Hi Lejonklou
You recently gave me some very useful advice regarding the tightness of the Ittok arm pillar and I am hoping you can do the same for this query.
I currently use a Dynavector DV20X H (Stylus profile Micro Ridge) on my LP12/Ittok and had set it up using a Polaris protractor (inner null point 63.7mm). Then curiosity got the better of me. I downloaded a Linn protractor (inner null point 65mm) from the vinylengine.com website. This site also shows a correct calculated (calculated from effective length / overhang / offset) null point to be 65.6mm. In addition John Rogers, author of 'How to set up and fine tune a turntable’ calculates the inner null point for the Ittok to be 63.7mm.
Having decided that Linn knows best for it's products I realigned the cartridge using the Linn protractor (after first taking the arm off the turntable). I did notice that the cartridge bolts were not as tight as they could be so when it was realigned I made sure they were nice and tight.
So far so good!
Prior to the change the sound was musical and beguiling. After the change the sound seemed to lose some of the magic. I have only had chance to listen to a couple of tracks so I could be premature with my conclusions.
Any advice?
Thanks
Mike
Cartridge Alignment
Moderator: Staff
Hi Mike!
The null points you mention make very little difference. If you look closely at the geometry of a turntable, you will find that cartridge alignment is always a compromise. What you want to achieve is the least amount of average angle offset, but you will still have angle errors in between and outside the null points, regardless of what protractor is used.
Moreover, most cartridge manufacturers don't mount their styluses very accurately, resulting in stylus angles far more off than the difference between these two protractors. This is sad but true. I have recently spoken to a manufacturer who confirmed that the allowed deviations from perfectly straight is quite big. It is simply too costly to mount each stylus perfectly.
It is also worth noting that when one adjusts a stylus to a new angle, there will be a new running in period until it sounds as good as before. But this is hardly noticeable with tiny adjustments.
The torque with which you mounted the screws make a very clear difference. The optimal value depends on the materials used in cartridge body and tonearm headshell. If the cartridge body is metal, I'd experiment with torques around 1 Nm. If it's plastic, it needs to be much less. Perhaps one fifth of the previous value.
The null points you mention make very little difference. If you look closely at the geometry of a turntable, you will find that cartridge alignment is always a compromise. What you want to achieve is the least amount of average angle offset, but you will still have angle errors in between and outside the null points, regardless of what protractor is used.
Moreover, most cartridge manufacturers don't mount their styluses very accurately, resulting in stylus angles far more off than the difference between these two protractors. This is sad but true. I have recently spoken to a manufacturer who confirmed that the allowed deviations from perfectly straight is quite big. It is simply too costly to mount each stylus perfectly.
It is also worth noting that when one adjusts a stylus to a new angle, there will be a new running in period until it sounds as good as before. But this is hardly noticeable with tiny adjustments.
The torque with which you mounted the screws make a very clear difference. The optimal value depends on the materials used in cartridge body and tonearm headshell. If the cartridge body is metal, I'd experiment with torques around 1 Nm. If it's plastic, it needs to be much less. Perhaps one fifth of the previous value.
Fredrik is quite correct on the alignment front and there are different theories as to where the best null points are. Some go for null points that give the smallest error across the playing surface of the record, others recommend optimizing for the smallest error on the inner grooves where tracking is more difficult. Either way the difference is fairly small. The place where you run into the most problems is with the arms on a lot of the older tables, especially a lot of the S=shaped ones, where the arm or headshell is actually bent at the wrong angle by a significant amount. In this case the cartridge has to be twisted in the headshell for proper alignment. This is not a problem with Linn or Rega arms which have the proper offset angle to the headshell.
I also have found that the accuracy of stylus mounting is not all it could be and can certainly be big enough to swamp the differences in alignment points.
In regard to the torque settings I have actually found that most of the cartridges I have tried in Linn arms end up sounding best near .4 Nm - even metal bodied units like the Lyra Argo and Sumiko Blackbird. The Adikt is closer to .3 Nm. The only metal bodied cartridges I've found that worked best near 1Nm (just a hair under) have been the Akiva and Arkivs but they use stainless steel fittings instead of having threads directly in the body like the Lyra and Sumiko. Unfortunately I have not set up your Dynavector model so I can't give much help here - best is to try different settings and listen for the most tuneful performance.
