I'm very late to the party... my graham 2.0 with 2.2 bearing cap gave me too much anti sskating as measured with a wallytool with a koetsu rosewood sig and the standard antiskate weight all the way up the shaft to minimize. Got a lighter weight from graham which caused an acceptable wallytool outcome. |
I understand the point of the above msg's. My main objective was to find out if anyone else using a Graham 2 and Wally's tools had a similar conversation with Wally. My conversation wit Wally was >/= 2 years ago and at that time it made sense what he said. If I remember right his comments were something about the weight being too heavy even moved to the top. Whether there was a Benz Ruby cantilever factor in there as well I cannot quite remember. |
What I meant about the little set screw is exactly what you are alluding to Zargon.Set the weight anywhere you/one wants and lock it.Simple.I'm specifically talking about the little(tiny)screw in the weight,itself.This will give more flexibility to those wanting to go beyond the boundaries of the indentations.
Best! |
According to the Graham User Manual, the weight can be positioned at any point along the shaft, independent of the detents, without need for any "set screw" adjustments. In fact the set screw is not there for this purpose.
Gerardff, I hope we haven't gotten too far away from your subject. Some of this information does relate to use of the antiskate mechanism. |
Zargon,Why not try the second,and then third dent,out.This should be for 1.5 and 2.0 gms.I believe the little weight has a set screw that may be able to lock to an intermediate position(more approximating the 1.8 gms).I hope this can work out for you,as I,myself track at 1.85 I have sometimes wondered if I should do the same.I'm too lazy I guess.Also,as the record is being tracked,look at the cantilever,from straight on(front of arm).If antiskate is correct,there should be no leaning(drag)of the cantilever in any direction,to a significant degree.Sort of like,if you considered the cantilever and it's reflection,in the lp to be ONE continuous line.Viewed from straight on.Hope this helps.
Best! |
My appology for any unintended sarcasm and getting carried away. Maybe I was having a bad day! This particular cartridge is supposed to track at 1.8g. For that VTF, do you know where would one nominally place the weight as a starting position? Which detent? |
Zargon,firstly I really think you are getting way to carried away in your response to me.I made a general statement about some supposed "professionals" (not alluding to anyone in particular).I've read many posts from owners,and experienced folks who did not fully understand the Graham 2.2.
The measuring device for antiskate,that I mentioned was a simple oversight which I corrected in a followup post.
The business about test records was just some information that I thought some could benefit from knowing about,if not already.I was not alluding specifically to you,so please don't be so self centered!Other folks read this stuff!!
Nothing I posted was specifically directed at you,because from the time I've been corresponding on these forums there has been a wealth of misinformation regarding the Graham arms,by some.
I was simply trying to be helpful,but in all honesty,from your sarcastic tone,I won't make any comments to you again.
As to the antiskate being set at the collar,if your "professional" friend set it that way,FINE!Of course I assume the cartridge was supposed to track at around one gram.Right? |
Please re-read my post. I said nothing about any antiskate inaccuracy of a Graham. My point was that placing the weight at the collar still results in some finite antiskate (by design), and that may have been appropriate for the TT setup done by this professional.
You could benefit from some additional care in your responses. In 2 short posts, you managed to unfairly criticize a known professional, state a tool existed and then retract it, suggest out of the blue that I need a test record (incidentally, I have 2), and suggest I am spending too much time obsessing with TT setup, when I didn't even bring it up, and don't need any help.
Were you having a bad day? |
Sorry!There is no tool from Graham regarding antiskate.But,having set up Grahams,from the 1.5/2.0 to 2.2's(alot) I can state with confidence that you can dismiss any doubts as to the antiskate accuracy of these arms,relating to Graham's instructions,and how they perform in real world conditions.Unless you want to go nuts,and dismantle common sense,in order to find miniscule geometric and technical flaws,which will have no real impact on what you are hearing.Some posters like to do this.I hope you do not.You would be better served listening to your records.
Best! |
Sirspeedy,
Unfortunately the Graham installation instructions that come with the 2.1/2.2 do not describe how to set the antiskate. It does say that each detent on the calibrated shaft is equal to 1/2 gram, and it is clear from the design that placing the weight at the collar does not result in zero antiskate. What is the device you referred to for the Graham? |
Firstly,Bob Graham knows his products,so please don't waste your listening time with this.
Secondly,as to the "professional setup" having the antiskate all the way up the collar,for least force,I'd assume they were NOT professionals,or were compensating for problems elsewhere,in the system.Possibly the cartridge had ZERO weight(just sarcasm,sorry).
It's easy to actually check for accurate antiskate,and the Grahams can be had with a device for this.However if you follow the instructions with the arm,you should be close enough not to waste your mental energy,or time.There are,also,a myriad of test discs that allow for antiskate checking.Hunt one down,or better yet,borrow from a friend.
Best! |
I have seen a professional setup of the 2.2 where the anti-skate weight was pushed all the way up to the collar (least force), and wondered why. So, I would be interested in this as well. Keep us informed. |
Go the the source and ask Bob Graham. Good luck. |
