My one experience is with the Dynavector DV505, which is unique, as you know, in having two independent pivots, one for horizontal and one for vertical motion of the arm wand. The DV505 was designed for the DV alignment, which is very close to Stevenson, if not identical. When I aligned the very same cartridge by Stevenson and then by Baerwald, in the DV505, I actually heard gross distortion with the latter alignment that was ameliorated by going back to Stevenson. Please notice that I DON'T claim that this would be a general observation applicable to conventional pivoted tonearms. I have written about this experience many times already.
My hypothesis to explain my observation is that twisting the cartridge with respect to the long axis of the headshell, as one must do in order to achieve Baerwald in any tonearm designed for Stevenson, was placing some aberrant stresses on the cantilever (novel force vectors would be created) that might be more severe, and therefore more audible, with the DV tonearms than with conventional ones, because of the very short pivot to stylus distance with respect to vertical motion. Persons who own other vintage Japanese tonearms might want to consider this issue, but I have no idea whether the problem would occur with those that pivot conventionally at a single point in both planes. Further, I never claimed that inner groove distortion was either increased or decreased; I merely stated that for LPs with musical information close to the label, Stevenson makes some sense to try, especially if your tonearm was designed for Stevenson. In other words, I do not dismiss Stevenson a priori, as you advise.
Actually, I really don't give a hoot what anyone else does; I'm just putting out my experience, just as you are doing. With my modern tonearms, I do use Baerwald, regardless of the LP. But just because you have written something over and over again does not mean that I have to accept it.
My hypothesis to explain my observation is that twisting the cartridge with respect to the long axis of the headshell, as one must do in order to achieve Baerwald in any tonearm designed for Stevenson, was placing some aberrant stresses on the cantilever (novel force vectors would be created) that might be more severe, and therefore more audible, with the DV tonearms than with conventional ones, because of the very short pivot to stylus distance with respect to vertical motion. Persons who own other vintage Japanese tonearms might want to consider this issue, but I have no idea whether the problem would occur with those that pivot conventionally at a single point in both planes. Further, I never claimed that inner groove distortion was either increased or decreased; I merely stated that for LPs with musical information close to the label, Stevenson makes some sense to try, especially if your tonearm was designed for Stevenson. In other words, I do not dismiss Stevenson a priori, as you advise.
Actually, I really don't give a hoot what anyone else does; I'm just putting out my experience, just as you are doing. With my modern tonearms, I do use Baerwald, regardless of the LP. But just because you have written something over and over again does not mean that I have to accept it.
