Question on FR 66s

Dear Halcro: +++++ " you cannot adjust it via the headshell as Halcro suggests because you will end up with a different overhang... " +++++

so, all the advise you give to the FR set up is wrong. Why? because you are giving advise with foundation on what you hear on what you are aware and other that recomend the inherent distortions of the tonearm you are given advise on even higher distoritons you are hearing due to your absolutely wrong set up!!! ( as the Dover post pointed out. ) and it's almost sure that you followed and follow the same error/mistake with all cartridge in that tonearm and in other tonearms!

As you said: ¡ HORROR.....HORROR !

Certainly you have a deep misunderstood on tonearm/cartridge geometry alignment. It is not surprise because several people can't understand it.
There is no rocket science there is only Euclid geometry that even you can make equations " manipulation " through Algebra to change parameter values.

Well, the best of all is that now you can make the right set up to follow given advises.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.

Now I understand your predilection for that Signet high distortion item.

But wait, best for you and best of all is that you will have a lot of fun in the next few years because you have to re-listen any single cartridge you own in any single tonearm you own.

Halcro, any one of us made and make mistakes almost every " audio life day " and is the best way to improve: when we are aware and fix our mistakes.

R.

Dover,
Enlighten me as to where you see me "suggesting" anything other than mounting the FR-64s at 230mm as recommended by Fidelity Research which should give the recommended overhang using the geometry selected by them.
Your preferred mounting distance of 231 will either give a different overhang or different geometry?
Your choice.....no problems.

Since we are talking about alignments, I would appreciate to get some answers from knowledgeable members here.

As I understand, there are 3 popular alignment curves, i.e. Baerwald, Löfgren, and Stevenson, and these curves aimed to minimize tracking error in different sections of the LP.

With the alignment jig that came with the Graham Phantom arm, I can see the difference in overhang of the 2 different alignment curves (forgot which 2) can be as large as nearly 1mm. I would assume this difference is way larger than the accuracy built into even the cheapest alignment protractors.

As such, I am a bit skeptical when some users of ultra accurate alignment jigs claiming they got considerable improvements with these jigs. It seems to me that, even with this ultra accurate alignment, you are simply trading less tracking error in a certain section of the LP for higher tracking error in other sections! So, unless you are judging the performance by only a certain section on a certain LP, a considerable performance improvement over the entire LP seems unlikely!

I am not questioning the experience of other members, but just want to know if there is any technical reason behind that! Or am I missing something?

Dear Thekong: +++++ " and these curves aimed to minimize tracking distotion in different sections of the LP. " ++++

correct and you can have as many curves as you want depending if you take IEC/DIN/JIS most inner/most outer groove as input to the equations or even your own values. You can " play " about to make calculations make the set up and decide which one works better for you.

+++++ " With the alignment jig that came with the Graham Phantom arm, I can see the difference in overhang of the 2 different alignment curves (forgot which 2) can be as large as nearly 1mm " +++++

that's the difference between Löfgren A and Löfgren B alignment.

+++++ " As such, I am a bit skeptical when some users of ultra accurate alignment jigs claiming they got considerable improvements with these jigs. It seems to me that, even with this ultra accurate alignment, you are simply trading less tracking distortion in a certain section of the LP for higher tracking distortion in other sections! " +++++

right and that is what I understand Dover posted, unfortunatelly always exist trade-offs.

Remember what I posted :

++++ " any change on VTF or VTA/SRA ( if we make those changes or the ones that happen during playback due to the LPs are not flat but full of waves. ) affect the whole cartridge/tonearm geometry set up meaning that distortions values overall the LP surface that were calculated on the choosed cartridge/tonearm geometry alignment has no " value " any more because the starting distortions calculated were on " perfect conditions/theory " in a STATIC way not DYNAMIC as during playback.

So in reality we are almost at random ( during playback ) about those tracking distortions generated on a pivoted tonearm choosed cartridge/tonearm alignment.... " +++++

Btw, Halcro you can manipulate any of the equations parameters only if you made the value changes in the other equations input parameters and the set up was made it with the new calculated parameters. If not everything is wrong, you can'T manipulate the overhang parameter with out the choosed equations new calculation. This is not aritmetic where you can add or rest somewhere and think that all is preserved but the overhang: mistake.
Anyway, I don't care what you are listening because I don't have to live with, as Dover I'm only trying to help.

Reggards and enjoy the music,
R.