AntiSkate-crooked Cantilever correlation?

Doug, Thanks for your insightfull explanation. I really thought: no way one can fully understand this AS enigma without PhD in physics as well as in math. My experience is
in correspondance with your explanation. The most carts with 'cantilever deviation' were with the 'inside-direction' (not necessaryly my carts.sic). And then to think how proud I was with my 'achievement' with my (then)
Fr-64,Ortofon MC 30s combo: 90 micron without any 'buzz' from the R.channel. As,I think,Lasker stated:'there are obvious limits to the human mind but human stupidity is without boundarys'.

Regards,

Toss out those torture test records. They provide meaningless answers to your questions. After a very few passes of mistracking, the record is damaged and will never reveal if your cartridge is properly set up. Also, I have found that many anti-skating devices buzz, rattle, etc., and removal of these allow higher performance from the arm.

Dougdeacon, I agree with you much more than you might think. The part about "if it sounds better on the inside tracks, you have too much anti-skate" comes from my last attempt at anti-skate. Back in the day, Harry Pearson said the Koetsu Rosewood sounded better with less anti-skate than the tracking force number. I believe that was the first time that idea was mentioned. What I am really trying to do is to get people to listen to what anti-skate really does, and do this with some certainty. I believe that we get much more meaningful results from people this way, instead of a bunch of theories that confuse the mind while adjusting anti-skate. That statement that I quoted does not apply to uni-pivots. I believe that normally, with no anti-skate, the last song will sound the worst, and if it sounds the best, something is wrong-and it has to be too much anti-skate. I understand that there might be a sense of ease with no anti-skate, but for the average person, I was just trying to give them a starting point.