Here is my advice: Find out what geometry your tonearm was built for. (Headshell offset angle will vary according to the length of the tonearm and the geometry assumed by its designer.) Then use THAT geometry for THAT tonearm. Here is why: In a few of my own experiments, I found that using a geometry not envisioned by the tonearm design, as you might expect, results in a need to "twist" the cartridge with respect to the long axis of the headshell; the cartridge will not line up perfectly with the headshell, in other words, if viewed from above looking down. Listening tests suggested that this per se seemed to be a "bad thing". I can think of theoretical reasons why this might be so, but I have no proof. However, to avoid that source of distortion, I say again, use the geometry for which the tonearm was designed. Many vintage Japanese tonearms were designed either for a geometry unique to that company (e.g., SAEC, I think) or for Stevenson (e.g., Dynavector and probably your Lustre and Victor tonearms). It's something like LP equalization; back in the "old days" there was no gold standard, and one company often did equalization differently from another. Nowadays, RIAA and Baerwald seem to rule.
Time to choose: Baerwald, Lofgren, Stevenson ?
I’ve managed Dr.Feickert Analog Protractor for a decent price (build quality is superb, such a great tool).
Time to play with Baerwald, Lofgren, Stevenson alignments on my Luxman PD444.
Need advice from experienced used of the following arms:
Lustre GST 801
Victor UA-7045
Luxman TA-1
Reed 3P "12
Schick "12
Baerwald, Lofgren, Stevenson ? What do you like the most for these arms?
Manufacturers recommend Baerwald mostly.
Dedicated "7 inch vinyl playback deserve Stevenson alternative, maybe?
Since it's a smaller format than normal "12 or "10 inch vinyl, it's like playin the last track's according to position of grooves on '7 inch (45 rpm) singles. RCA invented this format, i wonder which alignment did they used for radio broadcast studios.
Thanks
Time to play with Baerwald, Lofgren, Stevenson alignments on my Luxman PD444.
Need advice from experienced used of the following arms:
Lustre GST 801
Victor UA-7045
Luxman TA-1
Reed 3P "12
Schick "12
Baerwald, Lofgren, Stevenson ? What do you like the most for these arms?
Manufacturers recommend Baerwald mostly.
Dedicated "7 inch vinyl playback deserve Stevenson alternative, maybe?
Since it's a smaller format than normal "12 or "10 inch vinyl, it's like playin the last track's according to position of grooves on '7 inch (45 rpm) singles. RCA invented this format, i wonder which alignment did they used for radio broadcast studios.
Thanks
- ...
- 104 posts total
By Yip , the owner of the Mint Arc protractor ,one can order specific tractor calculated for the owners TT and tonearm. Yip has the data of the most tonearms but needs the (exact) dimensions of the spindle in addition. Those are not of the same dimensions. The price is about $110 . The address: mintlp.com/best I own three Mint protractors two of which are made for my Kuzma Stabi Reference , Reed 3 P and Triplanar VII. The third for my SP- 10, Mk2 and FR-64 s . |
Dear @astro58go: Here you can understand what you can do on your VPI tonearm: http://www.vinylengine.com/vpi-tonearm-geometry.shtml Regards and enjoy the music, R. |
A general rule? OK, I’ll admit that can be dangerous, but how about this? If you need to set up for 7" records (nandric, those large center hole 45s) or mainly symphonic classical, then Stevenson may be your best alignment. Otherwise, play other LPs (33 or 45 should make no difference) set up with the more common Lofgren/Baerwald. Of course Lew’s recommendation to follow your arm design may overrule this. But then that may also guide you as to which type arm to select based on the records you intend to play. I use a Dennesen Soundtracktor for alignment and that was designed to conform with Baerwald. I still have nearly 100 45s from high school but those are hardly ever played. And I enjoy many symphonies but they are a smaller percentage of my overall listening. So I’ve never felt the need to try the Stevenson. Now, the truly anal may choose to have multiple playback systems, each specifically set up to play a particular type of record. ;^) |
Hi pryso, If you mean with ''general rule'' any standards by cart or tonearm producers then , as J. Carr stated, there are no such rules. The arguments for Stevenson are rediculous as put forward by chakster. Consider my records collection of +/- 3000 pieces. I would need to check them all in regards to the distance of the inner grooves to the spindle as well regarding the question if the crescendos are in those grooves. As I mentioned in my post the assumption is that those inner grooves are the most difficult for the arm and the stylus. So if the tracking error of the arm is at its minimum on this part of the record then this means ''zero'' point on the tractor. Those zero points are elsewhere by Lofgren/ Bearwald. This is in accordance with their intention: the least possible tracking error on the whole recod radius. Those are not ''small diferences'' but different approach of the tonearm geometry. |
- 104 posts total