Stylus Rake Angle

Sarcher30, it might, but if so it would be very very slight! If you look at any lathe you will see at once that they are built to be quite sturdy and machined to exact tolerances. Thus the cutterhead mount is exactly perpendicular to the platter surface; one of the better examples of how excellent machining really looks, such that the azimuth error cannot be measured. So in essence, I am saying 'no, azimuth does not vary from lathe to lathe'.

I wasn't talking about out of phase signals, but left or right signals. I can see that a mono signal varying only in amplitude, side to side, will maintain a constant groove depth which doesn't vary, but stereo?

I imagine my response was not entirely clear so I will try to restate in a less ambiguous way. There is no variation in groove depth due to signal. There is only signal modulation that varies, whether stereo or mono. It sounds to me like you are confusing the two- and I can see why.

Look at it this way- groove depth is something you can set on the cutterhead. Take it as a definition unique to the technology that 'groove depth' means how deep the groove is with no signal. The signal is a function of the electronics. Think of modulation in an radio signal and its the same idea- if you want to reproduce the signal, the groove depth is a constant, just as the frequency of the radio station is a constant. If you want to look at the groove as being variable depth according to the signal, you won't be able to reproduce it.

If the cutterhead were to rise and fall with respect to the lacquer surface, then we would see a varying groove depth. In theory, during playback the cartridge body is held in constant locus by the mass of the arm so that the cartridge can only respond by the motion of the needle in the groove, not anything else.

John, Thanks for the treatise. I agree with your definitions of the terms, but I cannot see the point of your statement:

"Now while the stylus might be set at 92 degrees, the cantilever may not be at the same angle as the the cutter."

The cartridge is a transducer whose optimal function depends upon a fixed spatial relationship between the magnets and coils, as one or the other vibrates. Once the LP is cut, why should the cantilever give a damn about the cutter angle? The stylus "cares" about that in terms of SRA. So I would think that you set VTA so as to obtain proper or optimal SRA, first of all to assure proper energy transfer between groove and stylus, and then it is VTF that mainly assures the proper spatial relations between the transducing parts of the cartridge. VTA is just a convenient surrogate for SRA. Probably this has become a discussion about semantics.

John, semantics aside, if you are correct, then why are we discussing SRA? If the cartridge manufacturers want to refer to SRA as VTA and vice-versa, so what? All they are doing is referencing a record manufacturing standard. There is no way VTA refers to cantilever/surface angle. I've owned many cartridges and I stand by my statement on that. My goodness, I've had cantilevers that are curved!

Csontos,

If the cartridge manufacturers want to refer to SRA as VTA and vice-versa, so what?

They can call it what they wish, as can you, but the terms are distinct, and in adjusting every cartridge varying one varies the other.
VTA in a cartridge should be the same as the equivalent angle in a cutting lathe.
SRA should be the same as the cutting stylus angle.
My point is simply that optimising one does not automatically mean that the other is also optimised. This was the argument for using SRA rather than VTA to set up in the first place.

I used the cantilever angle as a easily understood approximation of VTA. The actual angle is that between a line drawn from the cantilever pivot point to the stylus tip and the record surface. For most cartridges this is close.

Lewm

Once the LP is cut, why should the cantilever give a damn about the cutter angle? The stylus "cares" about that in terms of SRA. So I would think that you set VTA so as to obtain proper or optimal SRA

The reason there is such a thing as VTA is that the stylus moves through an arc which is described by a radius the length of which is approximated by the cantilever and ostensibly at 20 degrees +/- 5, to the record surface. The reason for that is that the record was cut in a similar manner, the cutting stylus (while set at, say, 92 degrees to the lacquer surface), also describing an arc, as it is constrained within the cutting head. Variations in VTA cause distortions. They may be less of an issue than SRA but do exist.

But doesn't VTA become a moot point when matching SRA to whatever it is, by ear? VTA is static and fixed whether it's accurate or not. The angle of the stylus relative to the cantilever is not a fixed standard. I don't understand why you keep referring to the cantilever. If you insist that I refer to SRA as VTA, fine. It seems to be a matter of communication. Could you please explain to me the correlation between SRA and VTA?