Ikeda IT-407 tonearm geometry
dEAR @sdrsdrsdr : """ Then Raul gave his recommendations for it407 and his p2s was shorter than recommended. I was just hoping for a more general consensus. """ YOU HAVE A TOTAL MISUNDERSTOOD ON ALMOST ALL WHAT i POSTED HERE. It’s normal your misunderstood when M.Fremer ( in those times. ) had a bigger misunderstood on the overall subject and this is what I’m talking about and why I posted what I posted in your thread: for we can understand it and seems to me you did not yet. This is what I posted on the 407 and I took the manufacturer effective length specification ( one of input alignment calculations. ), I did not change it. The P2S is only one of the calculation outputs achieved by difference in those calculations using Löfgren A and is not my recomendation but a result of the calculations: """"""" P2S: 293.718 . I used and use Löfgren A. Many years ago I used Löfgren B. Before I learned my tonearm set up always was made according manufacturer specs, not any more. https://www.vinylengine.com/tonearm_alignment_calculator_pro.php?arm1=Arm+1&l1=el&a1lv=307&a1=la&oh1v=&oa1v=&arm2=Lofgren+A&l2=el&a2lv=307&a2=la&oh2v=&oa2v=&arm3=Lofgren+B&l3=el&a3lv=307&a3=lb&oh3v=&oa3v=&arm4=Stevenson&l4=el&a4lv=307&a4=st&oh4v=&oa4v=&og=iec1&ogv=&ig=iec&igv=&cal=y&submit=calculate """""""" Got it? That alignment can be use exactly for the FR66 too following the manufacturer EL spec. Any thing different down there is only input/output number manipulations with out foundation but any one can do what any one wants it. Anyway, Ikeda-san is an ignorant on the overall alignment subject and its advantages/disadvantages. Period. R. |
Dear friends: I posted that any one of us can manipulate in any tonearm any of the input alignment calculations and this means that each one of us can have a self " designed "/dedicated propietary alignment. That’s what the SAT tonearm did it when he refused to use the input parameters of the standard inner/outer groove radious and that’s why the SAT tonearm must be aligned by the seller/distributor. Has any advantage what he did it? not really because we can use Löfgren A/B there and evertthing will be fine. It does not exist any NEW alignment as that DIN that an Agoner posted. What the gentleman down there did it was a manipulation of the input most inner groove radious. He took 54.00mmm for that distance and use Löfgren B alignment and that’s why in the analog planet link appears those null points values. Here an easy calculation about where any one can corroborates what I’m saying: https://www.vinylengine.com/tonearm_alignment_calculator_pro.php?arm1=Arm+1&l1=el&a1lv=307&a1=la&oh1v=&oa1v=&arm2=Lofgren+A&l2=el&a2lv=307&a2=la&oh2v=&oa2v=&arm3=Lofgren+B&l3=el&a3lv=307&a3=lb&oh3v=&oa3v=&arm4=Stevenson&l4=el&a4lv=307&a4=st&oh4v=&oa4v=&og=iec1&ogv=&ig=cus&igv=54.0&cal=y&submit=calculate any advantage?, no only higher error. Btw, I have not a LP that been recorded at 54.00mm inner groove radious. So that data manipulation is futile and useless for say the least. Vive le IgnoraCE ! ! ! ? Obviously that due our normal low knowledge levels on this alignment specific subject those kind of data manipulations looks as something new/invention. Those gentlemans are taking advantage of our ignorance levels about and nothing more. R. |
Dear @sdrsdrsdr : P2S: 293.718 . I used and use Löfgren A. Many years ago I used Löfgren B. Before I learned my tonearm set up always was made according manufacturer specs, not any more. https://www.vinylengine.com/tonearm_alignment_calculator_pro.php?arm1=Arm+1&l1=el&a1lv=307&a1=la&oh1v=&oa1v=&arm2=Lofgren+A&l2=el&a2lv=307&a2=la&oh2v=&oa2v=&arm3=Lofgren+B&l3=el&a3lv=307&a3=lb&oh3v=&oa3v=&arm4=Stevenson&l4=el&a4lv=307&a4=st&oh4v=&oa4v=&og=iec1&ogv=&ig=iec&igv=&cal=y&submit=calculate Regards and enjoy the MUSIC NOT DISTORTIONS, R. |
Dear @bukanona : That’s why Stevenson is no truwe alternative alignment and you can see it in the analog planet link that posted @sdrsdrsdr . Yes, the tracking error is independent of what your link stated but has a relationship that we can't just forget. Btw, the article gentleman said that to align the cartridge body through protractors but in reality we all know that what be stay perfectly aligned with the protractor lines is the cartidge cantilever. R. |
