@wlutke I get what you are saying, and agree that the arc should be flatter for a larger P2S (or a longer effective length). However, if the null points are the same for both configurations, perhaps this doesn't matter. By definition, the null points are the two points where the cantilever is tangent to the record groove, and this is not effected by the "curvedness" (or flatness) of the arc. I think the difference is that a flatter arc will create less error at locations away from the null points. That is why a 12" tonearm is preferred over a 10" tonearm.
I found a good turntable geometry calculator on this website. This calculator shows that for any given P2S, the zero radii are the same. What changes is the effective length and offset angle required to meet the null point requirements. For example, calculating the zero radii for a 250mm and 290mm P2S, I get the same zero radii (63.32, 119.63) with the following differences:
P2S 250 290
Eff. Length 264.79 302.84
Off. Angle 20.25 17.61
I guess the cool thing about my tonearm is that the offset angle is adjustable, because the headshell is attached at only one point and can be rotated. Thus, if I am able to find a P2S that works for the effective length of the tonearm, I can adjust the offset angle accordingly. Early indications suggest that I can accomplish that with the MINTLP - but I haven't confirmed that yet.
Where I get confused is applying the protractors. My MINT and TTB protractors both have the same zero radii (67 & 121 mm) which differ slightly from those calculated above (don't know why, maybe different calculation method). But they are clearly offset from one another in a different manner. So if I could lay them on top of one another, the two null points would not line up, even though they use the same zero radii. That probably reflects the difference in P2S, and the TTB must have some assumed value of P2S. The problem is that both protractor manuals state that you should fix the protractor - so that the differing offset makes it either possible or impossible to match the two null points on the protractor. If the only requirement is that at each zero radius the cantilever is tangent with the grooves, couldn't I simply rotate the protractor and use the lines on the mirror to make sure that the angle is correct?
I found a good turntable geometry calculator on this website. This calculator shows that for any given P2S, the zero radii are the same. What changes is the effective length and offset angle required to meet the null point requirements. For example, calculating the zero radii for a 250mm and 290mm P2S, I get the same zero radii (63.32, 119.63) with the following differences:
P2S 250 290
Eff. Length 264.79 302.84
Off. Angle 20.25 17.61
I guess the cool thing about my tonearm is that the offset angle is adjustable, because the headshell is attached at only one point and can be rotated. Thus, if I am able to find a P2S that works for the effective length of the tonearm, I can adjust the offset angle accordingly. Early indications suggest that I can accomplish that with the MINTLP - but I haven't confirmed that yet.
Where I get confused is applying the protractors. My MINT and TTB protractors both have the same zero radii (67 & 121 mm) which differ slightly from those calculated above (don't know why, maybe different calculation method). But they are clearly offset from one another in a different manner. So if I could lay them on top of one another, the two null points would not line up, even though they use the same zero radii. That probably reflects the difference in P2S, and the TTB must have some assumed value of P2S. The problem is that both protractor manuals state that you should fix the protractor - so that the differing offset makes it either possible or impossible to match the two null points on the protractor. If the only requirement is that at each zero radius the cantilever is tangent with the grooves, couldn't I simply rotate the protractor and use the lines on the mirror to make sure that the angle is correct?