Actually the 25% improvement I mentioned is on the conservative side. With some records I am very familiar with and played over and over I always thought the midrange sounded a little thin but after the azimuth adjustment it gained so much more body and depth. Yes the detail and imaging improved but it was the critical midrange where I noticed most of the improvement. Both male and female vocals took on new life with a fuller and more robust sound and I could hear strings placed on the soundstage with great clarity that was somewhat smudged before the azimuth adjustment. Records that already had a full body sound before became even bigger sounding with improved transparency and musicality.
I guess I am lucky in so far that the azimuth on my basis vector arm is easy to adjust and can be done in a precise manner with very small increments to obtain the best sound. In conclusion I have discovered that even very small changes in azimuth can have a signafignant impact on the quality of sound reproduction from our audio system. Using the eyeball method is a good starting point but further refinements must be done by ear or test measurements to get the most performance out of your system. As the old saying goes you dont know what your missing until you make the change.
BTW I did mean to say "precision" not precession.
Thanks
Johnny
I guess I am lucky in so far that the azimuth on my basis vector arm is easy to adjust and can be done in a precise manner with very small increments to obtain the best sound. In conclusion I have discovered that even very small changes in azimuth can have a signafignant impact on the quality of sound reproduction from our audio system. Using the eyeball method is a good starting point but further refinements must be done by ear or test measurements to get the most performance out of your system. As the old saying goes you dont know what your missing until you make the change.
BTW I did mean to say "precision" not precession.
Thanks
Johnny