Dear @lewm : Your post has no sense for me and useless to this thread. Btw, 1938 was the year E.Löfgren alignment studies and in 1941 Baerwald appeared with the same Löfgren A solution, nothing new with. Who cares what was available back then. Certainly not me or Löfgren because it not matters to calculate tonearm today or back then overhang and offset angle ! ! !. The Löfgren solutions are valid then and for ever no matters what. Your post ? ? ? ? R. |
Dear @sdrsdrsdr @edgewear : Löfgren was and is the gentleman who made the overall research that permits him to develops the formulas to make the critical tonearm/cartridge set up calculations parameters. What wanted Löfgren to calculate?, two main data/parameters: overhang and offset angle. He took 3 precise and know input data for the overall calculations: tonearm effective length, inner most and outer most groove distance/radious ( LP. ). Löfgren main output data/parameters are: overhang, offset angle, both null points and by difference P2S distance. But Löfgren made two calculations alignments: A and B where the difference in between is only in the overhang distance. After Löfgren alignments several other gentlemans tryed two make their own kind of alignments but at the end almost all of them finished with exactly the Löfgren A alignment calculation. This was and is the case of Baerwald that is similar to Löfgren A. From where took Löfgren those input data/radious? from the IEC standard that defined that those LP inner/outer radious are: 60.325mm and 146.3mm. Exist, at least, other two radious standards: DIN ( Germany. ) and JIS ( Japan. ) Stevenson made two alignments: one similar to Löfgren A calculation and the " stupid " Japanese Stevenson alignment where he took the inner most groove radious as the inside/second null point, he defined that way this null point: coincide with the most inner groove. This Stevenson alignment is the worst one of any alignment and not opnly because has the higher tracking error/tracking distortion levels in the LP surface recorded grooves but the last/inner 3mms. grooves but because in reality the higher tracking distortion levels are over all the LP surface due that those inner 3mms. are only when a LPhas recorded grooves from around 58mms. inner groove to end of LP. How many of our LP’s has recorded information at 58mm. inner groove? In the other side, all input/output Löfgren calculations parameters can be " manipulated " no matters what specs were given by the tonearm manufacturer. We can change it. We can have our self dedicated alignment with different paramenters and different tracking error and tracking distortion levels too ( normally higher. ). @edgewear, you are not thin ears, in reality exist those differences but not something as " nigth and day " and we need to know what to look for to detect those differences and that our room/system have high or very high resolution. Why I posted the word stupid to that alignment and people that use it? Because for me any person that for very low knowledge levels on some specific subject ignores the true behind that subject is ignorant about but if through several years that same person mantained that kind of ignorance then the person is no more ignorant but stupid because has not the capacity to learn on that subject and with all respect Ikeda-san is one of this kind of persons. I had the opportunity to know the king of stupids in this precise alignment subject and unfortunatelly belongs to this forum and as a fact are two persons that figth in between to achieve that title. The question here: who will win the title? Btw, I owned the 407 too. Regards and enjoy the MUSIC NOT DISTORTIONS, R. |
Dear @sdrsdrsdr : There is no problem with Ikeda geometry. The problem is to understand how the tonearm/cartridge set up alignment works. Forgeret about the Ikeda specs because you can change the effective length of any tonearm changing the pivot to spindle distance ( not making the change through overhang. ) and use an alignment calculator to set up your cartridge to the new parameters. You have to " play " with that effective length change till you find out the one for that cartridge. https://www.vinylengine.com/tonearm_alignment_calculator_pro.php Regards and enjoy the MUSIC NOT DISTORTIONS, R. |
