Tonearms without anti-skate, damage to records?

Dear @rauliruegas 

If you give me a $100 bill and I were to exclaim I am now $100 richer, that claim might be untrue because I didn’t notice you may had taken $200 from my back pocket while giving me this one hundred dollar bill.

I.E., One may not make any claims about the sonic benefits of anti-skating before first measuring the starting horizontal torque force AND the arm’s static frictional force. Starting horizontal torque forces and stiction can vary wildly by tonearm - even of the same brand and model (to wit: those who were at AXPONA and witnessed the problems Michael Fremer had with the tonearm suppled to him for his setup seminar.) This is why the WallySkater was developed: so we can REMOVE THE VARIABLES  from our assessment and apply the best AVERAGE compensatory torque force to keep the skating force from inhibiting the performance of the cartridge.

additionally, if your tonearm has significant horizontal torque native to it before applying AS, then you can be sure your cantilever alignment will be off as well

 I have generally found that a very tiny amount of AS, usually much less than textbook, suffices to alleviate the distortion, and that’s where I stop, but not at zero AS.

Spot on - from my personal conversations with both Brian & John Garrot ( orig Garrots Bros ) and AJ van den hul most cartridges come in with uneven wear from incorrectly applied antiskate ( or none ). This is from truckloads of cartridges sent for rebuild.

The top van den hul cartridges all now come with recommended antiskate levels specified - individually calibrated for each cartridge.

In the old days (80's onwards) most shops used to recommend anti skate up to 75% of the tracking force - this is too high.

Both Shure and Grado with extensive testing came up with recommended levels between 25-30% - much lower than most shops recommend.

I can easily hear changes to antiskate in my system.

Have an unusual tonearm, dynavector 507ii.  Anti skate is dialed in and adjusted easily with a test record. Subtle change in balance of left to right clarity. Basically set it and forget it after the cartridge is mounted. No numbers to quote vs vtf as it was never much of a concern.   

@rauliruegas , 50% is WAY too much. The proper amount of AS is 9 to 11% depending on the stylus. 9% for Spherical to 11% for line contact. The type of AS mechanism also is very important. Magnetic AS devices have no additional friction or parts that can resonate like strings. Forget about hearing, too many psychological factors. You can see the effect of AS when you lower the stylus onto the record. The cantilever should remain dead straight. With too much AS it will deflect to the right channel and will start mistracking on that side first. With too little AS the cantilever will deflect towards the left channel and will start mistracking on that side first.  Clearthinker should not perform this test as he obviously has a hard time seeing cantilever deflection. With the cantilever deflected the coils are no longer symmetrical in the magnetic gap something that Lyra designer Mr Carr strives to maintain. This can, at least theoretically, cause trouble with channel balance, crosstalk and as a result imaging. That sense of "spaciousness" that some audiophiles seem to like is the image falling apart. I can demonstrate this. Just like tube sound this is a distortion of reality and a matter of preference. I can not complain as I have my own preferences but IMHO that is going a step or two too far. 

@clearthinker , IMHO air bearing arms are a terrible way of going about tangential tracking. If this is important to you get a Schroder LT. No compressor or air current around the arm, Similar vertical and horizontal effective masses, much less change in VTA with record thickness and much better looking. Simplicity is always best and in this regard your arm is a nightmare.

Tapping the turntable's side is just a way of inciting the cartridges horizontal resonance. A lot of other things that do not involve action by you will incite it also. In the case of your arm that resonance is either too low or the vertical resonance is too high. This is a terrible thing to do to a cartridge as their vertical compliance is usually lower than their horizontal compliance. IMHO you should ditch the York and get a Schroder LT. It is not a total loss. You can mount the York on the wall and everyone will think it is some type of modern art :-)

@mijostyn  

Your comment about my vision is not required.  More sensitive people would regard it as insulting.

I don't need anti-skating any more but there sure has been a  load of rubbish written here.  The only known facts are:  you need it, the amount required varies as the arm moves across the record, = to tracking weight is loads too much, implementing it well is devilishly difficult without ruining the performance of the arm.

In the Aeroarm the tiny air current is expelled sideways along the arm beam, nowhere near the cartridge.

Your imagined evaluation of its resonances can only be fictional because you cannot know what they are.  Whatever they may be, they are always invisible and inaudible.

I already told you the Aeroarm deals with disc thickness differences by an easy arm height adjustment; you obviously have trouble reading (touché re your comment on my eysight)

You say simplicity is best.   Look at the bloody Schroder!  It is a poor over-complex clunky design.  It introduces an undesirable third freedom of movement that is likely to allow catastrophic arm pillar movement, entirely ruining the SQ (remember a few microns is bad).  The Aeroarm has only two freedoms of movement, as in a conventional pivoted arm.

I told you I did not require your advice on arm acquisition - again you have comprehension difficulties

We shall have to agree to differ.