for SME isn't the arc based on the 233.15 spindle to pivot distance, the distance you change to adjust? I bring this up because you mention that the Wally is the best method for SME alignment(IMO), I'm not sure it or any arc protractor is unless the cartridge one uses produces the correct effective length for the 233.15 arc. I just mounted a SME IV.Vi so I'm looking for feedback also. Now, if I measure the effective length and back into the spindle to pivot measurement and it's not the SME suggested 233.15, I wonder if it would be better to order a protractor for the SME suggested 233.15 or order one based on the spindle to pivot number derived from the actual effective length? HMMMMMMM.
Your question is indeed a valid one. Every effective length has one and only one correct pivot to spindle distance and offset angle.
Tim is adjusting for a change in effective length with the pivot to spindle change (and likely adjusting offset angle slightly with his oversized screw holes).
I suspect he's getting such good results with a Wally because his cartridge's stylus position closely matches SME's design assumptions, and therfore his tonearm's effective length is close to specification.
So, if one wants a custom-made arc protractor, shouldn't one supply to the maker the ACTUAL spindle to pivot distance, rather than the optimal theoretical one, which may not pertain to the arm for which the protractor is to be used? Forgive me if the question is redundant.
Consider this, the gauge that comes with the SME arm is driven by the effective length and you change the spindle to pivot to dial it in. So, maybe the 233.15mm spindle to pivot recommended by VPI is not cut in stone but a starting point, if that is the case maybe a a protractor based on the effective length is best for this arm. Mike
WouldnÂ’t you be defeating the purpose of a custom protractor by changing the spindle to pivot distance as an adjustment?
My admittedly limited and possibly flawed understanding is that pivot-to-spindle distance + overhang = a spot on the arc of a protractor designed for a specific pivot-to-spindle distance, 233.15 on the SME V. The way to adjust a cartridge in an SME V/IV is by moving the entire arm via its sled. If by moving the tonearm via the sled I cause the stylus to perfectly trace the arc on a protractor designed for the tonearm, doesn't that equate to proper setup? If I follow that method, is my cartridge not aligned correctly? (Genuine question, not rhetorical).
Tim, Proper setup is probably what sounds good on the SME and as pointed out by Thom your effective length probably matches what the spec should be. "I suspect he's getting such good results with a Wally because his cartridge's stylus position closely matches SME's design assumptions, and therfore his tonearm's effective length is close to specification" I just thought I'd bring up some other points as food for thought. I have not yet decided which way to go for a set up tool. One other point, I think some of the changes we make are so small as to not be detectable from one to the other by using the arc, even with a magnifying glass they might look the same, so probably sound the same.
Hi all, this had been one of the better post i have seen in a long time. Very unbias. No "war". No "ditch your SME it's crap and buy a Phantom or ditch the Phantom and buy a Triplanar". Congratulations to all and most particularly Thom Mackris at Galibier. As far as overhang adjustment with the SME, you must move the base to adjust it and as a result, you are changing the spindle to pivot distance. DON'T SWEAT IT. This is how ARA designed it and there is no other way around it, unless you want to take a hacksaw and "chisel" slots in the headshell of a $5000.00 tonearm. Again, this is an awesome thread.......
This post to date is approaching 2,200 views, someones reading it. Here's an opportunity to drive home, AGAIN, this subject of proper set up and enjoyment of vinyl playback.
There is helpful guidance for the novice and some veterans of this hobby.
I am using WallyTracktor Universal and it delivers the results needed for precise tone arm setup. Most arm type arcs are included in the design. A group or club of analog heads could make good use of this fine phono arm tool.
Excuse me if this is redundant. What about those of us that have an older SME arm that uses the Stevenson geometry? Is it possible to use an arc protractor for these? Aren't most, if not all based on Baerwald? I ask because I just installed a Grado Reference Master on my SME Series III arm. Set the VTA and VTF on a 150 gram LP. Checked and double checked the alignment with a new SME alignment protractor (cardboard, single point). Checked and rechecked VTA/VTF. I notice some sibilence at the beginning of the record. Towards the end, it sounds great. From what I've read, this would make sense due to the Stevenson setup. Is there any way, without changing arms, to more closely "mimic" the Baerwald?
And I agree with Smoffatt, this is a great thread.
