Reed tonearm w/ Raven One table-how's the match ?

Cut and paste for me where i say another method other than the human ear should be used for azimuth adjustment and then i will respond.(forced smile)

If you read my posts, i think you will see and distill from them my belief that the azimuth adjustment can be set by ear , that that is the method i use and that you can have great confidence in what your ears are telling you.

This issue was never the METHOD ...RATHER ...just that it ACTUALLY be EXPLORED! and i was in fact thinking he would do this through listening by EAR.

I would define perfect azimuth as the position of the stylus in relation to the record groove that most consistently rides the groove with the highest contact surface area possible within the physical limitations of the the diamond and that both sides doing this identically to each other. This to ME would in fact equal "perfect" azimuth. That is what i meant by the use of the word.

When i used the word perfect in a previous post the meaning i was pouring into its use is "ideal".

I was only wishing to encourage opus to "know" not just "hope" his azimuth is "perfect/ideal" through... experimentation and... listening by ear. It sounded to me through our discourses , opus and i, that there was the possibility to increase the enjoyability of his playback even further than he already is enjoying through what i perceive to be a slightly overlooked parameter.

*** How would you define perfect azimuth adjustment, in electrical terms?***

I wouldnt...is this a trap?

But to answer your question, i'll take a crack at it...hmmm, lets see? Cant you use an oscilliscope for that? So, i guess the definition would be "identically measured ouputs from each channel, maybe?"

Is it possible that my azimuth is still not ideal? Yes, i am open to that. That is why i champion "ongoing openness and continuing experimention" for myself and for others. Do i need to get a oscilliscope to be absolutely sure i have ideal azimuth? I dont know, i'd have to think about that for awhile.

But i prefer to streamline my use of space and not too much stuff lying around.

I think my ears can do just as good a job of finding ideal azimuth as a oscilliscope can.

Nobody really knows how good i am or how bad i am at setting up ideal azimuth, we'd have to test my results with an oscilliscope and then judge.

I do know one thing. I increase my possibility of nailing ideal azimuth because i am actually engaged in the exercise! but if i weren't and my attitude toward it is too relaxed what are my chances now of nailing it?

Cut and paste for me where i say another method other than the human ear should be used for azimuth adjustment and then i will respond.(forced smile)

If you read my posts, i think you will see and distill from them my belief that the azimuth adjustment can be set by ear , that that is the method i use and that you can have great confidence in what your ears are telling you.

This issue was never the METHOD ...RATHER ...just that it ACTUALLY be EXPLORED! and i was in fact thinking he would do this through listening by EAR.

I would define perfect azimuth as the position of the stylus in relation to the record groove that most consistently rides the groove with the highest contact surface area possible within the physical limitations of the the diamond and that both sides doing this identically to each other. This to ME would in fact equal "perfect" azimuth. That is what i meant by the use of the word.

When i used the word perfect in a previous post the meaning i was pouring into its use is "ideal".

I was only wishing to encourage opus to "know" not just "hope" his azimuth is "perfect/ideal" through... experimentation and... listening by ear. It sounded to me through our discourses , opus and i, that there was the possibility to increase the enjoyability of his playback even further than he already is enjoying through what i perceive to be a slightly overlooked parameter.

*** How would you define perfect azimuth adjustment, in electrical terms?***

I wouldnt...is this a trap?

But to answer your question, i'll take a crack at it...hmmm, lets see? Cant you use an oscilliscope for that? So, i guess the definition would be "identically measured ouputs from each channel, maybe?"

Is it possible that my azimuth is still not ideal? Yes, i am open to that. That is why i champion "ongoing openness and continuing experimention" for myself and for others. Do i need to get a oscilliscope to be absolutely sure i have ideal azimuth? I dont know, i'd have to think about that for awhile.

But i prefer to streamline my use of space and not too much stuff lying around.

I think my ears can do just as good a job of finding ideal azimuth as a oscilliscope can.

Nobody really knows how good i am or how bad i am at setting up ideal azimuth, we'd have to test my results with an oscilliscope and then judge.

