What about Uni Din?


I finally broke down and purchased a Smart Tractor. The owner of that company created another cartridge alignment he calls Uni Din. He makes a very reasonable argument for favoring the inside third of records particularly those cut down close to the label. This is at the expense of the outer grooves. But the outer grooves are traveling three times faster thus a given tracking error has 1/3rd the significance in terms of distortion. 
Has anyone here tried this alignment? If so how did you like it? I will certainly give it a spin as reorienting the cartridge in a Schroder arm is as easy as it gets. 
mijostyn

Showing 5 responses by rauliruegas

Dear @syntax : I know you are not a stupid audiophile or an audio rookie.

Any gentleman as you ( including me. ) can’t really be aware of real/true differences in between different kind of alignments but with Steveson one and we can’t do it because the distortion level changes in between groove after groove are really tiny to detect it and the sound is continuous and you can’t detect those changes even at the first null point or even at the inner null point.

So what are you talking about on that alignment or any otehr than Stevenson?, in Stevenson there is a chance you can do it because is a extreme kind of alignment where Stevenson in porpose puts the inner null point exactly at the inner most groove on IEC standard.

Now and just an example if you take the alignment that you are talking about and with the same tonearm and cartridge change it for Löfgren A or B with out changing the tonearm EL the differences if any that you could listen will be thank’s to the differences in the accuracy of each alingment changes you do but not because the alignment it self.

Do you think that when you change between two alignments where you need to change the P2S distance and the cartridge overhang and off-set angle the accuracy on those two alignments were perfect?.
You are rigth, can’t be perfect and exactly same " perfection " on both different alignments.

So if we can’t be aware of differences between alignments other than with Stevenson why are we " figthing " and discussing in to many threads over the internet audio forums?, easy: to have our mind in calm.

So we choose what we think is the best alignment compromise for our needs and that’s all.

There is no way, no matters what, that our alignments ( any ) can be do it with Zero error: NO WAY.

Differences we are hearing in the best cases are because that kind of errors when we made it the alignments and where those errors can’t be avoided and only we can put at minimum but does not exist two similar different alignments ( that we did it. ) with errors at minimum in exactly same way.

Unfortunatelly the alignment is not a " virtual " one kind. So what you are interpreting in your alignment is only a true " illusion " and nothing more. Even using the same kind of alignment we choosed if we made 2-3 alignment set-up ( meaning unmount and mount again the cartridge and the tonearm too. ) at different " times " at each time you can be sure that you will listen " differences " even if you know that can’t been differences because is the same kind of alignment.

R.
Dear @lewm  : "  They are two different phenomena.. ", agree.

Löfgren A ( example. ) distortion at 139mm is 0.19% and at 75 is 0.42%.

R.
Dear @jtimothya @solypsa : First than all to make compartisons between different alignments the first premise to be stricted unchangeable is the tonearm effective length, it’s not the same if we make the comparisons with the same P2S distance because the effective length changes.

In the other side and only as an example:

if we take Löfgren A ( could be B too. ) the difference in tracking distortion between the groove at 69mm and 68mm is : 0.06% .

So, both of you are saying that can be aware of that difference between two concecutive inner grooves?

No one can detect even 0.8% and that tracking distortion is going up or down at each single groove: how can any one be aware when the changes are so small and continuous? and if any one can detect it then something wrong with the alignment or the room/system.

All alignments are a compromise and Löfgren A and B perhaps have the best compromise certainly Stevenson and the mijostyn alignment is talking about  are not the best compromises.

R.
Dear @mijostyn : I'm not talking of null points, this is what I posted that is one of the input values to make alignment calculations:

"  alignment you are talking about choosed the most inner groove distance around 54mm. ""

R.
Dear @mijostyn : Obviously that you can try it. Now, how many LP’s you own and listen often to them with inner grooves at 64mm. and beyond?

As with Stevenson all that marketing is only that: bs. for new comers or very low knowldge level audiophiles that do not understand perfectly how " things are "/overall alignments issue. And as Stevenson that alignment is only of number manipulations at the most inner groove data need it for the calculations, SAT made it the same but instead to goes at lower than 60.3mm ( IEC ) gone a little higher than this number. The alignment you are talking about choosed the most inner groove distance around 54mm. Now tell me how many LPs you own with innergrooves at 54mm.

As I said you can try it, why not?

R.