2. analog
  3. 1345561403

Table/Cart Set Up - By Ear or Test Record?

Been on Audiogon for years and love the interaction amongst members - its both entertaining and educational.

Several threads have discussed how to set up various aspects of a table - isolation, VTF, VTA/SRA, azimuth, anti-skate, etc.

I have all the bells ans whistles - two test records, Fozgometer, Mint protrator, Feickert protractor, etc.

Over the last week, I set up my table by both using standard measurements via Feickert (spindle to pivot distance) and Mint (overhang,arc). Then set up cart using test records and Fozgometer. I then waited a week and reset everything else up again after Feickert/Mint by ear alone. Here is what I found:

By test records / Fozgo: quicker, less hassle, good sound

By ear: slower, meticulous, learned more, great sound.

For learning analogholics, I would recommened, time permitting, that you try both set up strategies and learn from them. I'm glad I did, but after this exercice, I will definitely agree with Doug Deacon and others, setting up by ear is the most sastisfying, educational, and will give you the best sound.
philb7777
swanny76109
382 posts
 
I agree. Proper analog set up is both an art and a science. The science can get you close, but the ear (art) gets you all the way. There are so many variables and each makes a big difference. I can see how it could take a lifetime to really get the feel for it.
jazdoc
365 posts
 
I use both. Pivot to spindle, overhang and offset require precision tools like the MintLP. VTF, VTA and azimuth are set by ear.
actusreus
733 posts
 
To me adjusting by ear means adjusting to suit your own personal and subjective tastes, nothing more. When you say you obtained "great sound" by setting up by ear, what does that really mean? Only that you found the sound preferable. But another person might find the sound obtained by setting up with a test record and other tools more preferable. Is there a sound that is "right" or "correct" regardless of listeners' tastes and preferences?

If you find the sound better by adjusting by ear, that's great, but all you're doing is tweaking the setup to suit your personal and subjective perception better, not that you actually improved anything in an objective sense. Doug Deacon would most likely come and re-tweak your setup differently yet. So all this discussion tells me nothing about superiority, accurateness, or correctness of either method in an absolute sense. It might be interesting as a discussion topic in an academic sense, but from the practical standpoint it has very little value.

bpwalsh
1,207 posts
 
It's better when the technical method correlates well with the ear. Less guesswork and time, and unanimous glowing testimonials.
tonywinsc
583 posts
 
I use the tools to set-up my tonearm geometry and the test record to set the anti-skating. But after all that, I tweak in the Horizontal Tracking Angle, vertical tracking force and anti-skate by ear. If the cartridge sounds too bright or dull, I adjust the VTA and start the entire process over. The final fine adjusting has to be done by ear. I cannot visually set everything perfectly. I listen for clarity out of both channels and typically hear mistracking in the right channel first which tells me I need to adjust the anti-skating. I also clean the stylus every play with a wetted stylus brush. Currently, I experience clean clear sound from beginning to end of a record. That takes some patience to get it all dialed in just right.
More to discover