Time to choose: Baerwald, Lofgren, Stevenson ?
@thom_mackris I’ve tried Stevenson for victor ua-7045 on luxman pd444 and it sounds great (no matter LPs or 45s). First cartridge was AT-ML170 OFC mounted at AT technihard shell (at-lh13). The little twist is hardly visible, but i’ve done so to set it up in dead accuracy by Dr.Feickert. Now i have Victor X1 with Grace HS-6 headshell on the same arm. I use Baerwald, but i sill have to twist the cartridge in headshell even more. I think Victor UA-7045 was designed with Stevenson alignment in mind, correct me if i’m wrond. My Reed 3p was designed with Baerwald alignment in mind and this is what i use with Feickert. With Pioneer PC-1000 mk2 the sound is fantastic. I love this cartridge even more now. Long before i get Dr.Feickert i used protractor from Hi-Fi News Analogue Test LP (they call it Linear Offset technique.) It’s Baerwald and works fine for "12 inch tonearms, there are no errors when i use both now to doubleckeck the accuracy of the old one compared to new. |
Agree with Lew. On an arm designed for Stevenson (or close), to get a Loefgren A or B requires moving the cart forward and increasing offset angle. I've done this numerous times for people who wanted a Baerwald alignment. Often such an alignment wasn't possible because the headshell slots weren't long enough. If the mounting distance is fixed, these alignments require greater overhang and increased effective length. You can use an intermediate alignment if desired, in between Stevenson and Baerwald. Contrary to popular belief, such an alignment is legitimate. Chakster has a good point. If the offset angle is in agreement with the arm design, there might be less torsional force on the cantilever. This might be especially true in arms with removable headshells. fleib |
Interesting the debate over the 3 main alignment curves, how most can detect differences in tracking errors depending where on the lp one is tracking and everyone has a favourite alignment. Mine is Stevenson as it sounds better/cleaner than the other two on the last 3rd or any lp. I recently got a Thales Simplicty II tonearm and the maximun tracking error is 0.0006. far less than any of the 3 other alignment’s. You can hear its superiority, more than any other tonearm I have heard, you can’t tell where on the record the stylus is, the music is clear and just sounds right. So far there is no downside in my listening. We have Kuzma, Trans-Fi , Ckearaudio and Bergmann that have traditional linear tracking - some say with drawbacks. We now have pivoted tangential tracking with Thales and Schroder. Tangetial tracking is what most audiophiles should be aspiring to right? You no longer have to worry about what alignment sounds the best compromise. |
downunder Tangetial tracking is what most audiophiles should be aspiring to right?Not necessarily. Tangential trackers introduce their own set of problems including higher friction and noisy fiddly air pumps, depending on the arm, of course. Other so-called tangential trackers rely on a servo to maintain tangency, so there is periodic deviation from tangency as the servo "hunts" to correct it. Some audiophiles consider most linear trackers to be a cure worse than the disease. |
