Hello all,
I'm extremely happy to inform you that i have solved the sibilance & tracking problem that i recently encountered in my system.
The thing was that i had been using the Loefgren alignment for most of my turntables (since this is recommended for modern records that have the modulated grooves (musical signal) no less than 65-66mm from the center of the record, as stated by Mr. Wally Malewick). When i encountered the sibilance & tracking error problem, i tried many different suggestions from members from audioasylum and audiogon with little success, I got very frustrated and i decided to re-align my setup again. This time, i took time to read the manual of the tonearm i am using (SME IV.Vi) very carefully. I discovered that i have overlooked the SME arm's nullpoints, which coincide with the Baerwald alignment's nullpoints !!! (Stupid me). I decided to try this alignment since it makes more sense on the SME tonearm.
After carefully seting up my tonearm this time using the Baerwald method, the tonearm/cartridge now sounds much cleaner with less, tighter and cleaner sibilance and distortion. The sound now is more natural than before!
Now, I am not very sure if those two alignment methods could be used interchangeably on different tonearms, but if the tonearm manual specifies the nullpoints, better choose the alignment scheme that is closest to ur tonearm geometry. Given that those two methods only result in addressing the tracking error differently, i made an assumption that I could just pick either one and it just did not work that way, at least for me.
I also tried to use the WallySkater to set the anti-skating and it is almost identical to what is suggested by SME 's manual. As Doug pointed out, the HiFiNews test record suggest too much anti-skating (Thanks, Doug).
I'd like to thank all and everyone of you who have contributed to this post to help me solve this problem. I really appreciate all of your inputs.
Best regards.
I'm extremely happy to inform you that i have solved the sibilance & tracking problem that i recently encountered in my system.
The thing was that i had been using the Loefgren alignment for most of my turntables (since this is recommended for modern records that have the modulated grooves (musical signal) no less than 65-66mm from the center of the record, as stated by Mr. Wally Malewick). When i encountered the sibilance & tracking error problem, i tried many different suggestions from members from audioasylum and audiogon with little success, I got very frustrated and i decided to re-align my setup again. This time, i took time to read the manual of the tonearm i am using (SME IV.Vi) very carefully. I discovered that i have overlooked the SME arm's nullpoints, which coincide with the Baerwald alignment's nullpoints !!! (Stupid me). I decided to try this alignment since it makes more sense on the SME tonearm.
After carefully seting up my tonearm this time using the Baerwald method, the tonearm/cartridge now sounds much cleaner with less, tighter and cleaner sibilance and distortion. The sound now is more natural than before!
Now, I am not very sure if those two alignment methods could be used interchangeably on different tonearms, but if the tonearm manual specifies the nullpoints, better choose the alignment scheme that is closest to ur tonearm geometry. Given that those two methods only result in addressing the tracking error differently, i made an assumption that I could just pick either one and it just did not work that way, at least for me.
I also tried to use the WallySkater to set the anti-skating and it is almost identical to what is suggested by SME 's manual. As Doug pointed out, the HiFiNews test record suggest too much anti-skating (Thanks, Doug).
I'd like to thank all and everyone of you who have contributed to this post to help me solve this problem. I really appreciate all of your inputs.
Best regards.