Fidelity Research FR64s Headshell dilemma


Dear FR64S users can you help me please. I have an FR64S that i bought without a headshell. I have only just got round to getting it mounted. I did pivot to spindle distance of 231.5 (the alternative distance' I also have an armboard for 230.
I tried a Sony headshell that i had - it was 2mm short of correct alignment. So I bought a new Jelco headshell it was also too short. 
CAn you tell me what headshell does work to allow other cartridges to work. I'm just using a DL103 for alignment first as I fettle the rest of my front end.

thanks
lohanimal
@nandric PS has nothing to do with Baerwald, i can re-align any cartridge on conventional headshell with slots on FR tonearm without changing PS distance. I do NOT change PS when i re-align between Baerwald, Stevenson or Lofgren, it’s all about cartridge position in the headshell, not PS which must be fixed to 230mm on FR tonearm, same with Ikeda tonearm.

Anyone who use Dr.Feickert protractor can do that too, no need to change PS distance to change alignment method.

Stevenson case has been discussed million times on audiogon. Actually it was made for classical music you’re listening, not me.

I have many tonearms and use them according manufacturer recommendations, some of my tonearms such as Reed is always Baerwald, my Lustre GST 801 realigned for Baerwald without changing PS distance. My Denon DA-401 aligned with its own method and i like it. What else ? Technics EPA-100 mkII is very close to Stevenson like almost any Japanese tonearms and i can't detect any single problem with many cartridges.

Using FR-7 or SPU series on FR tonearm everything is just perfect as it is with manufacturer recommendations, PS according to the manual.






Dear chakster, your ''theory'' imply that one can chose spindle
to pivot distance as one like. But pivot to spindle distance determine
eff. length. By Stevenson 245 mm by Bearwald 246 mm. If one 
could chose eff. length as one please we would not need tangential
arms because all points on the record would have zero angular error.
Your Feickert can't correct all the errors manufacturer made. 
As I mentioned by Kessler&Pisha all 22 inspected tonearms have errors. 
By Stevenson 245 mm by Bearwald 246 mm

This is why a cartridge must be moved just a little bit forward in the headshell and a little bit turned to the side to align by cantilever using lines on the protractor.

As i said earlier there are many turntables with fixed tonearms, you can’t change PS distance, but you can change alignment method moving a cartridge only (in the headshell slots).
BTW there are 9'', 10'' and 12'' tonearms. My Kuzma is made
for 9'' while my SP-10 does not allow 9'' tonearm. For tonearms
with different length different spindle to pivot distance are
needed. Ergo: one can't  chose this distance as one please. 
If we do speak about scientific arguments we have to use science principles.
I can see hypothesis - geometry. A lot of very exact calculations from derived data. Although I was thought in the university that after hypothesis you have to do experiment which must be reproducible. I do see a lot of calculations. What I don't see actual measurement with test disc using dedicated setup like old days system produced by Bruel & kjaer. So I think that Japanese geometry is problem related to that we can speak a lot, make a lot figures that manufacturers are stupid. Although at the very end measurement is the easiest way to decide.