I also have found that the accuracy of stylus mounting is not all it could be and can certainly be big enough to swamp the differences in alignment points.
In regard to the torque settings I have actually found that most of the cartridges I have tried in Linn arms end up sounding best near .4 Nm - even metal bodied units like the Lyra Argo and Sumiko Blackbird. The Adikt is closer to .3 Nm. The only metal bodied cartridges I've found that worked best near 1Nm (just a hair under) have been the Akiva and Arkivs but they use stainless steel fittings instead of having threads directly in the body like the Lyra and Sumiko. Unfortunately I have not set up your Dynavector model so I can't give much help here - best is to try different settings and listen for the most tuneful performance.
A question, Thomas: The Rega protractor uses the above mentioned approach. When mounting e.g. an Adikt on a Rega arm, have you ever tried comparing the Rega protractor with a more conventional 2-null-points type?ThomasOK wrote:others recommend optimizing for the smallest error on the inner grooves where tracking is more difficult
I have generally used Rega's protractor with Rega turntables, but always wondered if a 2-null-points alignment wouldn't perform a little better. I mean on the whole, not just the innermost track, where the Rega alignment becomes perfect.
I'm afraid I've tended to do the same as you: I use the Rega protractor on Rega turntables and the Linn on Linn turntables. I have also used a Dennesen protractor on the Regas but I've not tried listening to the two different alignment approaches - something I should do one of these days.
I rather like the Adikt on the mid-to-upper Regas but I'm not wild about the additional $78US for the two spacers needed to raise the arm to a proper height. :( I preferred the much cheaper thick washers that they originally used as spacers for the RB700.
I rather like the Adikt on the mid-to-upper Regas but I'm not wild about the additional $78US for the two spacers needed to raise the arm to a proper height. :( I preferred the much cheaper thick washers that they originally used as spacers for the RB700.
Hi
Over the weekend I redid the cartridge bolts using my torque driver to 0.5nm (the lowest it will go). Once again following your advice brought a very noticeable improvement. The music flowed much better. It was easier to follow what was going on and the music just seemed to have more feeling.
I originally bought the torque driver after reading on the Naim forum about the importance of getting the torque right for the mid/bass units of Naim’s SBL speakers (which I have). I noticed similar improvements with the speakers. I also noticed with both the speakers and cartridge that getting the torque right removed any unevenness in the sound (if that makes sense).
This has raised a few questions in my mind.
Is the improvement partly down to getting all the relevant screws/bolts tightened to exactly the same degree?
What other areas in the LP12 setup would benefit from getting the torque right?
How do the torque settings I’ve tried (arm pillar/cartridge bolts) reconcile with Linn’s instructions – “it is important that all fasteners in the turntable be very tight …….. probably tighter than you would have imagined”?
Thanks again for your help
Mike
Over the weekend I redid the cartridge bolts using my torque driver to 0.5nm (the lowest it will go). Once again following your advice brought a very noticeable improvement. The music flowed much better. It was easier to follow what was going on and the music just seemed to have more feeling.
I originally bought the torque driver after reading on the Naim forum about the importance of getting the torque right for the mid/bass units of Naim’s SBL speakers (which I have). I noticed similar improvements with the speakers. I also noticed with both the speakers and cartridge that getting the torque right removed any unevenness in the sound (if that makes sense).
This has raised a few questions in my mind.
Is the improvement partly down to getting all the relevant screws/bolts tightened to exactly the same degree?
What other areas in the LP12 setup would benefit from getting the torque right?
How do the torque settings I’ve tried (arm pillar/cartridge bolts) reconcile with Linn’s instructions – “it is important that all fasteners in the turntable be very tight …….. probably tighter than you would have imagined”?
Thanks again for your help
Mike
Nice to hear you got an improvement, Mike!
Thanks to Paolo for lots of ideas and information about optimal torque and to Thomas for introducing me to the torque tool!
What's important is that the torque is exactly right, not that it's exactly the same.Mikeg wrote:Is the improvement partly down to getting all the relevant screws/bolts tightened to exactly the same degree?
