Somehow lost in the ensuing discussion is a point made in my original post, which is that I recently bought a Feickert protractor. It is from the use of it that my observations concerning Baerwald, Lofgren and Stevenson are derived. I did compare the VPI jig with the Mint LP some years ago when the Prime was first purchased. I felt that the Mint LP yielded the better results between the two, but admit that my conclusion could have been reached on the basis of expectation as much as on actual sound. With that said, the VPI jig is not a particularly precise device and it is almost impossible to obtain repeatable results using it. One of my curses is that I am an engineer, for better or for worse.
To complete this circle, I think properly executed any of the three alignments provides quite acceptable results. The difference between Baerwald and Lofgren is often extremely subtle or some times even indecipherable. Stevenson is different enough to be consistently noticeable and it can be better, worse, or neither depending on the position of the cartridge relative to the spindle and of course listener taste.
Something that has not been mentioned yet is that the whole alignment issue is really very vague. Rare is the perfectly flat record. Equally rare is the record with a hole placement that is perfectly centered. So we take our imperfect records and align them using one model or another and give a listen to side one. Then, between hammer blows to one another, we turn the record over and get ready for side two. Does anyone honestly think that the alignment on side two is identical to what it was on side one? And of course the alignment on neither side is perfect because of the imperfections of the records anyway. So alignment is all a set of approximations. The irrationality of all the fuss defies any semblance of logic.
To complete this circle, I think properly executed any of the three alignments provides quite acceptable results. The difference between Baerwald and Lofgren is often extremely subtle or some times even indecipherable. Stevenson is different enough to be consistently noticeable and it can be better, worse, or neither depending on the position of the cartridge relative to the spindle and of course listener taste.
Something that has not been mentioned yet is that the whole alignment issue is really very vague. Rare is the perfectly flat record. Equally rare is the record with a hole placement that is perfectly centered. So we take our imperfect records and align them using one model or another and give a listen to side one. Then, between hammer blows to one another, we turn the record over and get ready for side two. Does anyone honestly think that the alignment on side two is identical to what it was on side one? And of course the alignment on neither side is perfect because of the imperfections of the records anyway. So alignment is all a set of approximations. The irrationality of all the fuss defies any semblance of logic.
