An easier way to set VTF/VTA/SRA? Perhaps....

Hi, D., your comments reflect the factors that I, too, believe (but don't ascribe to) will keep consumers from having an easily measured parameter for cartridge setup. My thoughts (rebuttals really) on the points against using WCA follow:

1) "...cartridges suspension hasn't adapt to ambient conditions and hasn't reach its full velocity yet, the idea of the "WCA" won't give the right result."

This is, in some ways, a mute point. Cartridge break-in, controversial as it may be, should not be a factor in alignment. My opinion is that we should just play records for some time before we seriously attempt to fine tune cartridge alignment.

2) "Next problem is, that the cartridge designers won't supply any such thing."

Probably not, at first. But I believe that cartridge manufacturers might be willing to provide this information for LOMC cartridges above a certain price point, say $750 to $1000 USD for example. It's in their best interest. If their cartridges are so good, why don't they publish the design parameters? Competition can be a good thing.

3) "...fear that this would arise even more questions by the customer."

Not necessarily a bad thing; assuming that WCA is only provided for audiophile cartridges (see #2 above), consumers would begin to ask why manufacturers are unwilling to provide WCA specifications. Audiophile cartridges are intended for a more knowledgable and experienced consumer. Again, competition can be a good thing.

4) "Todays cartridges - especially the Top-flight ones - do not feature any such thing."

And why not? If a manufacturer claims that their "top-flight" cartridges are so good, they should be more than willing to provide the specifications, including WCA, for their best cartridges. Manufacturers provide a range for VTF, why not for WCA? No shame in acknowledging the variability in suspension parameters.

5) "...setting the "right" "WCA" can be performed by looking through a highly illuminated magnifier from the front into the body of the cartridge..."

That's one of the biggest problems: The need to use high magnification and illumination in order to more accurately establish proper cartridge alignment. Many experts espouse the benefits of using these techniques to find the optimal alignment of SRA or VTA (impossible without x-ray vision). Much too complicated and inconvenient. WCA would allow a much more convenient parameter for consistent measurement and alignment.

And lastly...

"But so far we are left in the dark and have to trust our ears...."

That's the conundrum. Why should consumers be "left in the dark" in regards to optimal cartridge settings. If a customer is willing to spend a thousand dollars (USD) or more for a product that has a limited lifespan, the customer should be provided as much information as needed to get the most enjoyment out of the product without needless uncertainty and undue complications. Adjusting "by ear" is a poor reflection on the nature of cartridge installation. Most speaker manufacturers have much more objective parameters in setting up their product for optimal performance. And listening environments are far more variable than the plinth/tone arm/phono stage environment in which cartridges are installed.

Cartridge alignment should not be the mysterious endeavor that seems to be perpetuated by audiophiles and enforced by manufacturers. It needn't be so darned complicated. Using weighted cantilever angle (WCA) to find the (nearly) optimal alignment could make cartridge installation so much more convenient and consistent.

Tom

Hi, Nsgarch, the use of weighted cantilever angle would not add to the confusion but rather eliminate the use of SRA/VTA since both of these alignment parameters are nearly impossible to measure, especially VTA. Your description of how to find optimal SRA is, unfortunately, unrealisitic when considering the range of stylus geometries and the need for high magnification to actually see the stylus.

We actually agree on several aspects of cartridge alignment and your comments reinforce my belief that we need a more simple and easily measured parameter.

Tom

Tom -- finding true vertical for a line or micro-ridge stylus, as I outlined, is actually quite easy, and many people have done it with great results once it was explained. And there are only three stylus geometries, if what you mean by "geometries" is stylus 'shapes'. There are: spherical, elliptical, and line/micro. There was also the Shibata which was an attempt at making a line-contact but before laser cutting techniques were available. After finding zero SRA, it's nice but not mandatory, to have an arm with vertical height adjustment "on the fly" (while the record is playing) so you can experiment easily once you know where true vertical is for your stylus.

