Sarcher, That's better. Maybe it was use of terms, not sure.
Anyway, "The people that try to get the perfect SRA for every record must believe that it's more important than perfect alignment. I doubt there are many people that would go to the trouble of adjusting overhang for every record as well."
I know that's taken out of context, but that perception was what I was addressing by statements about percentage of records needing correction, and viability of resultant alignments. If SRA is set for 92, then additional SRA angle results in less overhang from raising the arm. It's true that angle changes slightly but less overhang would put a Baerwald alignment a hair closer to Stevenson. A small change in height results in a much smaller change in overhang, depending on eff length, plus most records don't need correcting.
After many thousands of records, it's a trade-off I might make to optimize SQ. Hence the popularity of on-the-fly adjusters. The only problem with some of them, is they compromise mounting integrity. Some linear arms are a particular problem with respect to changing SRA, those with a short arm tube.
Regards,