So, assuming your cartridge (stylus position) is consistent with SME's ideal, then your effective length is indeed 232.2. You might try fiddling with the pivot to spindle distance (increasing by about .9mm for Baerwaald and .4mm for Loefgren) to get to Baerwaald and Loefgren approximations.
Perhaps you can lay a piece of masking tape on the base to measure this small change.
If the overall distortion level drops, you can always drop a few coins on either the van den Hul protractor or the TT Basiscs one.
Yip (Mintlp) and I have been positing (not yet verified) that tracing the arc (getting pivot to spindle and effective length right) is more critical than the offset angle.
The Ken Willis protractor has provisions for all three geometries (sp?). Right now I have my Audioquest PT-6/Denon DL-160 set up for Stevenson feeling it sounds better than Baerwald. I have not tried Lofgren. I echo the positive comments about this thread. It's the epitome of information sharing without the messianic tone of trying to convert posters as so many threads seem to do.
OK, I see I had the wrong number (233.15) as the pivot to spindle for the SME Iv.vi, it's actually 215.35, 233.15 is the effective length suggested by SME. I got the calipers out and find my cartridge stylus looks exactly at or very close to this effective length. I just contacted Ken Willis for a protractor based on these numbers. Now I can see if the SME gauge is close.
I contacted Ken Willis on my arm and he told me if it was an SME with the sliding base and no slots in the headshell, he recommended NOT using his protractor. He told me to use the SME supplied cardboard guide. His reasoning was because the SME's don't have anyway of adjusting offset, and that the pivot to spindle distance on these arms is not a fixed dimension.........
On another note.... I came across a black arm wand that is the updated version. This one is supposed to be designed to use the Baerwald geometry. Maybe I can use my old Geodisc..... we'll see..
On a side note off topic. Pete Riggle has a VTAF for the 3009/3012 arms.....
Here's the email I got from Ken..... for all the other SME owners out there.
"I'm assuming the SME III uses the typical SME adjustable base mount. Does it also have slots in the headshell? If it does, I need to know what mounting distance you want to use. If it does not, I would not recommend using this type of protractor. I'd stick with whatever SME provides for it. The reason is that if the headshell does not have slots, the effective length (mounting distance plus overhang) cannot be adjusted for different cartridges. The effective length of the arm changes with every different cartridge that is used in it because there is no standard for the location of the stylus in relation to the location of the mounting screws. The accuracy of the alignment using this protractor is completely dependent on the mounting distance. Every mounting distance has a unique overhang and effective length associated with it. If the headshell has no slots, the cartridge cannot be moved in the headshell to compensate for the longer or shorter cantilever length. If the cartridge is in a fixed position, but the cantilever length changes, this changes the position of the stylus which changes the effective length. Since every effective length has a unique mounting distance associated with it, changing the effective length requires a different mounting distance. It would be easy enough to move the base of the SME arm to a different mounting distance, but then a different offset angle is required. If the cartridge is fixed in the headshell, the offset angle is also fixed."
04 rdking, For the reasons stated by Ken is why I measured my effective length before ordering. The SME jig does the same thing because it is driven by effective length and you move the mounting distance to make it's adjustment. I just find the arc protracter easier to work with than the SME jig. I have enough play in my cartridge mounting to adjust offset.
Using the Graham B-44 factory alignment jigs to position the arm for the spindle pivot distance and then to mount the cartridge. The end result , I found them to be of ease of use, well thought out and a very accurate design.
Once the Feikert protractor arrived, I checked my set up against the Graham factory jigs and my ability of using them.
First up , the Feikert read a pivot to spindle distance of 216.5 mm for the Graham Phantom arm. Next step I was able to land the stylus on the first point of reference with little problem. It was bang on the mark. The third step which took a little longer, was to position the stylus in a grid to check to see if the cantilever is parallel with the lines on the grid, which it was. Oh yes, the Feikert disk is reflective.
For us older guys, this is where a photographers lope and mag light came in handy.
Thinking about it as I type this, did I need to buy protractor? I also have the MintLp arc tractor on its way too.
Using an arc protractor made specific for my arm and table is going to be interesting.
Its a learning experience for me, its fun and in the end I will have complete piece of mind knowing the geometry of my arm and cartridge are exactly to spec.
Stiltskin, let us know your impressions on the Mint LP after using it. Also, when this is all done, let us know your impressions for all 3 (Phantom own jig, Feickert, MintLp) and the one you would highly recommend. Perhaps the Graham supplied jig is all you need and the Feickert and MintLp become redundant. All the best......
