Mint Protractor. A Pretty Nice Alignment Tool

I bought one about 10 years ago and never did like it, too difficult for my eyes. The problem with the Mint is that it’s pretty much turntable specific, change tables or tonearms and you likely need a new protractor. None of this matters as the consensus is that Mint is either out of business, or Yip is deceased. As far as protractors are concerned, I much prefer the Dr. Feickert, easiest alignment tool I’ve ever used.

Thanks, R.

Dear @lewm  : Not exactly that. What I'm saying is refered to how the MINT LP protractor was/is made it where ( independent of the type of alignment choosed ) the manufacturer takes the P2S distance as his protractor reference to build it.

R.

Mijostyn, is it really true that most tonearms are mounted incorrectly regarding P2S distance? I would have thought that overhang was the most common error. The very first and really only important thing to do when mounting a new tonearm is to get P2S as precisely as possible to the recommended distance. After that, setting overhang is a piece of cake. So why assume that the same tonearm mounted on the same TT in two separate instances by two different operators, will exhibit a difference in P2S? Bear in mind that I’ve never seen a Mint protractor, let alone used one. I guess what Raul is saying is that P2S for Stevenson is different from correct P2S for either of the Lofgren alternatives. Therefore, one ought not to use a Mint protractor to achieve a perfect Lofgren alignment, unless the Mint was specifically created for Lofgren A or B.

I sheepishly agree with fsonic on the minimal benefits of being anal regarding alignment.

@rauliruegas is absolutely correct. Most tonearms are not at their specified spindle to pivot distance. They are off by several mm which throws the Mint out the window. There are way too many ways to create error when drilling for the tonearm. SME took this into account when they created their famous tonearm base.

In order for a protractor to be as accurate as possible the lines have to be vanishingly thin and there has to be a little divot to place the stylus in. The SmarTractor is a great example. It also gives you a choice of alignments, Lofgren B being the best for modern records.  The SmarTractor also allows you to accurately measure the spindle to pivot distance. So, if there is room for adjustment you can get it right on target. 

I ordered two Mints from Yip way back in the day when I was using VPI decks. As Raul has noted, P-S was a critical measurement for Yip. He would not provide his custom protractor without it. He also needed to know the ID of the tonearm.

Now that said, is the Mint "pretty nice"? Well dayum, "pretty nice" describes a lot of things, even the mediocre. The Mint is very difficult for those with so-so vision or who have brains that for whatever neurological reason do not perceive paralax very well. And all for an alignment method that favors classical music with crescendos at the innermost grooves.

I’ve said this so many times that I am embarrassed to say it again. One can literally slam the cartridge to the very front of the head shell and if you nail the tracking force, VTA, and zenith you will get very good sound. With microline and similar stylii there is a fair bit to be gained by further optimization. The point of this is that minimizing arc-induced distortion is so incredibly overrated-it is like how you choose to set your broken watch so that at least it’s right two times a day.

Dear @neonknight : " The Mint protractor is built specifically for this arm. "

NO, that’s where you misunderstood strated and belongs because the MINT LP protractors were made not for an specific tonearm ( this does not matters. ) but for an specific P2S distance.

Look, the name in cartridge/tonearm alignment is accuracy and the MINT LP protractor is totally accurated for that specific P2S distance that each owner ask for.

Example of that accuracy and your misunderstood, differences in the alignment A and B in Lófgren are this way:

same linear offset for both A/B, different null points at each one, same offset angles, different tracking distortion and error levels and different overhang by only 0.8 mm and obviously different P2S distances.

Compared any of the A/B Löfgren alignments with Stevenson all parameters are way different ( this is the worst kind of alignment but one choosed by tonearm japanese designers. )

R.

There is something to be said for using the alignment algorithm (Stevenson, Lofgren, etc) for which your tonearm was designed. Because deviating from one to another requires twisting the cartridge in its headshell which can create aberrant force on the cantilever. 

@chayro At the Mint site there is no longer an email link, the one there takes you to an order page is all. Also the order and associated shipping schedule stops at February of 2022. I find no threads of where anyone has purchased one past 2022. All indications are something has happened with Mint, and they may no longer be obtainable. Hope I am wrong, but it seems that way.  

