LP 12 set-up part 1 cartridge alignment

[yours in music]

I discovered recently, on the website of vacuum state, a cartridge alignment method which looks promising:

http://www.vacuumstate.com/fileupload/GuruSetUp.pdf

which uses first the unorthodox Rowan McCombe's (aka The Guru) Phono Cartridge Protractor:

http://www.vacuumstate.com/fileupload/G ... ractor.pdf.

Would be particularly interested to have the feedback of somebody having or planning to use it, especially with an LP12

Yours,
:twisted:

[lejonklou]

Sorry, but after a quick read I can't find anything that sounds promising. If there is anything specific you've found, please point it out to me.

There is no magic in using different protractor's, just a matter of trading one slight tracking error for another. Linn's recommended 65 and 120 mm null points (Baerwald geometry) from the spindle distributes the errors over the record and I don't see any point in using anything else.

[Moomintroll]

There is no magic in using different protractor's, just a matter of trading one slight tracking error for another. Linn's recommended 65 and 120 mm null points (Baerwald geometry) from the spindle distributes the errors over the record and I don't see any point in using anything else.

Completely agree - it's all a compromise. Things like tight cartridge bolts, clean stylus and tracking force are far more important.

'troll

[yours in music]

OK, point taken for the protractor.

However my question had two parts, the other one being the process of optimizing the different parameters VTA, VTF, antiskate, (azimuth), and their relationship with each other. The description of the process given in this paper is comprehensive and constitutes an integral approch of the problem which I liked, as a novice.

I did not find any other description of this process elsewhere on internet, everything written I have seen was focusing on only one parameter and not the all of them.

Would be interested your feedback on this paper too

[lejonklou]

I don't feel the need for any additional theory regarding these parameters, as they are already well understood. This is how I do it:

1. I set the VTA (tone arm height) using the Tune Method. It differs slightly between every cartridge (and unfortunately between every MM stylus), but on an LP12, the arm will be close to parallel to the record surface.

2. I determine the optimal VTF (tracking force) using the Tune Method. On Linn cartridges/arms, it's between 1.5 and 2.0 g.

3. I adjust the antiskating using the Tune Method. On Linn cartridges/arms, the value is often a bit higher than the tracking force.

4. If the tracking force and antiskating ended up significantly different from what I initially used when setting the VTA, I start over from 1. Otherwise, I'm done.

The result is a great sounding turntable.

[yours in music]

Where could I find the best description of the tune method?

[lejonklou]

This is my description:

http://www.lejonklou.com/?page=37

[ThomasOK]

I don't feel the need for any additional theory regarding these parameters, as they are already well understood. This is how I do it:

1. I set the VTA (tone arm height) using the Tune Method. It differs slightly between every cartridge (and unfortunately between every MM stylus), but on an LP12, the arm will be close to parallel to the record surface.

2. I determine the optimal VTF (tracking force) using the Tune Method. On Linn cartridges/arms, it's between 1.5 and 2.0 g.

3. I adjust the antiskating using the Tune Method. On Linn cartridges/arms, the value is often a bit higher than the tracking force.

4. If the tracking force and antiskating ended up significantly different from what I initially used when setting the VTA, I start over from 1. Otherwise, I'm done.

The result is a great sounding turntable.

Clear, concise and certainly the best way I've found to do it.

Having things like tracking force gauges accurate to .001 gram really means nothing when you have to tune each parameter by ear for best performance anyway.

[k_numigl]

Antiskating setting

On my Ekos I can't read any value between 1.5 and 2. I counted
the zigzag rim: 11 zigzags for 1 g difference = little help. On top of
that, this red dot is not a good indicator. So how in the world is
it possible to find a previous setting again???

I'm asking because I changed the setting from where it was by less
than half a zigzag plus (music was much worse) and had to struggle to find
the previous nice sound again (success, but I would have appreciated
something like a nonius or at least a proper scale and indicator). Any
tricks there, or are you just confident to find the good sound again?

Regards, Klaus

[Tony Tune-age]

Antiskating setting

On my Ekos I can't read any value between 1.5 and 2. I counted
the zigzag rim: 11 zigzags for 1 g difference = little help. On top of
that, this red dot is not a good indicator. So how in the world is
it possible to find a previous setting again???

I'm asking because I changed the setting from where it was by less
than half a zigzag plus (music was much worse) and had to struggle to find
the previous nice sound again (success, but I would have appreciated
something like a nonius or at least a proper scale and indicator). Any
tricks there, or are you just confident to find the good sound again?

Not sure if this will help, but over time I learned approximately where the nice sounding antiskating setting was located. The antiskating and tonearm tracking numbers don't always match exactly. However, the antiskating can be adjusted according to sound 8) .

