How to properly set VTF??



Hello there.

Just wondering which is the proper "placement" of the gauge to set the VTF for a cartridge. I use a digital gauge and normally fine tune by ear.

Method #1
Place VTF gauge directly on the turntable playing surface.

OR

Method #2
Place VTF gauge "outside" of the playing surface beyond the records edge.

I set the VTF at the recommended 1.96g using method #1. I then tried the #2 placement and the measurement read 2.14g for a difference of 0.18g

The only explanation I can think of that attributed to the weight difference is the anti-skate setting. On my arm (Tri-Planar) the anti-skate kicks in when the cartridge is on a playing surface, outside the playing surface the anti-skate is very minimal.

Which method do you think is best or is it arm dependent?

Cheers!
dogpile
I'm a bit surprised with you,Raul.I certainly agree with this current point,of yours(and understand Bob's as well).Yet it has always been you,who have been very techno oriented about getting the best results!Now you seem to have a "glossed over" approach,and emphasize "just enjoy the music"!What gives?Have you finally gone over to digital?
Nothing wrong there,btw.I have a nice CD player that's in use,now,as my COSMOS gets two of Sota's latest mods.

Believe me I DO get what you,and Bob are saying,and most of my own arm/cart voicings are set by ear,but I STILL check ultimate downforce,for a benchmark,after all is set.It gives a fairly reliable reference for set-up,which though not "absolute" is still better than not knowing,and only relying on ones ears.When it is only us,who basically only listen to our systems,if it goes off just a bit,it is hard to clearly identify when this happens.Since we get used to our particular sound.Usually a pal comes over,and mentions,to me,that I may want to recheck something.This is where a critical parameter like downforce can be simplified,after some prior work has been done.VTA stays locked,as well as damping fluid.I doubt my coils/cantilever "sag" as I believe you state,as my cartridge is fairly new.Also I have a dedicated room,with controlled humidity/temp.Fairly consistent parameters.Why would anyone not want a consistent downforce reading?I'm perplexed!

I find it hard to believe that all the mumbo jumbo with other factors is more pertinent than having a really good starting point.Assuming one has played around a bit,with a good variety of discs.What doesn't make sense here?Even Harry Pearson recommends the Winds guage,as do numerous people I know.I have finally had extensive experience with one,and now think it's indispensable.

I mean let's all take a look at our analog investment---Tables(big bucks)-arms(fairly big bucks-to the stratosphere)-cartridges(pricey,expensive)-even arm cable isn't cheap(if it's a seperate entity)!So to recommend an accurate digital guage for a few hundred bucks is to be "blown off" is silly,to me.

I get the impression that those who don't ascribe to this have either not really extensively utilized the better digital guages,and found how effective they can be.Or,Don't really want to bother,or have invested in something like the Shure,or older,and "once classic" Technics guage.Here some rationalization may have set in.

Believe me,I'm NOT trying to insinuate my feelings on this subject,as I regretably have in some past posts.My only criteria is to, maybe, relate how an important set-up parameter can be made easy,and repeatable!I'll say no more,after this.

It happens to be a very viable subject,and one that has made itself surprisingly impactful,to quite a few of my own friends,as well as me.I would LOVE to find a reason for keeping my own guage,but accuracy to 50/100's doesn't seem to be up to snuff in my own set-up.I hate the thought of spending anymore!

Please understand that this is only our opinion,in our systems.Nothing is set in stone.This is certainly not my old rants in defense of the "not perfect by a long shot" 2.2!I'm only relating input from extensive sessions that took place at some friends' homes.Others have their own way of doing things,and I'm fine with that.

As for the pricey Winds guage--I want one,but that cute newbie guage shown on Audiogon,that reads to four digits really has to be considered.Not that anything beyond 1/100 interests me.Who knows?I certainly don't!

Best regards!
Dear Sirspeedy: +++++ " ...about getting the best results!Now you seem to have a "glossed over" approach,and emphasize "just enjoy the music"!What gives?Have you finally gone over to digital? " +++++

Not yet. Btw, maybe you don't read what I posted or I can't explain about:

" If we want a better music/sound quality reproduction ( because is what I think we all wanted ) we have to " touch " every single link on the audio chain to a minimum frequency deviations, then the VTF/VTA-SRA issue means something to be nuts, not before. "

Regards and enjoy the music.
raul.
Sirspeedy, with all due respect, you sound like the accountant who wants to calculate average costs to +/- 0.5 cents because he/she (and the computer)can do division to 3 places after the decimal. One can't get more accuracy, nor need, than 1 cent out of 100 cents. So it is with VTF. Although the scale might show a figure to 0.01g, the measurement is not of that accuracy or reproducibility and thus not really more 'accurate' for the baseline start points to which you are referring than a simple 0.1g accurate gauge.
Having said that, there is no harm in continuing to use the 'higher' accuracy gauges, but much of the perceived 'finer' adjustments that you are making is simply 'chasing your tail' so to speak, that is making adjustments to compensate for the lack of repeatability of the 'finer' measurement.
respectfully, Bob P.
Bob P.
Bob,if you have any Mercury SR series "promo" pressings,or Decca wide bands lying around,I'd consider doing your taxes as a barter!How about it? -:)
Sorry, Sirspeedy, even if I had those recordings, I don't need your level of 'accuracy' in doing my taxes and wouldn't part with them! Would Mercury Wing recordings qualify, however?
Salut, Bob P.