Cartridge alignment with non slotted headshell?


With headshells that don’t allow for alignment, how is this a good choice? Some examples, Yamamoto HS-6, Ortofon lh10000, and many vintage ones I’ve seen. Without a slotted headshell I don’t see a way for rotating the cartridge for zenith adjustment. Also, it will be very difficult to get the the overhang 100%. This also goes for SPU’s in SPU headshells. One reason I think my SPU Royal N is a better choice than in SPU headshell. Am I missing something or are the people using these not caring about proper alignment?
sdrsdrsdr
I use Dr.Feickert protractor latest version to verify my FR-7fz on FR tonearms (same with SPU on this arm), there is no damage and cantilever is straight as it should be, the stylus tip is spot on if the PS distance is correct. Very easy.

When you're using tonearm and cartridge made by the same manufacturer there is no risk, they are designed for use together. 

EMT headshell integrated must be perfect on EMT tonearm too

No matter when it was designed today or 40 years ago, if same person design tonearm and cartridge this is a perfect match and you don't have to kill time with alignments. 

I remember SPU on my ex Schick "12 tonearm and since this tonearm was designed primarily for SPU i can't remember any problem in setup, the alignment method was Baerwald, but the sound is not better than my SPU on FR-64fx with Stevenson. Actually the latest combination was much more impressive and Ikeda designed his tonearms and cartridges for use with Stevenson alignment. 

Conventional cartridges and heashells with slots are easy to align using whatever method. It's a cure if you can twist a cartridge in the headshell if the cantilever is off-centered, so you can alight by the cantilever, not by the cartridge body as a result cartridge body will be twisted left or right. 

But a perfect cartridge is the one with perfect cantilever (not off-centered cantilever) it can be turned left or right if you want to use different geometry (not the one that a tonearm designer expected). Everyone is free to use whatever method, but i always use what tonearm designer suggested first.  



  
Dear @sdrsdrsdr  @bukanona : Not Ortofon, they only gaves what the people in Japan ask for the 95% of those Ortofon cartridges were sold in Japan in those times: only business. Problem was developed in Japan and that's why Stevenson made what he made it: a stupid alignment. No Stevenson was or is not a stupid gentleman, he did it only what those unknowledge level people were asking for.

Now, please tell me how can you change or make an azimuth correct set up with all those FR7 and other stupid kind of designs?

I was stupid enough to own several of those F7 including the 702. I know what I'm talking about.

Problem with SAEC is not its geometry. Who told you this or from where do you think learned it?. Totally wrong.

R.
Alignment isn't stupid one Rauliruegas, you are ignoring the fact that these cartridges was very low compliance hence tracking wasn't the superior one. So Stevenson was safe approach.
They were low compliance deliberately -  there was no shortage of soft rubber in old days :)

Yes you have some limitations with integrated designs although if it's used on makers tonearm - it's resonances usually are perfect ones. Users had an ability to get a working system. Tweaking in these old days like I am using Denon DL103 on ultralight tonearm and it's very OK for me as it's unipivot wasn't popular. 

I don't know your problems with SAEC but I have managed to get it work with low compliance cartridges so it's OK for me and it's perfect in tracking business so I am happy.