[yours in music]

for the antiskating setting I used , having an early ekos SE, the general rule VTF+0.5; then checked with hifi-news test record and adapted little bit
however, to fine tune by ear I like the method indicated by my first post in this thread:
Anti Skating
This is new and vital information, never before seen in print from other sources, and totally creditable to the Guru (Rowan
McCombe), who taught it to me back in the mid/late 70’s. (And I in turn taught it to Dice 45 circa 2000).
a/ Select a premium stereo recording with a wide even spread of texture across the whole stereo picture. A live well spread out choral
recording is perhaps the best for this, particularly if recorded in a large naturally reverberant space, but a.studio recording with a
huge background reverberation can also be used if nothing else is available (I have used Al Stewart’s 70’s “Year of the Cat”).
b/ With the antiskating force at zero, listen to the dynamics & microdynamics of the stereo picture. Not the tonality or anything else,
just the macro/microdynamics, but more specifically, what we call the Downward Dynamic Range (DDR), which is “What
microdynamics can you hear in the presence of macrodynamics?” A live recording of a large choir is a perfect disc for this purpose.
With no antiskating force dialed in, the left channel will show more DDR than the right channel, it will seem more alive than the
numb flat sounding right channel, which may almost sound as if it’s been switched off.
c/ Now increase the antiskating force step by step by small step. Maybe nothing happens for quite a while (you are still down on the
“flat” region of the Pix 1 red curve) but sooner or later you will sense the right channel (Pix 3 blue line) slowly coming to life more
and more, but the left channel (Pix 3 green line) sounds pretty much OK and unchanged.
d/ Continue to increase the antiskating compensation by *very* small steps until you reach a point (Pix 3 Red arrow) where the right
channel has improved to the point it now matches the left, so they both sound equally dynamic and you have a wonderfully balanced
stereo picture. This point you should mark/document carefully, as you may need to come back to it if you get lost further on.
e/ Then you further increase in extremely small steps and both channels will grow more alive together. This shows that the diamond
is now almost perfectly “floating” in the groove, with identical pressure & response on each side of the diamond (= each channel).
But one step too far and both channels loose their dynamics dramatically and the magic just vanishes. This is because the curve (Pix
3) associated with antiskating is even more extreme than the red curve of Pix 1, and the sonics drop like a stone once past the peak!
Obviously you have gone too far, so sneak it back a fraction and verify BOTH channels are now dynamic and naturally singing
beyond what you have heard before..
Don’t expect this antiskating setting to be anything like that marked on the arm’s scale—it could be less or more— trust your ears![quote][/quote]

[Azazello]

yours in music, please understand that this forum is completely based on tune method as the only qualitative method of evaluation.

/Az

[k_numigl]

My feeling is that the author had nothing else than tune dem in mind,
but expressed it just a bit differently. For myself, I simply translated
the wordings.

Could you feel how other instruments (drums or percussion for example) were helping you to follow the tune (then B is better!) or were they slightly distracting or playing on their own? (Then A is better).

is “What
microdynamics can you hear in the presence of macrodynamics?”


If you were feeling "yeah, that's how it goes!" the last time, then B is better. If you became puzzled and no longer really sure how the tune goes,

and the magic just vanishes
.....and naturally singing
beyond what you have heard before


I like the explanation by the blue and red curve, as this explains
nicely why the last tiny steps can be as important as the bigger
first ones. (Thought myself that things behave like the blue curve...)


However
- trust your ears
- the antiskating can be adjusted according to sound
is obviously what I did. The question was about a (improvised) scale which helps
to return to a certain and distinct previous point.


For that, exact measurements are helpful (go forth and back
in a defined and repeatable way), so in my view
> things like tracking force gauges accurate to .001 gram really means
such devices, too, could assist with the setting, just as a torque tool
does. (Provided that a few of those 1/1000 g make a difference,
of course - what I don't know.)

Regards, Klaus

[lejonklou]

Sure Klaus, you can interpret it that way if you wish. But such translations can easily lead wrong.

The difference is that we understand what audiophiles mean when they describe sound, but they rarely understand what we mean when we talk about musical differences.

Although one may extrapolate and be diplomatic, the differences become all too clear when you're making comparisons together. Tune Method is a skill that, once aquired, changes your view on musical reproduction and the language with which you describe the differences.

[Azazello]

[...] we understand what audiophiles mean when they describe sound [...]

Talk for yourself! I never understand what they mean! :lol:

[Tony Tune-age]

[...] we understand what audiophiles mean when they describe sound [...]

Talk for yourself! I never understand what they mean! :lol:

Same here...understanding audiophile terminology hasn't been easy for me...

[Charlie1]

I set the VTA (tone arm height) using the Tune Method. It differs slightly between every cartridge (and unfortunately between every MM stylus), but on an LP12, the arm will be close to parallel to the record surface.

Hi Fredrik,
LPs vary a lot in thickness. When setting the height by ear, do you use a thicker LP, say 180g, or not?

[lejonklou]

LPs vary a lot in thickness. When setting the height by ear, do you use a thicker LP, say 180g, or not?

For about ten years, I used an original copy of The Mamas and the Papas first LP. It's medium thickness and seemed a good compromise.

One day last summer, however, the sun was shining in through the window in my lab and I had left this album standing by the LP12 service table. It became slightly warped due to the heat.

Now I use an old record by the Doobie Brothers. It's a tiny bit thinner than The Mamas and the Papas, but still medium thickness.

[vicdiaz]

One day last summer, however, the sun was shining in through the window in my lab and I had left this album standing by the LP12 service table. It became slightly warped due to the heat.

Hi Fred,

Place the LP between two night table glass tops (like a sandwich) and leave in the sun for about two hours. Then move the LP inside (still between the two glass tops and let it cool for about another hour. That will take care of almost any warped LP.

[lejonklou]

Thanks Vic!

Never tried that, but I will

I assume the "baked" record will get a bit noisier. Correct? Not that it matters in this case, as I only use it for setting tone arm height.

[vicdiaz]

Thanks Vic!
I assume the "baked" record will get a bit noisier.

I have not noticed any increase in surface noise.