Curved and Straight Tonearms

Dear @lewm : In all japanese vintage tonearms and even today the set up specifications are jus totally non-accurated. Dynavector is a clear example on that when states 15mm. for overhang and even that is near Stevenson A calculations is out of it as is too the offset angle stated by them and it’s does not matters if we choose IEC or DIN for the calculations.

Obviously that these kind of facts tell us that if we are following the tonearm manufacturer set up specs then we are totally wrong and what we have are higher distortion levels.
Of course that’s not our fault to follow the manufacturer instructions. We assume that what they tell us is what we have to do.

I already check all the information from the manufacturers on all the japanese vintage tonearms and no one is accurate about.

All those facts along the " terrible " misunderstood on the subject by that reviewer ( MF. ) confirm that " people " ( including audiophiles. ) do not cares seriously about and maybe they did not because they do not understand the 1938 Löfgren great mathematics studies, its premises and critical importance.

Again, accuracy is the name of the game in TT/tonearm/cartridge alignment with any kind of tonearm design.

Regards and enjoy the MUSIC NOT DISTORTIONS,
R.


lewm, I don’t know if you remeber that I told you that for my 505 set up I used Löfgren alignment with better results than whit the Dyna set up specs. Well, there are very good facts/reasons about.

All those facts can tel us that maybe don’t exist two analog rig set up that gives same distortion levels using same TT/tonearm/cartridge with the same alignment type due to those inaccuracies on the overall set up. Where differences in set up means different quality performance levels.

Raul, I respect your opinion, but I don't necessarily do everything as you would do it.  For my 505, I do not use the Dyna spec; I use Stevenson.  Stevenson allows the cartridge body to be parallel to the long axis of the headshell and seems to sound fine.  Unlike yourself and apparently some others, I do not sit around fretting about tonearm alignment once the set-up is completed.  I just listen.  Some few years ago, I wrote on this forum that when I set up the 505 according to Lofgren/Baerwald, and as you must know too, the cartridge cannot be aligned with the long axis of the headshell (it must be twisted toward the spindle with respect to the headshell axis), and I heard some distortion that was troubling.  When I then re-aligned with Stevenson, to me it sounds better and the distortion I heard is now absent.  One must be careful about assigning cause and effect, but there was certainly a correlation between alignment and an audible distortion, in my case, in my system, to my ears.  I don't know why Clearthink is prone to hysteria, either.

Raul, After posting, I saw your earlier question to me, up the thread.  The chosen headshell offset angle and the suggested P2S distance do give a clue as to the intention of the designer regarding alignment geometry.  If you are willing to twist the cartridge (in the horizontal plane) in the headshell, then you can achieve almost any geometry with any tonearm, I agree.

Dear @lewm : What you like it is not the main subject here, as I pointed out before. 

In the other side I already posted all the facts around Stevenson A alignment. Useless to repeat again.

Higher quality performance levels mainly depends to mantain the audio system distortions ( every kind. ) at minimum. Stevenson A preclude to achieve that critical target but is up to you.

Regards and enjoy the MUSIC NOT DISTORTIONS,
R.

@lewm : " " I tend to use whatever alignment was in the mind of the person who designed that particular tonearm.. "

that is what you posted here but in your latest post you said:

" For my 505, I do not use the Dyna spec; ""

the 505 designer gaves the set up specs but you are using diferent set up parameters ? ? ! ! ?

R.

Btw, hysteria?, not really only very high ignorance and frustration levels. That's all.