Is extremely accurate "VTA" adjustment necessary?


Here's a very interesting article by Geoff Husband of TNT on the importance (or better relative unimportance) of overly accurate VTA adjustment.

Exposing the VTA myth?

A short quote form the article:

Quote - "VTA, or Vertical Tracking Angle is one of those topics that divides opinion...That 'VTA' matters is indisputable, but the purpose of this article is to examine the validity of the claims made for the relative importance of VTA...SRA/VTA matters of course, but in the real world not THAT much, rigidity, simplicity and lateral alignment are all more important"

What are your thought and comments on this issue?
restock
A lot will depend on the contour or your stylus - how sensitive it is to groove tracing - and how resolving your system is. Some cartridges (and some systems) simply are not that sensitive to modest VTA changes. Others are highly sensitive and spending the time to make those adjustments can be incrediby impactful on the sonic quality of the playback. In my system, I can make seemingly minute changes (as in thousandths of an inch) and it can make all the difference on certain (but not all) LPs. On a previous turntable with different cartridge, small changed were not so impactful for me. Today they are (and my system today is also much more resolving and musically satisfying, I would not willingly go back).

See my post from just a month ago:
http://forum.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/fr.pl?eanlg&1094417113
.
I think it depends on how fussy you are, and how much trouble you want to go through to perfect the sound of every record.

Since record thicknesses vary, you'd need to adjust the VTA, for every record you play, if you want "perfection". I don't think anybody does this.

I'm pretty fussy, and I just make a single setting that is good for all my records, but only perfect for some of them.
I still enjoy my listening.

You can get "crazy" trying to make everything perfect all the time.
Thank you Rushton and Tom for your contributions here.

I think the question here is whether changes of 0.1mm in tonearm height are actually necessary. I would agree based on my personal experience that changes on the order of 0.5mm to 1mm do make a difference. The question is more about smaller changes than that.

The problem is that I have to mostly agree with the article. Following the same geometrical argument I do also think that the variations from cartridge to cartridge, temperature fluctuation, thickness variations in records (even in audiophile ones) are much bigger change the vta/sra angle more than a tenth of a millimeter change in the tonearm height.

Looking at my turntable and even with a record clamp and an unwarped LP you see changes in the record of more than 0.1mm which would say that the vta/sra angle changes as much as if you would change the tonearm height on the same order. On a highly resolving system this would change the sound as the LP goes round at 33rpm. This would be quite damning result for music reproduction through LPs. I good measurement of the thickness variations is to shine a laser pen on the record and look at the reflected light some meters away. You then geometrically determine the difference in height as the record goes round. My guess is that unless you use an inner and outer record clamp you will have variations bigger that the 0.1mm adjustment possible on some tonearms. Otherwise one could be quite busy adjusting the VTA as the record turns.

I would think in agreement with the author that mechanical stability, when a more staple thread of the VTA adjuster is hit, accounts for most of the difference in the sound for these tiny adjustments. Rushton, this could for example explain your observation a couple of months ago, when adjusting vta and hitting a "mechanical" sweet spot.Roy Gandy would be really happy about this argument, although I think he goes to the other extreme by not providing any possibility of vta adjustment on his arm.

A good example is the new vta adjuster for the Teres turntables. They allow adjustment of the vta to 0.0254 mm (1/1000 inch). If we can here differences in the sound on that order we really would be distracted by the VTA variations during the turning of a record. On the other hand I do see a good reason for this degree of fine adjustment. If I can adjust the vta by 0.0254 mm I can set a more reasonable 0.25 mm very accurately and reproducible. Also you have ten possibilities to hit a good thread.

Meine zwei Pfennige...

Rene
I use an additional DIY wool felt "rider/spacer" mat for thin LP stock (set the VTA using thicker late 50's/early 60's RCA "shaded dog" stock).

During the Winter months I use DIY cork "Spot Mats" (made up thicker/thinner versions).

I have some killer stuff on thin import LP's (like Mari tribal music), and it sounds nicer/fuller with the thicker mats.

Simple, easy and effective.

"Since record thicknesses vary, you'd need to adjust the VTA, for every record you play, if you want "perfection". I don't think anybody does this."

Hello. I know several people who do exactly this, ourselves included. Ask Colitas. I just cleaned, played and returned some LPs for him and forgot to remove our yellow stickies from the inner sleeves. Damn! Now he knows our secret arm height settings for three different copies of Pink Floyd's 'The Wall'! :-)

Even worse, it's more complex than just adjusting for record thickness. Different cutting engineers and record labels used different cutting angles, sometimes even for multiple copies of the same LP. I have a couple of boxed sets with different arm heights for different discs. Uniquely, so far, I have one London FFss with a different setting for each side! That struck even me as bizarre. I suppose Fred cut the lacquer for side A on Monday and Bill cut the lacquer for side B on Tuesday. Or something.

Easy, repeatable and on-the-fly arm height adjustment is precisely the reason we replaced a pretty nice sounding HIFI-modded OL Silver with a TriPlanar. For us it's just part of playing an LP, like CF brushing or screwing on the clamp. I think of at as tuning my instrument, which it is in a way. The good news: once the optimal setting is found it goes on the sticky. Now it's a 2 second adjustment every time I replay that record.

SRA adjustment is certainly a YMMV area. But as Rushton said, if you're willing to take the time then the benefits on some LPs can be astonishing. Like him, we sometimes make adjustments that are very small. The scale on the TriPlanar is accurate to the nearest .007mm (not inches).

The impact of SRA adjustment varies greatly with the type of musical sounds. HF's are more sensitive than LF's, obviously. Long, sustained tones like an organ may produce are fairly insensitive. Sounds with quick transients and decays are quite sensitive, especially if the decay of the instrument is at a different pitch than the leading edge. Piano and percussion are pretty sensitive. Well trained vocalists may be the most sensitive of all. Getting their sibilants just right is a sure sign that SRA is spot-on. Obviously the better and more HF extended the recording, the more it matters.

As for that article, to me it's just another pointless argument offered by a theory-blinded engineer trying to "prove" that I can't hear what I hear. If his theory doesn't explain my hearing, it's of no concern to me. Sure, solidity and lateral alignment are more important. But most of us already have that. As for simplicity, I have no idea how to adjust that! Tri-Mai didn't mention it in the manual. ;-)