Review of the SMARTractor and SMARTstylus

Agree.  No regrets on spending the $700 for the SMARTractor.  However, the SMARTstylus was a total waste of money - its worth about $25 at most.  Tried to return, but store would not allow.

Agreed on both counts.
SMARTractor-fabulous and easy to use.
SMARTstylus- which I purchased because I loved the Tractor--a waste.

I have something similar. Put it on the side without the fingerlift to see if the headshell is level. I think the price on this is high. You can find similar items for less on-line

"Now for the SMARTstylus. This is just a piece of plexy with four sets of grid lines, vertical, horizontal and SRA, and VTA. It comes with it's own hand held magnifier. It looks well made. It is also close to worthless with an offset arm that has a permanent finger lift. "

The question I have about this is that if you don’t have an arm with a perfect dimple to set the arm to pivot distance, can you ever really achieve maximum accuracy just eyeballing the pivot? I have an old Dennison Soundtractor that also requires a pin placed on the arm pivot. Yes, of course you can eyeball it fairly close, but when you’re dealing with the distances we are talking about, even a mm or 2 could negate the accuracy of the alignment significantly. The same thing is true of many other gauges. The Basis gauge requires you align the tonearm with two lines on the plastic gauge. Can this ever be done with accuracy to 1 mm? So, IMO at least, unless you can be sure about the pivot point, perhaps only the Mint and its like can give you the highest level of accuracy. Of course to some or to many, including myself, I just try my best to get it right with the alignment gauge I have and leave it there. But anyone buying the Smartractor is obviously looking for the most accurate alignment humanly possible.

@chayro There is a little trick you can use on many arms. Take a fine point sharpi and place the tip on the point where you think the axis is. While holding it there move the tonearm over the spindle. If you are right on the mark you will have just a dot left. If you are off the Sharpi will draw a semicircle which will point to where the axis is. Now repeat the process till you are left with just a dot. 
Fortunately for me the Schroder arm has a dimple to aim at. 
In studying the various alignments it does not take much to be way off in either overhang or offset angle. Getting it right using a cardboard over hang gauge is a matter of luck and the weather. The DB Systems Protractor gets you a little closer but the SMARTractor gets you reliably as close as you can get. Eventually I am going to record files of the various alignments and one purposely way out to see what the sonic differences are.  

I bought a Smartractor a year or so ago, I already had a Feickert but the Smartractor was worth the extra.The pivot pin is a bit on the loose side in the plastic sleeve on mine and you have to use rather too much force on the screw to secure it at the required height, but that’s about my only criticism.

Thanks for the very timely warning about the value of the smart stylus. After spending an age setting VTA, VTF by ear, after roughing them in with a crude gauge and digital balance (I use a thin card feeler gauge for the magnet gap) I was quite tempted to order one for next time.

The question I have about this is that if you don’t have an arm with a perfect dimple to set the arm to pivot distance, can you ever really achieve maximum accuracy just eyeballing the pivot?

Good question. I've got an even better one: does it really even matter?  

Pivoted arms trace an arc that is never in alignment anyway, other than at the 2 null points. All the rest of the time tracking is off- and by a lot more than whatever error there may be from getting the overhang off by a millimeter or whatever.  

Nobody ever complains about hearing this. Only linear tracker people even seem to care about it- and even they never talk about having heard it on pivoted arms in the first place. So this cannot be much of a thing to worry about. 

My experience has always been that the two most sensitive and therefore critical things to get right are VTA and VTF. Both of which can only be initially set somewhere in the ballpark. Both of which can only be perfected by ear. Both of which do make a big difference. Especially VTA. Which, again, cannot be set by any tool, but only by ear.   

So what exactly is the point of spending money on fancy alignment jigs?

MC, If you make an error locating the pivot point while setting P2S distance, it is quite possible to end up with only one null point on the playing surface of a typical LP, or none at all.  Plus it could exacerbate tracking angle errors that occur at every other point on the LP surface.  If we care about tracking angle error, which is the whole point of set-up, that would not be good.  You make a practice of pooh-pooing anal behaviors of audiophiles, which is sometimes amusing but not always a valid criticism of "our" behavior.

MC, If you make an error locating the pivot point while setting P2S distance

Right. Except we were talking overhang, which is different. But covered anyway by specifically saying, "overhang off by a millimeter or whatever."

Clearly I’m talking overhang, not P2S. Equally clearly I’m talking about errors on the order of a single millimeter.

People who are truly concerned with tracking error, why are they even using a pivoted arm in the first place? Its a provocative question. Intended to provoke thought. Ultimately, who even cares if the tracking is so far off its only null at one point instead of two? Like I said, in the entire history of audiophiles no one ever said, "Gee it sounded really good there for a second, but now its all messed up. Wait! Now its great again and... its gone!" The two seconds where it sounds great being the two null points. Never happened. Not even once. Ever!