I do know one thing. I increase my possibility of nailing ideal azimuth because i am actually engaged in the exercise! but if i weren't what are my chances now of nailing it?

(sorry about the double post)

Vertigo: I respect your effort in seeing that no stone is left unturned when it comes to those measurable and mechanical factors involved in accurately setting azimuth. Notwithstanding, on many past occasions, I've been able to enjoy my music considerably without necessaily going as far as you have in an effort to achieve an "ideal" sound. I'm not criticizing or finding fault with your approach. Certainly, if it has brought you to a level of great satisfaction that's wonderful. I just don't have the interest to pursue or persist with the level of determination you do. You mention above that you wished to encourage me to "know" not just "hope" my azimuth was "perfect/ideal"...I have never in my life actually even thought, let alone hoped my azimuth was "ideal/perfect". I simply made some of the usual adjustments, then used my ears. My desire to possibly seek some changes in my system's front end has more to do with attaining an overall sound balance which in part expresses or reflects the qualities inherent in the particular components I expect to purchase and which I desire. Setting azimuth with them, as with any similar components, will take its place within the context of the usual set of adjustments. All this aside, kind thanks again for your concern.

Your welcome, Opus.

**My desire to possibly seek some changes in my system's front end has more to do with attaining an overall sound balance which in part expresses or reflects the qualities inherent in the particular components I expect to purchase and which I desire.****

****qualities inherent in the particular components***

Your deduction of a thumbs up or thumbs down for that component is affected by azimuth therefore your conclusions will be skewed.

In my situation incorrect azimuth originally made me think the breuer was a arm that sounded "mechanical" and "cold" or that the virtuoso's were "hashy"!

Interestingly before i bought the breuer i inquired with a previous breuer owner and asked him why they sold it. He complained that it was bright? A what? 7000 dollar arm bright? anythings possible...but...anyways... my unchecked azimuth or other parameter would have corroborated what i now believe to be a incorrect assessment.

Azimuth adjustment shouldnt have to take any longer than vta or vtf experiment.

If you choose to assess components and build a system with unknown azimuth i suppose i can respect that its fine with you but i just dont know how thats going to effect the value of our future discussions about how this really sounds or that really sounds?

I guess were all different kinds of audiophiles. Who am i to criticize? I was just like that too and i guess i cant be like that anymore.

To this audiophile...trying to assess ACCURATELY how a component or system sounds without taking a look at azimuth is like navigating a ship through fog without the use of radar.

(Interestingly i've been in two situations. One where there was no radar, i was asked by the skipper to stand on the bow and keep my eyes peeled ,progress was very slow, the other situation was where we did have radar and the "blip" on the radar was on a collision course with us and traveling too fast for that kind of weather condition! (you cant see each others navigation lights til you're on top of each other so no one knows how the other is steering!Sometimes your both trying to avoid each other but in doing so youre still steering into each other! Luckily WE stopped to a dead halt and seconds later we saw a 60ft cruiser eerily pop out of nowhere and just zing by us! and as quickly as he appeared , he just as quickly disappeared again into the fog! Idiot! A very unnerving feeling that situation. Luckily he didnt split us in half !or ride right up over our bulwarks!)

Opus, you better start consistently checking azimuth from now on or i am going to call the azimuth police! to come to your door and fine you! (smile)

Yeah, i'm getting pretty ok playback now, after attending to azimuth along with the other parameters.

I just like having as many tools at my disposal as is possible. Plus i have fun at discovering the sometimes really profound changes minuscule differences can make.

I also dont like buying and selling a component for unjustified reasons. I feel sorry for component builders who probably have to hear " their x speaker is bright", when they know it isnt. It must really hurt. But then they are probably comforted by the fact that they know alot of audiophiles dont know what theyre doing.

The hi end industry to some degree thrives on poor set up. That is, there is alot of buying and selling.

No, the breuer in my context is not bright.

From where I'm standing i dont understand your logic but i have to respect your decision.

Sincerely,