I think with being caught up with the excitement of some new equipment that recently arrived ,I felt that I should have another protractor as a 2nd reference, just to be sure.
As it stands , the Graham jigs are exceptional, including the Feikert protractor. Both use a design method of detentes where the Feikert locks into a disk template that sits on the platter like an Lp.
The Graham jig detentes are in the head shell. Another huge advantage with the Graham cartridge jig is that you can unscrew the arm tube and hold it in any position you need to, to get the job done.
As mentioned above regarding arc protractors, Ken Willis is said to make an exceptional protractor for $50.00.
From there, the Wally and MintLp tractor.
I'm sure there are other highly accurate and easy to use tractors available that may equal the ones mentioned.
For any ones interest, this post to date is approaching 3000 views.
If anyone has a question regarding set up of your own table, arm and cartridge, DO ASK.
It DOES NOT matter what you own.
Fear not.
There is a long list of highly experienced members here with friendly advice and guidance.
I haven't yet ordered the protractor yet. I'm just not convinced I need it. I did order a sample of their record cleaner. Below is an initial review I posted on Vinyl Asylum.
I ordered the free sample offered at the website. I normally avoid multi-step cleaning processes because life is to damn short to waste it on non-essential activities. My regular cleaning fluids are VPI, RRL regular and Superwash and I have used Nitty Gritty's fluid. My favorite was Torumat which, I don't believe, is now available.
MintLP requires a three step process (four if you count wiping the record edge with a lint-free cloth). My initial impressions are quite positive. This may be the best I've ever used. Vinyl is very quiet and dynamics seem to be improved. I need to spend more time with it on more records to confirm my observations are not simply the result of a placebo effect. The free sample only requires a $1 PayPal payment to cover postage from Hong Kong.
The Feickert is a useful tool, DaVinci Audio delivers this Protractor with its Grandezza Arms. But there is something REALLY interesting available from him, an Adjustment Record, it is called Adjust Plus. Put the record on the turntable, start it and with the Adjust Plus Software (packed with the record) you can connect it to a Laptop to check all kind of Settings. Azimuth, VTA etc. while playing! That is something amazing. It was developed with a Software Specialist. For the discriminated Audiophile a must.
Hi Thomas, I remembered early on in this thread someone made a brief mention of the Adjust Plus software from Feikert. Not until you mentioned it, I went back into the thread and saw it was Emailists, however he did not elaborate on the software at all.
Well the Adjust Plus is interesting. Thomas have you used it?
Narrod, on a good day cleaning records isn't much fun. Myself ,I can only handle 15 to 20 at one sitting, It's up there with watching paint dry.
However ,once they are cleaned you get a lot of mileage out of them before you have to do it again.
Each to his own, however this might change your mind and for anyone alse that maybe interested.
Check out the thread in the analog discussion section titled....Best Fluid For VPI 16.5 Cleaner, None VPI Brand...
Member Rushton, Doug Deacon and myself have a couple of things to say about active enzyme base cleaners for your Lps.
I acquired a Freickert protractor a little while back. I wish I had listened to the really knowledgeable pundits on this thread.A Freickert is a good place to start, if you are a vinyl novice like me. A newly arrived Lyra Skala is sounding far superior to the Helikon it replaced on a Rega RB 1000 arm and Gyrodec. Having spent a tidy sum on my vinyl rig, its good to know that the cartridge is properly aligned and set up.Its certainly an improvement on the hit and miss of a downloaded paper protractor( given printing errors and clumsy hands trying to puncture a spindle hole). I guess I went for a universal protractor knowing that upgraditis is never far away.A silly move coz I intend to order a Mint from our friend Yip in Hong Kong.IMHO the biggest advantage of the Freickert is also its biggest let down: namely an accurate spindle pivot measurement that has no use when you actually align the cartridge on the predetermined null points. A custom built arc protractor built for the spindle pivot distance of your arm as measured by a Freickert should yield optimum results. It would be interesting to see the change in alignment, if any,required by the Mint.
Just to add my voice regarding the virtues of the Mint LP. Having read some of the comments on this thread I took the plunge and ordered one and I must say I am very impressed. Very easy to use as long as one remembers the importance of light, patience and more patience. The instructions were very well written with good drawings and photographs and some helpful tips thrown in for good measure, especially regarding "PATIENCE". Do as Yip says and it works.