You make a practice of pooh-pooing anal behaviors of audiophiles, which is sometimes amusing but not always a valid criticism of "our" behavior.

So yeah, it is kinda funny, now that you mention it, spending $700 to mount a $200 cartridge, all to be sure you eliminated something that can’t ever be eliminated- and which no one ever hears anyway!

@millercarbon, You surprise me! King of the cable elevators does not care about tracking error? What about azimuth? Not important?
I set up someone else's $170 cartridge with my $700 alignment jig. I would think that a noble thing to do, no? As for SRA, that is best set up with a USB microscope at 92 degrees which with the new styli like the Gyger S, The replicant 100 and Soundsmith's OCL is very easy to see. 
You are entitled to mess around with your ears. I will mess around with my tools thank you.

millercarbon

My experience has always been that the two most sensitive and therefore critical things to get right are VTA and VTF ... Both of which do make a big difference. Especially VTA. Which, again, cannot be set by any tool, but only by ear.  

That depends. If your goal is to align the cartridge for minimum distortion, you can do that very precisely with a test record and an oscilloscope. If your goal is to set the cartridge for your preferred level of distortion then, yes, you can really only do that by ear.

@lewm , Hey lewm would you like to comment on cleeds statement above?

I have no doubt this is a great tool...I just have a hard time with the expense for someone who 1) has a single turntable with 2) a single tonearm and 3) only one cartridge...and doesn't frequently (i.e. years) swap components (like me!). Now, if only an enterprising AudioGon'er would start a SMARTractor rental side-hustle...

nrenter, funny you should mention that! My thought exactly. The box the SmarTractor comes in is quite sturdy. Dealers could rent it to customers easily with a deposit to cover loss or damage. I was thinking about doing just that. But, the problem is for people far away shipping charges plus the rental fee would still come to a sizable expense. If people are located near by and can come and pick it up that would be reasonable.
Otherwise, dealers should have it to set up customer's turntables to their favorite alignment. 

Personally, I’d gladly pay $100 + return shipping / insurance (in the US) for 7 days access. I’m pretty good with my MintLP + USB microscope, but I’d pay a Benjamin to satisfy a curiosity.

If I were to do it I would ask for a $600 deposit and would refund $525 when the device is returned without damage. You pay for return shipping.

So yeah, it is kinda funny, now that you mention it, spending $700 to mount a $200 cartridge, all to be sure you eliminated something that can’t ever be eliminated- and which no one ever hears anyway!

I agree

You certainly do hear it if the cartridge is off as you not only increase tracking angle error but you also can change skating forces. To hear it you need a system that images well.
For yuks just mount a cartridge way off, say forward and twisted 5 degrees. Listen to this to hear the effect then compare it to the cartridge set up correctly. That effect occurs in degrees. Dynamic range drops and the high end looses it's luster. The image becomes a little blurry. 
The real question is can you hear the difference between a cartridge that is right on and a linear tracker? It would be fun to set up a Schroder LT and make that comparison. 

Dear  @lewm  : ""  MC, If you make an error locating the pivot point while setting P2S distance, it is quite possible to end up with only one null point on the playing surface of a typical LP, or none at all. Plus it could exacerbate tracking angle errors that occur at every other point on the LP surface. ""

You are not only been extremely dramatical but " out of game ", you are wrong and your statement about the null points is totally false.

. Look, say that you need 250mm as P2S distance and you are using Löfgren A so you make the set up and with out knowing your P2S distance is off by 2mm ( + ) ( seems a " normal error " we could have. ). Now:

the null points for 250 are: 66mm and 120.89mm  and guess what: are the same for 252mm and for 300mm too because null points are determined by the most inner/outer groove distance and not because P2S or EL. This is true for Löfgren B or other kind of alignment.

We have to take in count that inner and outer most groove distances are 2 of the 3 inputs to make the alignment calculations, the other is EL.

Regards and enjoy the MUSIC NOT DISTORTIONS,
R.

Dear @cleeds : I think that any kind of option we take trying to make that kind of critical set up at the end always will be non-accurated due to the waves/irregularities in all the LP surface where VTA and VTF are in constant change and we can't avoid those changes.

Now, the other issue is that exist 120g. to 200g LPs and we want to listen MUSIC and not end trying the VTA/VTF on each LP be " accurated ".

If we want to listen MUSIC the best we can do is to set up on an average way/trade-oof and enjoy what we listen to because trying to be anal in that kind of set up makes no sense to me.

R.

