Adjusting SRA using macro lens vs microscope

Interesting video from Ortofon about the SLM process.

With all the talk about SRA and the A90 and getting to 92 degrees. It is interesting to see that in this video the A90 / tonearm is parallel.

http://www.ortofon.com/technology/slm-manufacturing-technique

Wntrmute2,

It's not clear who you were referring to when you said people "dismiss" anti-skating, but as one who currently plays without it I thought I'd address your question.

Playing with zero A/S does not necessarily constitute dismissing it. That would be true if one played this way (or recommended that others do so) without actually investigating what level of A/S is optimal. I've never done that, nor do I know anyone who has. What I and others recommend is experimentation: train your ears to recognize what A/S value works best on any given rig.

I analyze and adjust A/S the same way I do VTF or SRA or azimuth - by listening. I tweak VTF and SRA for virtually every LP. With some cartridges I've had to do the same for A/S. With one cartridge I tweaked A/S on an individual LP basis for months and heard the difference that even the tiniest change makes. This is not "dismissing" A/S, it's just the opposite: developing a full understanding of it.

It's true the optimal A/S value for my present cartridge happens to be zero. Further, since the A/S device itself feeds noise into my tonearm I've removed it. But a different cartridge might well need some value greater than zero, in which case I'd reinstall the device. Not dismissing; listening, analyzing and adjusting.

Downunder, nice video - thanks for the link. As for the A90 mounted and shown in action on a tonearm parallel to the record surface - I can shine a light here.
Ortofon's own test records are cut with the highest cutting angle in all cutter heads - thus the tonearm has to be parallel with standard mount cartridge in standard headshell.

In general and in any case - I do not want to spoil any "search-for-perfect-SRA-party", but finally it is always about the position of the polished area of the stylus towards the groove walls.
And this position is a variable one - not fixed, unless you only play records all cut with the same angle (i.e. - one manufacturer and one time period).
Since there are a wide range of cutting angles in records past and present, we either settle on a good compromise (which in turn is optimal for only ONE specific cutting angle) or adjust the position of the stylus to each cutting angle.
Those discussions have been made before and the two schools will never settle nor unite, but it is at least pretty clear that there is no such thing as a universal perfect SRA nor VTA.
Not in this world of record cutting angles differing by up to 8 degrees.
The stylus have to be aligned "groove-compliant".

Dougdeacon, I wasn't really saying YOU were dismissing A/S. From reading your posts I cannot believe you would dismiss anything. However, everything from no anti-skate to setting it using blank LPs has been advocated as correct. I was just saying that there has recently been this tremendous focus on 1 aspect of cart set-up with you advocating that LP by LP adjustment is critical, while another aspect varies so much.

Dear Dougdeacon: The A/S by geometry /machanically is a must to have: that force vector exist and needs to take care about.

This A/S set up parameter is another nightmare subject that depend on many other factors to we can hear tiny " gradation " changes in its set up.

IMHO and in a scientific way does not exist: " the optimal A/S value for my present cartridge happens to be zero. ", this is waht you like it and I'm not questioning about but any cartridge/tonearm set up needs " some " A/S quantity. At random can we find a cartridge/tonearm set up to be cero?, could be but??????

through any LP exist different recorded velocities all over the LP recorded area that affects the A/S, all over the recorded LP area exist waves in the LP that affect too, even over the LP recorded area exist differences in the tickness of the lp that affect too and all we know that we need different A/S depending of the place ( outer grooves, midle or inner grooves. ) where the cartridge is playing a LP.

Not only that, different tonearm A/S mechanism makes that the A/S had differences in its " aplication " and in some cases like in your tonearm the " A/S device its self feeds noise into... ".

All these " factors " and some others make that's almost imposible to have the right A/S set up over all the LP recorded area.

Some of us are working with out A/S in the cartridge/tonearm/LP set up but this does not means we don't need it or means that sounds better with out A/S set up. That could be a misunderstood: we need A/S set up, it is not matters which cartridge we own.

Maybe if our cartridge has a 2cu on compliance and works with 5grs on VTF then we can't heard A/S differences but even here the A/S vector exist and be there for " fix ".

The main problem is that there is almost no tonearm with the precise A/S setting device mechanism, it is really complex to do it.

As I posted, we have an almost impossible target: to make an imperfect analog medium be " perfect ", IMHO we just can't do it at least not yet.

When we share our each ones experiences on the whole subject we are helping first to understand the complexity of the subject and second to improve our each one analog set up. We have to continue on this experiences sharing excercise.

The whole subject and our opinions about must be not who is right/wrong but how we can help each to other on the subject.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.