Tri-Planar with no anti-skate?


On a hunch I removed the AS weight entirely from my new TP 7 (Merrill table & Ortofon Kont H cart).

The sound improved to an astounding degree: tons more body, much more solid imaging.

Certainly, I must not have had the anti-skate optimally adjusted, I am curious if others prefer it this way too.
paulfolbrecht
Lewm, I am talking about an increase in VTF by a tiny amount - considerably less than a hundredth of a gram. At the same time, when we speak of measuring THD as it relates to AS what is it exactly we are hearing? I think on the TP, the AS dogleg contributes as yet another resonant bit (like the dampening trough) - I find its removal beneficial to the overall sound by removing a tiny (but noticeable) coloration to the presentation. At the same time, there is a slight loss of depth and gravity to instruments in the R channel, but I find that adding a slight amount of weight (like .004 grams) seems to firm up and add weight back to the presentation. Perhaps I am suppressing an increase in THD via VTF due to my removal of the AS entirely; maybe I'm actually increasing THD and I simply like it - again, all the factors of setup interact intimately with one other. Am I merely trading one type of coloration/distortion for another? Probably. I guess it all depends on which type of dirt you like the best, or find the least offensive - because ultimately, it's all a little bit dirty, a little bit colored. In fact, if the goal was a "perfect" coloration-free audio system, I think most of us wouldn't be sitting here discussing such minutiae, because listening would be rather boring and sanitized - look where digital has brought us.
I have never set up a Triplanar arm, but, with every arm I have set up, when doing antiskating adjustment by ear (using torture test records or just long term listening), the setting I find that works is MUCH lower than that which the arm manufacturer recommended. This has been the case with both Graham 1.5t and Phantom arms, for the Vector 3 arm, and SME IV arm.

I believe that VPI concluded that the antiskating mechanism itself causes more sonic harm than skating forces (more loose parts to resonate and muck up the sound), but, was forced by the market to add such mechanism to their arms.

I wonder if anyone would dare to apply surgery to their expensive arm to remove such devices totally to see if that improves the sound.
Larry, that's what we've been discussing. Some of us ARE removing the AS mechanism completely from our Triplanars. Not much surgery really. Just a single cir-clip and set screw holding the thread.
Lew: How about the Stevenson alignment used by dv507 (pivoted arm) which supposely put the null point at the innermost track? The advantage of this approach is to minimize tracking error and hence reduce skating.

Where can I read more about skating force?
I suspect our differences may rest on location of the groove and the terminology. Are you refering to the general schemes of different alignment? Stevenson have increased average tracking error across the record but less skate force at the innermost tract. L and B have less averaging tracking error but increased skating at the innermost track.

I am refering to the actual forces acting on the stylus at the innermost tract. The fact that Stevenson can feature least amount of skating at the inner groove is deal to minimizing tracking error at the inner most groove ( null point).

Where can I read more about skating?