2. analog
  3. 1240914699

Will SME-V, etc benefit with non-stock alignment?

Hi,
it was suggested by some most knowledgeable member(s) on the subject of tone-arm alignment, to start a dedicated thread for 'fixed' stylus-to-pivot measurement arms.

To my knowledge those would be ALL SME arms, as well as ALL Linn arms -- there might be others.

The issue in particular is the method of overhang adjustment by moving the pivot (bearing arm post) a la SME to accommodate slight variations in cart design. Linn does not even offer that (go buy their cart(s), and get a life :-)

In the case of SME, the expected mounting hole to stylus tip distance being 3/8" or in more 'current metrics' 9.52 mm. (sorry not US quite as yet, i.e. both are valid)

If a cart has this design criteria, AS WELL AS! the cantilever in the centre AND STRAIGHT with respect to the cart body / mounting screw holes, and more recently all with a tapped thread in it, they would HIGHLY qualify, or?
BUT, how do you see, or know this is the case in the first place, when purchasing a cart?

Given ALL is right-on within spec. you then are 'stuck' with the alignment that, e.g. was decided (for you the purchaser).
As soon as you'd like to try some other alignment scheme, and there are some: Löfgren A (Baerwald) -- the SME point of view/choice, Löfgren B, Stevenson, plus in fact you may make up your own, that may be to your liking. BUT NOT with any of the 'fixed' type arms, since it'll play havoc with the arms intended alignment geometry. (Ask DerTonearm if you don't believe me. He'll give you the low-down right to the 100th of a millimetre!)

So far, so good. You can go to one of the expert template makers, state your case, give your cart and arm parameters and ask him to make on for you. 100$ ---- to 500$? somewhere around there.
BUT WICH alignment then please?!

One you think is better? The same? Why bother for the same?!
And IF different, will it actually work for you?

Well, if not, go spend some more 'greens' on the next try?

Of course if you are aware of these issue, you just go and buy another arm, right?
Hallo, but what about synergy for SME decks, ditto Linn decks and arms?

So hope to have made the point sufficiently clear. So let's see what we can learn, that we do NOT know as yet.
Could get interesting, I hope so.

But please keep it informative and don't come tell us a dentists drill will be a better choice than XYZ tonearm choice.
Thank you for reading,
Axel
axelwahl
dertonarm
1,042 posts
 
The SME V can ONLY be precisely aligned with either cartridges which do 100% comply with IEC standard stylus-mounting holes OR with a special tractor calculated on a given cartridge like the MINT tractor. And this will only work for a given sample (and with some dump luck for a few other individual cartridges - but just by coincidence).

All other experiments will lead to missalignment - to a smaller or larger degree.

The SME V does ask for a 100% IEC-compliant cartridge (at least in its pure mechanical dimensions) as conditio sine qua non.

Its the foundation of its design and geometry.
dertonarm
1,042 posts
 
Dear Axelwahl, dear all, Dougdeacon posted an extremely precise and knowledgeable comment on my similar post which I believe belongs here.

Please see here:

http://forum.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/fr.pl?eanlg&1240903165
axelwahl OP
788 posts
 
Hallo,
Herr Tonarm you suggested to do this SME stuff on a different thread, and I concurred.
So now you better send yeah old SME enquiries this here way. I agree that Dougdeacon's contribution is rather over here in the right place.

I also happen to agree with him, however it did not get to the point asked on this here thread --- will a DIFFERENT, other then SME stock alignment (Baerwald A, SME flovour) be of known BENEFIT.

If we concur it's not, we can close the subject and don't waste money on aftermarket protractors for SME arms, 'cause it's a waist of money, right?

So let’s see if we find somebody that has change the alignment to other then stock SME, and can truly rave about the major improvement derived.

Let's make nails with heads and don't chew up the old mathematics and theories only, what say you?

Axel
dertonarm
1,042 posts
 
Hello Axel,

it comes down to a simple statement:

- if you want to use a cartridge which does NOT comply with IEC-standard dimensions: get an individual tractor.
- if you use a cartridge with IEC standard dimensions - use the SME tool.
The SME V can't be aligned to different arcs anyway without altering the geometry of the tonearm.
jcarr
382 posts
 
Axelwahl: The Dorian is designed to have a mounting screwhole to stylus distance of 9.52mm (3/8 inch - not 5/8 inch which would be 15.875mm!). All of the present Lyra cartridges are made like this, with the exception of the Helikon (the oldest design in our lineup).

The Dorian's mechanical components are milled on an NC system, so even given component tolerances, it would be impossible for the 9.52mm dimension to be off by more than +/- 0.3mm.

Also, assuming for a moment that the Dorian was indeed considerably shorter than 9.52mm, the mounting screwhole to stylus distance is not a dimension that should change with a retip; unless the retip involves rather violent measures (grin).

In any case, Axelwahl, your story doesn't (yet) make sense to me.

As an aside, the suspension and dampers of an MC will gradually degrade with use, and should properly be replaced together with the cantilever system when the stylus wears out. Restated, a cartridge should be rebuilt rather than retipped when the stylus wears out.

However, no cartridge manufacturer that I am aware of is in the habit of making any of their components available to outside retipping companies (and none of these components are standard off-the-shelf parts).

Also, even for the original manufacturer, it takes time to understand the intricacies of a specific MC design and how to make it work at its best. Much of the prototyping cycle of a new cartridge model is focused specifically on that aspect - the design will be built and rebuilt in dozens of different ways until it can be figured out how to extract the maximum possible amount of performance from it.

Therefore, unless an outside retipper has a specific agreement to receive authentic rebuild parts from the original manufacturer, and has undergone a hands-on training program dedicated to that design, for him to rebuild an MC faithfully is an impossibility.

hth, jonathan carr
More to discover