Really, the best $90 I have ever spent. Excellent sonic rewards and the confidence that the set up is as close to spot on as these old eyes are ever go to be able to get. Yip was a very nice guy to deal with as well and super efficient service which went beyond what I was anticipating.
Help...am totally confused.Initially aligned the cartridge with the Freickert protractor using the Baerwald alignment thats on one side of the protractor disc. Out of curiosity, yesterday tried the Lofgren alignment thats one the other side of the disc and guess what...it was a perfect fit.According to my limited understanding , Baerwald and Lofgren use different geometries with different null points. If thats the case why am I getting a perfect fit with both or am I missing something? Hello Yip ...here I come!!
On my arm the difference in overhang between Baerwald and Lofgren is 0.5 mm.
I can, and do, see the difference between the two with overhang and alignment on my Feickert . I can also see this difference with the WallyTractor. Both are equal in the usefulness. Where the Feickert may have an advantage is in the ability to align any pivoted arm.
Just like any tool, it takes time and patience to gain a better understanding of it abilities. Both methods (Feickert, and Arc types) prove to work well for my use and both, when mastered, will provide exceptional results.
If you are up to it, you can try to spend some more time with the alignment tool. The first thing to check is overhang vs. the two alignment types (Baerwald and Lofgren)to make sure they are NOT the same. They should not be. The other thing to notice is that upon a quick look the alignment may appear similar but the cantilever will not be aligned at both points because it's not theoretically possible and in practice I've verified this as the Feickert has very good resolution to be able to align the cartridge to a fine degree. Again, as verified with the WallyTractor.
One thing you may want to try if you haven't is mark the pivot point on the RB1000 arm you reported in the thread above that you have. This point is very important to getting the alignment correct. This is important whether we provide the number to an arc protractor maker or if we use it in real-time to set overhang with the Feikert tool. It ends up being critical to the adjustment as well as assuring precise repeatability, IMO.
What all this really points to is the importance of getting to know and use the alignment tool of choice. The more you use it the better you become at maximising it's ability to accomplish the job. Both types of protractors require patience. The more patience we have the potential for better results become or reward.
Dan ed, Of course I was sent a tracking number. I have since found the package was sent from Jamaica N.Y., on July 11, and my local post office has no record of it, nor is it in their possesion. Hope it turns up.
I just arrived home and my dear wife handed me our local news paper as I walk through the door,
The headlines read...Canada Customs "On Guard For Thee" Under the head lines it read ,Canada Customs returns suspicious package from foreign land...
On a serious note, Yip has informed me once the package arrives back in Hong Kong there will be an explanation from Canada Customs attached as to why it was rejected according to info Yip found out at the Hong Kong post office.
First hearing about this myself my thoughts were the same as yours, the bottle of cleaning fluid,... oh whats this!, the R.C.M.P. have surrounded our home.
Just thought I'd let you know the Mintlp Best Tractor finally showed up today, intact. Just read manual, and ready to see where I'm really at. Mark, I hope the RCMP didn't take you away. So far, no sign of the Secret Service or FBI at my door yet. (That's a joke to you Feds..) Regards, Dan
Just did my set-up with the Mintlp Tractor. I must say, this is a wonderfully precise instrument for cartridge set-up. I found my overhang was off using the VPI jig. My first try, it just didn't sound quite dialed-in. I then checked pivot-to-spindle distance, and found it was long by a mite. After adjusting and set-up with the Mintlp again, the same lp, "Blue Bash" by Kenny Burrell and Jimmy Smith, sounded great. It's a good feeling knowing things are as good as you can get them. Good tool, worth the money!
I'm fully expecting to hear from Canadian Customs explaining why my MintLp tractor was not allowed to enter into Canada. It could of very well of been the sample bottle of record cleaner that alarmed ,as Dan ed suggested, some over zealous inspector.
Of course this hic up has not stopped me from spinning vinyl, so far 22 hours have been logged onto my new record player.
Yip has never had a problem of this sort and for now the both of us will have to wait until this week for Canada Customs reasoning.
You must have a verified phone number and physical address in order to post in the Audiogon Forums. Please return to Audiogon.com and complete this step. If you have any questions please contact Support.
