Graham Phantom Anti-Skate. Is it effective at all?

The LP is pulling inward on the stylus while the A/S device is pulling outward on the tonearm. Where are these counteracting forces mediated? In the only place that there's elasticity to prevent something breaking: the elastic suspension between the cantilever and the cartridge body.

Doug, you may very well be right about this assertion. It has a common-sense ring of truth. And I don't doubt that your rig sounds better (to you and others) without A/S; this vector-force narrative would seem to explain it in a scientific way. But I have to wonder about the actual physics of it. Now, I'm not a physicist (my PhD is in English, not Physics) but it seems logical to me that, with a rigid tonearm, the lateral force of the A/S device is transferred to the stylus, and the "mediation" of this force through the elasticity of the cartridge suspension would occur only if the A/S force is being met with a countervailing force at the stylus tip, in other words, the outside groove wall. Under these circumstances, of course, too much A/S force is being applied. Otherwise, the transmitted force merely relieves pressure on the elasticity of the cartridge suspension, pressure caused by too little A/S.

I'd love to have someone qualified in the physics of tonearm geometry and vector forces weigh in on this fascinating subject.

For precision, I should have said: "...and the *deleterious* 'mediation' of this force through the elasticity of the cartridge suspension would occur only if the A/S force is being met with a countervailing force at the stylus tip...."

Because unipivot arms are balanced on the point of a pin, if the arm is set up properly it will compensate for any nonlinearity elsewhere.

My vinyl experience over the years has not included LOMC's or other cartridges having relatively low compliance, such as I presume most of those participating in this discussion are using. FWIW, though, using MM's and MI's having relatively high compliance (primarily Grace F9-E variants, including non-Ruby, Ruby, and Soundsmith re-tipped Ruby versions), primarily on a Magnepan Unitrac unipivot arm, with VTF generally set in the upper part of the recommended range for the particular cartridge, I have over the years consistently found that:

1)Left or right deflection of the cantilever, as viewed from the front of the cartridge when playing a record, will closely match the corresponding angle (nominally straight ahead) that is assumed by the cantilever when the stylus is raised above the record if anti-skating is set to approximately 50 to 65% of the amount recommended for the particular tonearm at the particular VTF.

2)A setting can be found in that range which will result in imperceptible left or right cantilever deflection at ALL points on the record.

3)Modest deviations from that amount of anti-skating force (either higher or lower) will ALWAYS (IME, as described) produce clearly perceivable sideways deflection of the cantilever while playing a record, which will NOT vary perceptibly as a function of what part of the record is being played.

4)I have never tried an anti-skating setting approaching zero, because given the foregoing it would seem absurd to do so in these particular circumstances.

Hopefully that datapoint will be of some usefulness in the discussion. Best regards,
-- Al

Dougs point about the anti skate been applied to one end of the cantilever and the skating force being applied to the other is quite correct. However IF one has checked that the cantilever is straight, and not being pulled in one direction or the other whilst playing ( assuming one can find a record that is not eccentric ) then this argument has less weight. In terms of the physics then the effective mass and cartridge compliance come into the calculation. The issue here is that not many cartridge manufacturers specify the lateral compliance, and in my experience some low compliance cartridges are quite compliant in the horizontal plane and vice versa.

Furthermore if a cantilever is leaning one way or the other, then clearly the magnets or coils could be sitting in a position where there is more non linearity within the electrical/magnetic fields.

Many arms have inbuilt anti skate anyway. In the case of the VPI's the twisted loop of tonearm wire is far too stiff in my view and exerts both an anti skate and a rotating force affecting azimuth. In other arms the tonearm wire is often impeding free movement in the bearings as John pointed out.

Antiskate systems themselves can be problematical - spring, hanging weight, elastomer thread, weighted lever - they all have their pros and cons. It is a horses for courses scenario where you end up, but the process for determining the optimum ( or "none" ) anti skate should be consistent.

As an aside, whilst having a hiatus from audio, I used a Shure V15Vxmr ( with stabiliser brush removed ) for about 10 years on an ET2 linear tracker ( high horizontal mass, no skating forces ). I had added a little magnetic damping to the bearing tube motion using the eddy fields generated from the motion of the tube across the magnets. After 10 years the original cantilever was still dead straight and the cartage was sold for more than I originally paid.