@rauliruegas , Your last statement is almost right on. If you have a neutral balance arm VTF will not change over warps like VTA. Best solution is a vacuum table. 

If you mount the cartridge bad enough  you will only have one null point over the playing surface of the record. The other null point may be over the label or off the rim of the record. I think this is what Lewm meant. But, I am not sure if you can get both null points off the record. I'll have to think about that.

The change in VTA between a normal record and a 200 gm record is a fraction of a degree. If you increase the VTA by just an inaudible smidge on a 130 gm record you will cover all eventualities. You are right. It is nothing to get anal about (coming from the mouth of the guy that just bought a SmarTractor). 
One thing about the SmarTractor, it is a pretty thing to examine. Fastidious detail. 

Raul, you wrote in response to my post about the consequences of P2S error, "You are not only been extremely dramatical but ’out of game’, you are wrong and your statement about the null points is totally false."

First, thank you for your constant monitoring of my posts. It is good to know that if you do not criticize one of my posts, I must have been correct. However, I was surprised that your reaction to this last post was so vehement, since I consider you to be among the most orthodox, when it comes to tonearm/cartridge alignment. You have in the past been inclined to advocate absolute accuracy uber alles, and you are positively apoplectic with anger whenever anyone is bold enough to suggest that Stevenson alignment is an acceptable choice, even if one owns a plethora of LPs that have inner grooves that encroach the label.
Second, in this case, when you say that the null points don’t change whether the P2S is set at 252mm or even up to 300mm, are you running your numbers through one of the on-line calculators or your own calculator? Either way, that approach would ameliorate the problem I was trying to highlight. Such calculations would generally include changing headshell offset angle and/or overhang to keep the null points on the surface of the LP. Because my point was based on a situation where you err in P2S, but you don’t know you made the error, and you proceed to select the other mounting parameters on the assumption that you have correctly set P2S at 250mm. I am being intellectually lazy here, because I have not done the math myself, but it does seem you could by making that sort of error, end up with at least one of two null points entirely off the playing surface of an LP (maybe not both null points). Perhaps I did exaggerate or was "extremely dramatical" in saying you might end up losing both null points. I still could be wrong, but never am I "false". I was really responding to that old nihilist, MC, who takes pleasure in pretending he knows all the answers and that none of the answers are important.
So why did I make such a statement without doing the math, besides the fact that I hate trigonometry? I just guessed. The null points are points on the radius of a circle that has its center at the pivot point. As the center of that circle approaches the center of the circle that has its center at the spindle, then those null points get closer together on the surface of the LP, assuming you change NOTHING else. Conversely, as the centers of the two intersecting circles (P2S) get farther apart, the null points would get farther apart. As the null points get farther apart, eventually, at some P2S distance at least one and eventually both null points would "fall off" the playing surface of the LP. Probably no one of us would ever make such a large error in P2S so as to completely lose one or both null points, I grant you that.

Dear @lewm  : It's not exactly that I'm monitoring your posts, in reality you as me are really active in multiple/different issue threads that by coincidence are important for both of us. I always try to read carefully what you posted before give an opinion about and this time you was " out og game " and I'm just saying why and not only for you but for other members that maybe do not know how null points are fixed.

Not many years ago M.Fremer in his analog planet forum made the same mistake/misunderstood and I fixed that wrong information.

I'm still in favor of accuracy on the cartridge/tonearm/TT alignment set up even that if we are not so anal accurated is really dificult to be aware of it. Inaccuracies most be to large for we can detect it. 

The use of protractors impedes to lost null points.

"   Probably no one of us would ever make such a large error in P2S so as to completely lose one or both null points ..."

Exactly, no one. Stevenson alignment did it because on purpose he made that the inner null point been exactly at the most inner groove distance and that's why when a tonearm spec says that tracking error at inner groove is zero this means is using ST kind of alignment.

Accuracy in this important issue gives us calm/peace in our mind and this fact is important for us. Remember that  almost all in analog is full of trade-offs and alignments is a good example of it.

R.

Good, Are we buddies again?

I think both of you have a lot to add to the conversation let not lose hair over it. 

Think, most people do not know what P2S means. They do not mount their tonearms. They just follow the directions and jigs given to them with the turntable if they ever try to change the cartridge themselves. 
The SmarTractor would probably give them a headache.

By the way, Lofgren B is the way to go:-)

So we are playing with a P2S accuracy level of at least 0.38mm. to make the set up and with the same difference in the overhang. We have two points where we always are off because that kind of accuracy just we can’t achieve in this mechanical set up.

If you cant achieve P2S accuracy less than .38mm then you shouldn’t be opining on optimum geometry.

