HFNR and antiskate on SME 3009/III

There is an excellent post on Audioasylum today about this. Go over there and read it. To simplify things, what you want to do with that section of the record is get it so that you get EQUAL (but low level buzzing) on each channel. Getting no buzzing on either channel is going to result in grossly higher or lower antiskating than necessary. Once you've done this, fine tune from there setting by ear if necessary. I would trust my ears more than anything else. The Vdh method above was not even close with my table/arm/cartridge combo; Vdh essentially recommends very little antiskate (as little as 1/3 of VTF running the VTF very slightly higher than recommended) and it definitely didn't work for me. My tonearm is older, though and supposedly has some issues with the antiskate mechanism deteriorating to the point of needing overcompensation (which I also found info on at Audioasylum) which is, in fact, how it has worked out.

Go to the vinyl asylum at Audioasylum and do searches on your tonearm, cartridge and antiskate. But be prepared to invest some time reading; there's a lot of info there and it's a bit of a controversial topic with a lot of varying opinions.

Hdm, the method I explained above is not vdH's method, it mine. With vdH cartridges, it (coincidentally) yeilds the antiskate figures vdH recommends for their cartridges,

It will work quite accurately for any arm/cartridge combo however, so long as all other physical setup adjustments have been properly made, including VTF.

There's nothing mystical about anti-skate. It just a way of neutralizing the inward force created by tonearms with offset headshells, or by S curved tonearms. When there's no sidethrust on the cantilever, it's quite easy to see after just a little practice. And whatever that force happens to be, it's the right one for that arm and cartridge.

As a historical note, anti-skate was not available on tonearms for a long time, and nobody seemed to mind. They simply adjusted the balance control if things seemed a little "off". Getting proper SRA, VTF, stylus overhang, azimuth, and coil loading are far more critical. In fact if these other adjustments aren't perfect first, making antiskating adjustments will be futile IMO.

Listen to Nsgarch. That test record will lead you astray every time. I tried its "torture tests" and the only cart/arm I have that will sail through all four of them is a l962 Empire arm with a Stanton 881 cart on it, and it has no antiskating provisions at all! I have an SME IIIs myself and wouldn't dream of using the record to set anti-skate.

Dopogue, I have to admit I haven't used the test record Hdm refers to. I don't have anything against them, but my position is "why bother when it's so easy to do visually." In fact I have confirmed my visual adjustment(s) electrically time and again, as well as with listening tests (using female soloist mono records with preamp in 'stereo' setting) and the method seems to give consistently accurate results.

Agree with all the above.

Nsgarch's visual method works well. (Note: it's better with high compliance cartridges than low compliance ones.) Fine tune by ear while listening to music.

I do have the HFN record. As I've posted many times on VA, the design of its so-called anti-skate tracks (side one, tracks 6-9) is inherently flawed. Do not use them for setting AS.

If you want to use that silly record to rough in AS, use the three, widely spaced "tracking test" bands on side two. Adjust AS until L/R buzzing is about equal on all three bands. Assuming your VTF is correct, that method is valid. The tracks at the end of side one are not.