I use and like SAEC SS-300 mat, but never tried those tonearms, they are very very popular here, but it's knife-edge bearing design. Some people like them, i am not interested in SAEC tonearms, too many great tonearms available.
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
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
- ...
- 145 posts total
they disappeared not due to geometry but due to CD era. https://www.analogplanet.com/content/saec-again-producing-classic-double-knife-edge-bearing-tone-arm I have experimented with my 308SX they weird geometry works better that Stevenson. I have tried to move it to Stevenson although it tracks worse than with SAEC weird one, I am not expert like Raul but I really like test disks :) |
Dear @bukanona : please correct me if I’m wrong. I just finished to analize what SAEC did it for the cartridge/tonearm alignment on each of his models and I took as an example your 308SX. Thank’s that you brought out here the SAEC tonearm alignments finally I think I understand what they did it, at least with your model and my 8000 one. For me is an was not so easy to discern this unique tonearm alignment data " novelty "/manipulation and maybe it’s the same way for almost all gentlemans here and elsewhere. Now what they did it, that seems to me with out be totally sure ( only SAEC people of those times know about. ), with your 308SX is in the next link. I took as EL 240mm, overhang 5mm and offset angle 12° that are SAEC specs, I hope is rigth. Ok. they took both: must inner groove radio and must outer groove radius totally out of the LP recorded surface. Both around 50mm ( a little lower than that but the calculator does not permits lower " number ". ) that using the vinylengine calculator gives as result those parameters values ( almost there. ): https://www.vinylengine.com/tonearm_alignment_calculator_pro.php?arm1=Arm+1&l1=el&a1lv=240&a1=la&oh1v=&oa1v=&arm2=Lofgren+A&l2=el&a2lv=240&a2=la&oh2v=&oa2v=&arm3=Lofgren+B&l3=el&a3lv=240&a3=lb&oh3v=&oa3v=&arm4=Stevenson&l4=el&a4lv=240&a4=st&oh4v=&oa4v=&rs=12&rsv=&og=cus&ogv=50.001&ig=cus&igv=50&cal=y&submit=calculate that calculator was not made it to that kind of " novelty " so we can’t have the diagrams/graphics ( looks like tracking distortion/error gone very high .) about but we almost there. Anyway, a pain in the ass to align a cartridge with the SAEC specs. As I told you what I use it in the 506-30 and 407-23 was Löfgren and this is what you can do too because for me wroks just fine and with no troble of any way. Regards and enjoy the MUSIC NOT DISTORTIONS, R. |
Using other calculator it confirms that SAEC made it a " deep " manipulation with the must inner/outer groove radius. In this other calculator I used 37.4mm and 66.9mm and the off set angle and overhang coincide with SAEC specs. So manipulations/combinations of both equations groove radius will change everything and we can be " everywhere " doing that. Go figure. R. |
- 145 posts total