A new way of adjusting anti skate!

Nah! But MC, your avatar Einstein said something to the effect that one should first choose the simplest hypothesis to explain an observation, but not one that is “too simple”. We both agree that there is a skating force and that we need a little anti-skate. It would be too simple to ignore it. I just refuse to be bothered to measure it.

I personally set up my arm using the AJ Conti method of the "moving more slowly towards the label" method.  But I find it somewhat odd that so many of you, who I would wager have a minimum of 5-10k+ invested in an analog rig, draw the line at this $250 accessory.  Especially when it actually works and seems easy enough to use.  How many people here bought that 1/4 oz of contact fluid for $300?  It's supposedly very good. 

The OP has a good way of setting anti skate. I will try the OP method in the coming days. Suggest everyone try it. You have nothing to lose and maybe you can get some improvement.

 I agree with “chayro” some people won’t purchase a $250+ tool , but if you are spending $5K+ on a cartridge and do your own setup, these type of tools are worth it.

Have a great holiday season.

joe nies

Cant believe all the negative Nancy's on this thread.

The OP provided an interesting methodology to measure antiskate force.

The methodology can be used for whatever you believe antiskate should be 10%, 20% or whatever. 

Van den hul specifies a recommended antiskate value for his cartridges.

Furthermore one of the most positive aspects of this methodology is that you can use it to verify how accurate your antiskate mechanism is on your tonearm.

From my discussions years ago with the like of Van Den Hul and John Garrott of the Garrott Bros, uneven stylus wear from incorrect level of antiskate is a common problem. 

Any suggestions on how to get it right should be a positive.

I was re-reading this thread, just because I have recently been wrestling with setting AS for a very low VTF, recommended 1.0g, for my B&O MMC1. Mounted on my Triplanar. To Mijostyn: I would like to measure AS by your method, but just from reading your description of the method in the OP, I am not sure how you did it. What does it mean to set the fingerlift "in the crosshairs"? My VTF gauge has no crosshairs; nor does it have any other sort of optical sights. Can you post some photos?  Right now I am using two nuts from my tool stash, each weighing about 1g, tucked up as close as possible against the vertical arm of the AS mechanism on the TP.  The weight that comes with the TP weighs 5g, and that seemed to be too much AS. (We are talking about AS weights mounted near the pivot; as Mijo rightly pointed out, what counts is the AS force at the stylus tip, which is near to the fingerlift on the headshell.)

Also, in November, 2020, Crustycoot wrote: "Isn’t the aim of anti-skate to prevent the mistracking that would occur if unequal groove-wall contact was applied during highly modulated passages? Isn’t this solvable by a small increase in downforce such that the “weak side” never fell below the trackability needed to negotiate the passage? That was the opinion of Edgar Vilchur of ARXA fame."

Vilchur may belong on any Mount Rushmore of historically important audio personages, but if he said what CC says he said, he was very wrong and probably trying to wiggle around why the tonearm on the ARXA has no antiskate adjustment. The root cause of the skating force is friction between the stylus tip and the groove. That force is most dependent upon VTF, given that in all cases the stylus is diamond and the groove is vinyl. (The materials determine the coefficient of friction which is also in the equation for friction.) The more VTF, the more friction, the greater the skating force. Any attempt to ameliorate the skating force effect by increasing VTF would only make the problem worse. So I hope no one out there took Crusty’s (or Vilchur’s) advice seriously.