2. analog
  3. 1144172162

VPI Scoutmaster - Anti-skate again..

Hi,
I'm sure this has been covered, but I couldn't find it...

As we all know, the coiled wire of the JMW-9 tonearm provides anti-skate force naturally, and is seen by VPI as preferable to any mechanical implementation.

VPI now provides a mechanical anti-skate with the Scoutmaster turntable. It is supplied but not installed. VPI still stands by their original position on anti-skate.

Now, for my experience.

I started without the use of the mechanical anti-skate. Listening, backed up by the Hi-fi+ test LP, convinced me that more anti-skating force was needed. I twisted the lemo connector counter-clockwise to apply more force, but I didn't notice any difference.

I then implemented the mechanical anti-skate. I found by visual inspection and confirmed with the test LP that, even at the lowest setting, far too much anti-skating force was now being applied.

Listening tests with the mechanical anti-skate engaged were a mixed bag. I found the image to be more centered, rather than leaning to the right, but I also noticed a loss of fine detail. For instance, when a fast sequence of plucked guitar notes were played, each note stood out more independently WITHOUT the mechanical anti-skate. With the anti-skate engaged the notes smear together slightly.

Has anyone had a similar experience? I am hoping to find a solution that will enable me to focus the image better and not lose any detail. It seems to me that I need a way to provide a little more anti-skate, but not a lot more. (and I am slightly baffled as to why the lemo twist method seemed to have no effect whatsoever.)

Cheers.

Tom
tfkaudio
tfkaudio OP
591 posts
 
Yes, I undid the lemo twist (sounds like a new dance craze). I even tried to counter the excessive force of the mechanical anti-skate with a clockwise twist of the lemo connector. It had no effect that I could notice.

As for tracking force, I'm currently tracking at 2.2g. The Dynavector DV-20 has a recommended range of 1.8g to 2.2g. Would you suggest going higher?

Thanks.
stefanl
296 posts
 
Is your tonearm parallel or thereabouts to the record surface when your playing vinyl?
dopogue
1,773 posts
 
My JMW 10.5 with a Decca Super Gold Mk VII on it traverses the first 3 of those
fabled torture tracks without a murmur of distress, with VTF at 1.8g. And the
Deccas are notorious mistrackers. The arm is standard, with only the wire twist
to provide or affect anti-skating. I think Harry Weisfeld was right the first time.
And I'll bet he thinks so too.
tfkaudio OP
591 posts
 
I'm wondering if he was right when it came to 10 and 12 inch tonearms, but maybe not so much for 9 inch arms? 9 inch arms have a far more formidable anti-skate issue, due to the greater headshell offset.

I only need a little more anti-skate! I sound like a junky.

Can I put a JMW 10.5 on a Scoutmaster? How about a 12.5?

Cheers.
dodgealum's avatar
dodgealum
1,404 posts
 
I went through the process with my Scout/Dyna 20XH and, like you, found that the wire twist was not enough to handle the HFNRR test disc, though I thought the table sounded just fine to my ear. But the neurotic audiophile that sometimes rears his ugly head caused me to get the mechanical system to see if it would allow clear sailing on the test disc and potentially cause the sound to improve. Installed with the wire located midway up the shaft my arm/cartridge now tracks all but the last groove beautifully (and even the last one buzzes only some). As to the sound--I really don't hear a difference. So......it was an interesting exercise that, to my ears, left me in the same place (unless I break out my test disc for some really great "tones").
More to discover