Basically every fastener. Some are more important than others.What other areas in the LP12 setup would benefit from getting the torque right?
Linn were wrong when they wrote this. And I believed them for too long!How do the torque settings I’ve tried (arm pillar/cartridge bolts) reconcile with Linn’s instructions – “it is important that all fasteners in the turntable be very tight …….. probably tighter than you would have imagined”?
Thanks to Paolo for lots of ideas and information about optimal torque and to Thomas for introducing me to the torque tool!
cartridge alignement
Mike I have been looking for atorque spanner with low settings, have you identified a good supplier?
Mikeg wrote:Incidentally I have managed to get hold of a toque driver. Is there an ideal torque for the cartridge bolts? Does it make much difference?
Mike
Yes, and they would still only be pointers in the right direction, as these tools have inaccuracies (your tool is not calibrated against mine).Mikeg wrote:I suppose its to much to ask what those settings are?
I don't know it all, but I keep track of every installation I make and every screw I tighten. That way I can go back, compare and gradually improve.
Re: cartridge alignement
I don't know which unit Mike uses but I can recommend the one I use. It is the model 36/4 made by Sturtevant Richmont and covers the range from .2Nm to 4Nm which is pretty much just sufficient to cover the range of torques needed for the LP12 and for any speakers I've done so far. (I have one torque setting that is under the bottom of the scale but I can still use this screwdriver for it.) The manufacturers info on it can be found here.anthony wrote:Mike I have been looking for atorque spanner with low settings, have you identified a good supplier?Mikeg wrote:Incidentally I have managed to get hold of a toque driver. Is there an ideal torque for the cartridge bolts? Does it make much difference?
Mike
http://www.srtorque.com/tamatsd.html
They retail for over $200US but I have seen them sold by themselves and in kits with a number of tips for less than that. I picked up mine used off eBay but you have to be careful as they make a fixed torque screwdriver that looks much like the adjustable one and they sometimes get listed incorrectly on eBay. Sears also sells this in the US for $149 as a Craftsman piece item# 00934887000. You can see in the Sears photo it is the Sturtevant Richmont unit.
Hi
I have recently been thinking about this topic of cartridge alignment again as I have noticed on some records I am experiencing some inner groove distortion. To be fair it does only appear to effect those LP's with a narrow lead out groove.
I have come across this:
"Avid Mirrored Phono Cartridge Alignment Tool (For Linn Tonearms
While designing their own arms, Avid developed a computer program to calculate optimum alignment, taking into account the arms correct geometry. Every radial tracking arm with differing geometry will have different null points (were distortion is zero) and whilst our universal alignment gauge will be very accurate, the arm specific alignment gauges are 100% precise to the arm involved."
I don't anything else about it but I do wonder how this compares to Linn's own protractor?
Mike
I have recently been thinking about this topic of cartridge alignment again as I have noticed on some records I am experiencing some inner groove distortion. To be fair it does only appear to effect those LP's with a narrow lead out groove.
I have come across this:
"Avid Mirrored Phono Cartridge Alignment Tool (For Linn Tonearms
While designing their own arms, Avid developed a computer program to calculate optimum alignment, taking into account the arms correct geometry. Every radial tracking arm with differing geometry will have different null points (were distortion is zero) and whilst our universal alignment gauge will be very accurate, the arm specific alignment gauges are 100% precise to the arm involved."
I don't anything else about it but I do wonder how this compares to Linn's own protractor?
Mike
Computer programs to calculate correct geometry don't need to be "developed". They are freely available on the net. I did it on a piece of paper once when I wondered how big the errors would become with an incorrect positioning (like the Adikt's standard recommendation).
Linn's protractor is 100% precise to Linn arms, so there isn't any major advantage in using someone else's version of the same geometry. The only problem with the Linn protractor is that sometimes the central hole is not perfectly central in position, which is quite irritating. I think Thomas commented on having bought several in an attempt to find a copy with a perfectly centred hole.
Linn's protractor is 100% precise to Linn arms, so there isn't any major advantage in using someone else's version of the same geometry. The only problem with the Linn protractor is that sometimes the central hole is not perfectly central in position, which is quite irritating. I think Thomas commented on having bought several in an attempt to find a copy with a perfectly centred hole.