Tracking error distortion audibility


I recently unpacked my turntable from a couple of years of storage. It still sounds very good. Several times during playback of the first few albums I literally jumped from my chair to see which track was playing as it sounded so great. After a while I realized the "great" sound was always at one of the "null" points. They seem to occur at the approximately the proper place (about 125mm from spindle) and near the lead out groove. Questions:
Is this common? I have improved the resolution of my system since the table's been in storage but I don't remember hearing this before.
All others geometric sources of alignment error not defined by the null points (VTA, azimuth etc.) are essentially constant through out the arc correct? If so they should cancel out. I assume the remedy is a linear tracking arm but I am surprised at how obviously better the sound is at these two points.
Table - AR ES-1, Arm - Sumiko MMT, Cart. - Benz Glider, Pre - Audible Illusions, Speakers - Innersound electrostatic hybrid
Do linear arms really sound as good across the whole record as I hear at only the nulls with my set-up?
feathed
Hi Herr Tonearm,
thanks for the offer re.: calling :-)
When I'm looking East (for long enough..) I'll see the Indian Ocean.
Methinks, that's gonna be too much phone-cost since we have no real discrepancy in perception anymore.
Ain't that something for a change.
That other thread is some 'free for all' and next they'll talk about who is better at soccer... no thanks.

Thank you for offering, I do appreciate your unquenchable enthusiasm, jolly good show, I say.

The remaining issue (for me only) is, if I want to change to another then the SME's alignment system --- maybe some day, we'll see. Meanwhile I'll have to stick to the IEC-standard that comes with that SME purchase.
Greetings from the Black-Continent.
Axel
Dear Axelwahl, all you are asking is explained during the course of the thread mentioned. You either have to keep on reading all through that thread or send me a direct email.
This is too much, to repeat all that was written in March during that sometimes very hot discussion in that thread.
Herr Tonearm,
I'm going to log out now, I see that we are for some reason out of sync. Your are still busy with my older responses. No problem. Thanks for the great detail offered.
Take care,
Axel
Hi Axelwahl, you should consider the MINT LP tractor. If you settle for one specific cartridge right now, it is well worth the investment - especially with a SME V. It does provide very good results and is easy and fast to use.
Dear friends: Do you know why the tonearm denomination: 12", 10", 9", etc, etc? what those numbers means?

Well, as you all know is the tonearm effective length this is: the distance between the stylus and the center of the pivot/flucrum/bearing and IMHO this is the foundation of the tonearm calculations parameters.

When we want to design a tonearm ( between other things ) we first determine/think in those 12"-10"-9" numbers ( we are not thinking on overhang or pivot to spindle numbers. ) and is this " number " ( effective length + innermost/ outermost groove radius. ) the one that we introduce in the Baerwald/Loefgren/etc formula to obtain: overhang, offset angle, pivot to spindle distance and null points.

If we change the overhang ( like in the Graham example that " play " between Baerwald and Lofgren. ) alone then we are changing the " foundation " ( effective length ), so this practice is not correct, you can do it and you can do anything you want but that does not means is correct: is wrong.

Every time we change the " foundation " number ( effective length. ) change too the other tonearm parameters.

I'm not talking here if the sound likes you or not I'm only talking of what is right and what is wrong.

We can put an example using first Baerwald:

say 250mm on EL: offset angular, 21.949 degrees; overhang, 16.502mm; P to S, 233.50mm.

now 258mm on EL: offset angular, 21.235 degrees; overhang, 15.956mm; P to S, 242.04mm

Loefgren on 250mm: offset angular, 21.949 degrees; overhang, 16.967mm; P to S, 233.03mm

and in 258mm: offset angular, 21.235 degrees; overhang, 16.404mm; P to S, 241.60mm

Well, it seems to me that that tonearm effective length is in reality the foundation to calculate those critical tonerm parameters.

We have to take care on what we do because " sometimes " we achieve a different target that what we want.

Regards and enjoy the music.
Raul.