For example, I just installed VTA on the fly on my Naim Aro using a thumbwheel with standard M4 "coarse" thread. A full turn shifts the arm 0.7mm - in other words a 1/4 turn on the thumbwheel moves the arm 0.175mm - less than half of your claim. With a clock dial for reference I can get the adjustment down to 1/12 of 0.7mm which is 0.058mm accuracy. This is repeatable and measurable.

If I used a finer machine thread on the thumbwheel I could improve this level of accuracy to below 0.058mm.

I would suggest forget about making your own arm if you cant figure this out.

After putting my tools away, I'll "set the cartridge for [my] preferred level of distortion ... by ear" every time.

nice work IMO: http://www.vacuumstate.com/fileupload/GuruSetUp.pdf

Dear @mijostyn : " most people do not know what P2S means. "

As a fact and even that in this forum some of us were discussing in deep the tonearm/cartridge whole alignment set up still today exist a misunderstood in some alignment issues. It's easy to have some kind of misunderstood about.

The alignment per sé is an " open " scenario to have even personal and dedicated alignment only for our tonearms.

The foundation for the alignment calculations are 3 parameters ( inputs to the Löfgren equations. ): tonearm effective length and most inner and outer groove distances.

So we can manipulate/change one or even those 3 parameters and we " discover " our personal alignment.
Everything depends on what could be our specific targets, where we want the tracking distortions " lives " and its levels in favor of lowering some way even if we can detect it the changes.

SAT tonearm designer is what he did it changing the most inner groove distance parameter and that's why the tonearm comes with a dedicated/special protractor because null points are not the Löfgren standard.
Changes in EL works too if the headshell slots permit to do it.

Then we can choose for different parameters and choose between Löfgren A or B, each one with its own in theory trade-offs.

"" By the way, Lofgren B is the way to go:-) ""

But choosing between Löfgren A or B it's only an illusion that works only in theory/c/paper.

Example: EL 300mm. overhang difference between both alignments is only 0.38mm ( longer the B alignment. ) and if EL is 256mm. that difference goes to 0..45mm. The offset angle is the same in both kind of alignments.

So we are playing with a P2S accuracy level of at least 0.38mm. to make the set up and with the same difference in the overhang. We have two points where we always are off.

So the best we can " wait " for is to be around the alignment and with higher distortions levels that what comes through calculations and this is the true " game " we are platying and discussing.

R.

@rauliruegas  But Raul, my meager brain thinks Lofgren B sounds better overall. Maybe it is just because I set it with the SmarTractor. Your not going to argue with my ears are you? That would call for an extreme emotional discharge and even some name calling.

Dear @mijostyn : By coincidence I agree with you because for so many years I can't remember it is the one I use it.

Now, the times I switched to Löfgren A can I in true be aware of critical differences as could be at inner grooves?, I can't tell you for sure buyt my mind is ok with B, I think accustom to. Average distortion levels between both kind of alignments is almost the same.

Dover posted what posted because always reads my posts word by word looking how to hit me but almost never to contribute to the thread main subjects.
Just imagine whom is he when is happy with that truly unstable ( all over the LP surface ) tonearm. Such is life.

Alignment always is important but where we graded against TT speed short time stability/accurate or against tonearm dynamic stability or other critical issues. To every where we turn over the face we found out that we have to deal with trade-offs and as a fact our room/system whole quality level performance depends in specific how good we choosed each one of all those trade-offs over the room/system chain.

It's not only with the analog alternative but with digital too.

R.

@boothroyd  resume what I posted in last statements:

"  I'll "set the cartridge for [my] preferred level of distortion "

and some way or the other is almost the same we do with our system because all those room/system trade-offs I'm talking about talks about developed distortion levels.

R.

Only my older classical records venture into the territory where Lofgren B starts seriously losing out to A. I'll have to play some of those older records to see if I can here it. Throughout the middle of the record B is superior. A is superior over the outer 1/3rd but this is where groove speeds are highest and the distortion lowest. Over the entire side I get the impression that B is better but I can not say at this time that it is not psychological. 
I do things that at least have a plausible reason for working. Some things make obvious improvements there is no arguing with. The last such change in my system was getting the JC 1's. I got the magic of my long gone Krell KMA 100's and more. The lesson being you just do not put any old amp on ESLs. Go with the proven performers. If I think I hear an improvement but I'm not totally sure than I always discount it as psychological. If whatever has a plausible benefit than I am happy with it. An example would be shielded power cords. If whatever has marketing that is obviously contrived and a form that does not follow any function what so ever I am perfectly fine putting it in the scam category and telling others what I think of it. Such is the Hallograph. Watch, they will not be around long. Then the same clowns will come up with something else. This is exactly what the pharmaceutical industry does.