Tracking error distortion audibility

Dear Axel: Yesterday an audio friend call me to meet one of his friends ( new person for me ) at this friend place.

Well, he has a SME-30 wth the V and Windfeld cartridge with around 250 hours and he loaded at 180 Ohms ( no SUT ). We were hearing dfferent recordings and can't hear any inner groove distortion.
He was running the V in its original dinamically way and I ask to run in static way and the performance improve a little, he was satisfied.

Then, we take that Windfeld and come to my place where we try it ( loaded at 100 Ohms with no SUT ) in four different tonearms ( IV, Lustre, AT 1503 and our own design . ) where in no one show the inner distortion.

Btw, the Windfeld performs better in any of the other tonearms ( like was my experiences with LOMC Ortofon cartridges. ), in the V/IV its performance is good but not at the same level than in the other tonearms ( We try with a Nagaoka magnesium headshell and with an aluminum one, the cartridge " prefers " the aluminum one. ).

This Ortofon cartridge is very good and in some ways similar to other Ortofon MC cartridges specially the MC 7500, I like it.

Regrds and enjoy the music.
Raul.

Hey, one more thing
re: Dertonarm
--"100% precise spindle-bearing-mounting distance"--
Just PLEASE bear in mind that this is hard FIXED with ALL SME arms. Overhang is adjusted by moving the bearing-post back and forth, yes?

Phew,
thanks for all the various inputs. Never expected THAT much feedback..
To clear up some items and also add some more thoughts.
1) I use a 30dB SUT (XF-1 type M, 1:31.6 xfactor) which is pretty much on the high side for a 0.3 mV cart as is the PW.

2) So far PRIMARY loading gave the best result, it is VERY much different to SECONDARY loading, which I have also tried.
I don't want to go into the detail now, but believe it or not 13 ohms! seems just about a perfect impedance match.

3) With no SUT the loading is anywhere from 500ohm to 47kohm and VERY phono-pre dependent

4) Back to inner groove distortion:

a) The PW allows azimuth alignment 1-3 degree, due to 3 point support. This I long checked with a mirror (as mentioned) it looks fine.

b) the SME's (all of them) come with a SME type overhang adjustment tool --- it appears VERY sensitive and (at least to SME) as accurate, or more, then most any other method.

c) the head-shell is fixed and has a 22 deg. off-set angle (no slotted screw holes) so all seems fine, or?

d) I wish I could have had some better experience with Ortofon. The PW came about due to a Jubilee exchange, a side-wall of the Jubilee splitting open AND a badly misaligned cantilever. The PW seems to be OK regards the housing (new design) BUT has an issue by VERY 'low riding' AND the new 3 point housing needing exceptionaly much higher arm adjustment (the two rear point are to high for the one in front). This makes for a VERY limited VTA adjustment range, with the rear body (tail-end) easily touching the vinyl, when it has a lip (start grooves) or with slightly warped vinyl.

e) Now, using a different cart, Lyra Dorian on 9c Project arm with RPM9 AND LP12 alignment, Baerwald paper alignment tools, etc. ALSO gave me inner groove distortion! --- also with a different phono-pre (PS Audio GCPH).

f) this may help to explain my mentioning Herr Albert Einstein's bit on doing the same thing over and over -- expecting different results :-)

g) As the cart goes it appears to be just riding too low -- when my 3 times repared Jubilee came back from Ortofon, it also sported a higher ride-hight than originaly supplied. Maybe my PW could do with some of that too? But I am sick an tired of Ortofon to be honest.

h) having also tried a Dynavector DV 20X-L, higher compliance than PW and less heavy, I could still make out some but less distortion. Did not fiddle too much with it as it only was a quick test, and this cart is no where near as good/neutral/resolved/etc. etc. as the PW

Maybe it's just all my vinyl...? New Alison Krauss & Union Station "so long so wrong" has ALSO distortion e.g. side two last band --- much too sibilant.
So there you go...

Thank you for careing and greetings
Axel

Two more items:
I did not respond correctly to the spindle / pivot item. The SME has a hard fixed cart-mounting-holes to arm-pivot distance.
Of course the SPINDLE (main baering) to arm-pivot distance is the VERY thing that IS variable with the SMEs,-- contrary to most other arms, that have a fixed pivot spindle distance once the whole for the arm-post is drilled.

One more interesting and MOST readable post to the subject happens to be found under: Analog / Mounting of a tonearm.
It, as it happens, echos some of my 'intuitions' for lack of a better word.

Dear Axelwahl, the TT's spindle to the tonearms pivot bearing point is NEVER variable in a pivot tonearm. It is the ONE single FIXED foundation of a given tonearms geometry. The distance of the tonearms pivot point to the center of the LP (= spindle of TT's bearing ) is NOT variable. The SME sliding mount is not meant to "variate" the mounting distnace nor to compensate for the fixed cartridge mounting holes. The SME V has a fixed mounting distance of 215.35 mm (SME does give this value in such detail because it is paramount for the whole tonearm geometry....).
Not taking this point as serious as it is means to skip the whole geometry alltogether and results in poor sonic performance and high distortion.

Please see here:
http://www.sme.ltd.uk/content/Series-V-1330.shtml