As for your statement

I refer to it as Weighted Cantilever Angle (WCA) which is the angle of the cantilever (from horizontal) where the manufacturer intended the cantilever to be positioned within the cartridge generator.

I think you are using the wrong terms, which is what's getting you into conceptual trouble. It's not the CANTILEVER which is positioned WITHIN the generator -- since the GENERATOR consists of the coil/armature positioned inside the magnetic field. The cantilever is completely outside that area. And frankly, I don't think cartridge makers are much concerned with cantilever angle, so long as it allows the cartridge body and front pole piece to clear the record surface. What cartridge makers ARE interested in doing is making the cantilever as SHORT as possible to eliminate resonances. The van den Hul Colibri doesn't even HAVE a front pole piece in order to facilitate an EXTREMELY SHORT cantilever. And DECCA cartridges have no cantilever whatsoever!

I truly wish people would stop using that "SRA/VTA" term as if they are the same thing -- THEY ARE NOT!! Further, VTA can be pretty much any angle between too low (the back of the cartridge hitting the record) and too high (the front of the cartridge or front pole piece hitting the record) and so what!? What IS important, is to let the VTA chip fall where it may, while instead MAKING SURE the stylus' edges slant forward at exactly the same angle as the forward-slanting groove undulations - thus locking them together.

Sorry for the long post but I'm afraid we have little to agree on at the moment ;-)

Neil
.

Neil, thanks for the explanation. And for being tolerant of my misunderstanding of the relationship of the cantilever and generator. (The few schematics I've been able to find are crude representations at best.)

My original thought on the use of cantilever angle had more to do with setting proper stylus rake angle, as installed by the manufacturer. Using SRA as a measurement parameter is possible but not easily measured. Your procedure is certainly an improvement but still requires more effort than many vinyl lovers are willing to undertake. I wanted something quick and easy. :-)

In considering the use of cantilever angle, I assume that the stylus is properly mounted to the cantilever and that the manufacturer knows the angle of the cantilever when the stylus is at an optimal rake angle. Wouldn't it be much easier to measure the angle of the cantilever rather than a tiny stylus? (The exceptions you mention, notwithstanding.) If the process of mounting the stylus to the cantilever is not consistent and the resulting placement is so variable that determining proper SRA is not possible using WCA then this whole idea is a lost cause.

Tom

PS: We may agree on one thing: VTA is a fairly useless parameter. '-) I only included it as part of the collective theme of cartridge alignment.

Well, the cartridge manufacturers do already provide the parameter to set the VTF right: - their recommendation of the range the VTF have to be set in.

We will get no more and there is good reason why.
Aside that there is no monetary reason for the cartridge manufacturer to add any mechanical "helpers" - there too is little need.
Analog cartridges for the high-end customer is a luxury market with highly emotional customers. Nothing to quantify - nothing to determine the quality with any measurable parameters.
Similar to high-priced jewelry (at least there are quantifications like purity of precious metal, carat etc.), high performance cars - you name it.
Its individually viewed AND judged performance and personal preferences.

I guess - as frustrating as this might look on first sight to some - that we are doing quite well the way it is now.
Unfortunately this means that setting up an individual analog cartridge to fully show its abilities will always require skill, knowledge, experience and very precise handwork.

But then most of these are needed in all real passions.

There is hardly ever any free lunch out there.

Cheers,
D.

We all agree that a cartridge usually needs some time to reach its designed for operating conditions (velocity). Furthermore we are looking at a bundle of other depending parameters (tonearm, cable, matching impedances, inductances etc.) in interaction with the cartridge and thus influencing its sonic performance.
Next in line is individual sample differences within a production design.
No two cartridges of a given production design are truly identical in the technical sense nor in their technical parameters.
After all most are hand-trimmed or fine-tuned and so they are similar and go for a similar "family"-sound, but are not identical.

We will always need a range to work within.