2. analog
  3. 1298078162

Uni-Protractor Set tonearm alignment

Looks like Dertonarm has put his money where his mouth is and designed the ultimate universal alignment tractor.

Early days, It would be great to hear from someone who has used it and compared to Mint, Feikert etc.

Given its high price, it will need to justify its superiority against all others. It does look in another league compared to those other alignemt devices

http://www.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/cls.pl?anlgtnrm&1303145487&/Uni-Protractor-Set-tonearm-ali
downunder
rauliruegas
13,129 posts
 
Dear Thuchan: The best for cero traking error with many trade-offs as the ones you pointed out.

It is a good choice?, yes it is if fulfil your mind sound reproduction expectatives to handle a cartridge for this cartridge can shows you the best it has.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
t_bone
1,182 posts
 
Raul,
It appears we agree on that point (that using a different alignment than mfr.'s original design could alter resonance characteristics).

As to another question floating around out there... whether applying a different geometry than original to an arm could affect effective length (and therefore affect appropriate geometry parameters for the arm (which might affect resonance characteristics)... That remains an open question... Or maybe that too is not as difficult as it seems. I will have another think about it...

Syntax, Oscar was a smart man.
rauliruegas
13,129 posts
 
Dear T_bone: Normally the effective length does not change that input data, as I posted only if on porpose you want to change it.

The effective length is the main foundation on tonearm calculations through those known orthodox solutions ( Löfgren, Baerwald, Stevenson and the like. ) and is when you change effective length when all the other parameters calculated changed but not the other way around.

You need to read again those Dennes papers. Of course that you can manipulate/force on porpose every single input and output parameter on the geometry calculations but this is a different way/thing that IMHO is useless to discuss.

You can run an example of what happen on what you are asking: suppose that a tonearm design ( said: 270 mm on effective length. ) was designed according Löfgren B calculations and you want to make the cartridge set up with a different geometry like Baerwald or Stevenson geometry calculations for the set up, you can run this example through the " alignment calculator " tool in VE where you note that almost all the set up parameters ( including distortions level. ) calculated changed but the effective length is the same: does not changed.

regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
rauliruegas
13,129 posts
 
Dear T_bone: I forgot: +++++ " It appears we agree on that point (that using a different alignment than mfr.'s original design could alter resonance characteristics). " +++++

no and I can't say for sure if tha's happen till I have on " hand " white papers that prove it. What I'm sure is that two different approaches/solutions/equations calculated set up cartridge parameters give us two different distortion level performances.

I was thinking that I left clear that I don't buy speculations and normally I don't like to speculate as you.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
t_bone
1,182 posts
 
Raul,
Having read the papers, in my understanding of tonearm physics/math, there is no reason one cannot 'adjust' EL by 0.5mm and then come up with a new set of parameters derived from your preferred alignment (as long as the headshell is flexible enough (in terms of mounting holes)). It will no longer be 'official' but there should be room to play if one wants. Perhaps I have not properly understood. I will noodle it around a bit.

As to the other part, your idea of speculation and mine are obviously different. I think it speculative to assume that a change in the physics will have zero effect until a white paper tells me so. I have certainly not comcluded anything, but I am inclined to be open-minded, even without the white paper.
More to discover