Question on FR 66s


For some reason, search on FR 66s in agon did not turn up anything much. I recalled that recommended S2P distance is 296mm rather than 295mm and Stevenson geometry seems to work best. Is this correct? I already have FR 64s which works very nicely with Koetsu. In general, does FR 66s works well with the more modern cartridges, Lyra, Air Tight, Dynavector etc.
I am kind of curious to try it but not sure what to try it with. Beside those mentioned on my system page, I have Kiseki Blue, XV-1s and Miyajima Zero on hand currently.

Thanks for any suggestion.
suteetat
I have to say that back when Halcro asked about setting up his cartridges in separate headshells so that each cartridge could be used with each of his tonearms (at the time, I thought he wanted flexibility among several tonearms, not just 64S and 66S), I was dubious that this could be done without at least some minor re-alignment each time. (And we know there is no such thing as "minor" realignment; each time one must do it, it is a pain in the arse.) Later, when Halcro claimed he had conquered the problem, and since he was pleased with the results, I assumed that perhaps I had been wrong and /or that Halcro may have found some compromise that is "good enough". Now that the issue appears to have been put before us again, I am interested.

Right now, the question seems to be that if you mount the 64S at 230mm and the 66S at 295mm (factory recommended, as I understand it), then a headshell bearing a cartridge that is correctly aligned for use on the 64S will also give perfect alignment when that headshell/cartridge is transferred to the 66S. It would seem that someone who has actually done this using a quality protractor to evaluate alignment on both tonearms could tell us the answer. Also, Euclid could tell us, if he knew the other relevant parameters.
Sorry guys,
I had forgotten that the time Lew refers to when I did indeed seek to interchange headshells between my two FR-66s arms, the FR-64s arm and the Micro Seiki MA-505s which was nearly two years ago I think?.....
The MA-505s was no problem because it's overhang is the same as the FR-66s.....however the FR-64s has an overhang of 12mm as opposed to the 15mm for the others.
So to correct for that......I reset my P to S to 233mm for the 64s.
And yes......I know that the Av and Max distortion levels go up as a result.
I think now that I will select about 5 or 6 cartridges and specifically align them for the FR-64s set at 231.5mm.
I've had to do that already for the SAEC WE-8000/ST so we shall see......?
I also miscalculated my cartridge storage facilities.......
The total is 38......not 48 :-)
Dear Halcro: Something is wrong in your whole tonearm/cartridge set ups:

FR choosed Stevenson ( IEC ) alignment for the tonearms mounting specs ( we can choose Löfgren A or B if we want to test in between. ) and that's why the 66 overhang is 12 against the 64 that's 15mm.

Now, following Stevenson and following what you did to change the 230 PtS distance to 233 for " compensate " and can swap cartridges between 66 and 64 is a misunderstood just does not works because if you change to 233 the correct 64 overhang is 14.7mm not the same as the 66 and with a different offset angle/linear offset too and something similar occur with the 505 too.

So that's not only an issue of way higher distortion but a plain misunderstood how to handle how works those equations.

So, please don't delete my posts it is clear that you are hearing " different " things wrong or non-correct " things ", again way higher distortions.

Thank's for your explanation that puts a " light " on your set up that has several " problems ".

If I missed something please let me know.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear Lewm: +++++ " It would seem that someone who has actually done this using a quality protractor to evaluate alignment on both tonearms " +++++

IMHO that's is not a " quality protractor " issue but to understand how the whole subject works!!!:

in the link I posted comes everything you have to know about the tonearm/cartridge alignment geometry. Those white papers ( long ones. ) makes a in full explanation in easy words for any one could understand and has all the technical/equations inforamtion too.

The point is that we have to read it carfully, yes it's a long one but if we want to understand about we have to read it.

Through the time I posted that same link because the same subject not less than 10 times and people still don't read it!!!!!

With all respect seems to me that some like you want: " peeled and in the mouth ", this is what we say here in México.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.