Uni-Protractor Set tonearm alignment

Dear all, just out of curiosity - does anyone know, what calculation is used with the Dennesen Soundtraktor ?
Cheers,
D.

Raul,
When I changed to the 231.5mm spindle to pivot dimension and 14.5mm overhang, I changed the off-set angle to compensate correctly at the null points.

Dear Dertonarm: The original FR manufacturer numbers are totally wrong, these people IMHO wants only that the numbers appears in easy way for the customers but with out real care on the accuracy to Stevenson IEC solution and with no care on distortions. The original numbers: 245/230/15 and 21.5° don't match with any known geometry solution it does not matters changes in the input data for those calculations, makes no sense.

The " new " parameters for Stevenson IEC are better and the ones for Löfgren A/Baerwald ( that I posted to Halcro. ) are exactly the ones for this solution.

It is not true that the parameters you give Halcro that match Stevenson has lower distortions and this any one can confirm through VE calculations where we can see and " read " the diagrams/chart/graphics with the result on Stevenson/Baerwald/Löfgren curves.

Stevenson only gives a lower distortion at the inner grooves with a higher distortions all over the remaining 90% of vthe LP recorded area.
IMHO you have a misunderstood in this subject, please check not only the Dennes papers but the graphics on the curves through VE calculations.

Btw, Halcro obviously that a re-set in VTF is in order. I only want to insist that the reset on VTA/SRA and Azymuth is not only a must but critical to any comparison: accuracy in this set up parameters is a must ( desired. ) to have.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.

Dertonarm, I for one would like to know what the Dennessen is based on. Enlighten us if you know.

Dear Genesis168, despite what some here on Audiogon did say past early winter in a deleted thread, the original Dennesen Soundtraktor is 100% Löfgren A / Baerwald IEC.
"My" calculation for the FR-64s has nothing to do with Stevenson.
The original manufacturers specs weren't all that bad ( they are close to Stevenson but did put the 2nd null point even closer to the label - apparently Isamu Ikeda did have a lot of Mercurys and early DECCA SXL in mind when he choosed that alignment ...;-) ....) , but they did not do the geometry of the FR-64s any right.
It is not enough to find the white papers and the alignment calculator in Vinylengine - it is more about understanding what is actually important in a calculation curve for a stereo record ( and yes, - it has more and slightly different requirements compared to a mono record) and where to position the 2 null-points to get the best performance.
As said before - the "common model" we find everywhere is a bit simplified and takes too little into account that we are dealing with a 3-dimensonal stereo groove here - not mono.
At least - not me.
Cheers,
D.