IMHO, Wally Tools is the best place for turntable set up training and tools.

I have them all and based on my experience, their system (especially the cartridge evaluation service that results in near perfect zenith or, in some instances, exposes an incorrectly built cartridge).

I have a couple Mints and although well made, each is made for a specific analog front end whereas the Wally Tools are universal and allow for all three alignments.

The SMARTactor is also an excellent alignment tool based on owning and using one of these also.

WallyTools Analog Setup Tools

@neonknight As a former Mint user, I believe what @rauliruegas is saying is that the Mint may be using the Stevenson alignment, which creates a higher level of distortion than the Lofgren alignment and that Mint can make a new version for you using the Lofgren alignment if you so desire. I’m not sure about the P to S difference, but I know the alignment points are different with the different alignments. You can contact Mint to find out which alignment your particular version is using. There are several threads here discussing the differences between the 2 alignment methods. 

@rauliruegas

Please answer this question.

The Mint protractor is built specifically for this arm. Not another arm. This one.

If it traces the arc correctly, and offset is correct, and spindle hole size is correct, from my perspective this is correctly aligned.

Exactly WHAT is the issue. It was ordered specifically for this arm. Seller passed it along when i bought the arm. This is not a universal protractor, and not built for any Triplanar...it was ordered for this specific arm.

Write in plain speak what the problem is please. Please defer from using the long and convoluted answers you typically provide, be clear and concise. 

@neonknight  : Please do it a favor and don't insist in something where you have a clear misunderstood.

The designer protractor you own was in specific for a P2S distance to achieve minimum tracking distortions in the designer alignment choosed and that's why you:

" My overhang was off just the smidgiest of a smidge, and I made the slightest of corrections to the cantilever alignment. "

So, you have higher distortions down there in your cartridge/Sheu tonearm.

Löfgren equations inputs are the ones I pointed out and the output from those equations gives us: both null points, overhang, offset angle, linear offset and trackind distortion.

Where do you see P2S distance : nowhere.

You have to understand the Löfgreen equations. You are not the only audiophile with that similar kind of misuderstood, even M.fremer less than 8 years ago had that same misunderstood till he learned.

Sorry.

R.

@rauliruegas Well spindle to pivot is correct as the spindle is always at the same regardless of the table because the spindle is always at the center of the platter. So the size of the matter does not matter, whether it’s 10 inches, 12 inches, or something in between. Nor does it matter if it’s a Garrard 301 like the previous owner used or my Scheu or a Denon. Spindle to pivot is not going to change due to turntable manufacturer. A mm is a mm no matter what table it’s measured on. 

The cartridge traces the arc spot on from outer to inside position. The cartridge offset aligns the cantilever at both grids. What more do you want?

The null points are marked and I would have to reference them against the alignment types to see which it is. Or email Mint. I am not in a hurry to know since the cartridge tracks extremely well. Have an Audio Tekne MC-6310 set up at this time. Eventually I am going to move my Proteus to this arm when it’s time to send the Audio Tekne off for a new diamond. It has a bit over 500 hours as I recall.

No, it's not.

Please make a revise to the alignment Löfgreen equations where the only input parameters are: tonearm EL and most inner/outside distances. Those equations gives to you the overhang and offset angle but it does not calculates the P2S distance that's the EL minus overhang. Maybe I'm wrong and you are rigth.

R.

@rauliruegas Spindle to pivot is the same regardless of the table. I am at correct spindle to pivot so the protractor arc will be accurate. 

Dear @neonknight  : The MINT LP protractor is a dedicated one made it for an specific P2S distance and does not works for a different P2S distance.

Normally those protractors were made for Stevenson Alignment and under ask by customer for Löfgren A or B.

Regards and enjoy the MUSIC NOT DISTORTIONS,

R.

I could have managed it with magnifying goggles, but I decided to just stay with the basis protractor. 

@chayro For those cases I use my camera and snap a picture. It’s easier to get low and obtain an image you can then adjust from. With my Kiseki Blackheart 1st gen this is the only way I can accomplish this. I have a Proteus also that I do this with. 

I had a Mint for my Basis, but I found it too hard to see with my Transfiguration cart, with a small cantilever tucked under the body. It’s probably a lot easier with a Lyra or any cart with the cantilever out in front.