XV-1S and Antiskate


The XV-1s is a fantastic tracker, so much so that changes in the anti skate don't seem to effect the sound that much. Most people (based on searches) seem to set it at zero or very low. I have been listening with no anti skate based on the advise of my dealer. I decided to put a grooveless record on and noticed the arm (Phantom II)swung in fast. Out of curiosity I increased the anti-skate until the arm didn't move. The sound changed slightly and towards a warmer sound. I am more comfortable with the grooveless record approach for setting antiskate because the wear on the stylus would be more even. Some people say set it by ear but does this make sense with a strong tracker like the XV-1s? Am I missing something?
128x128musichead
I found that the proper way to set anti-skate on my TT is by ear.

Start out way low on the anti skate, after you have the cartridge alignment and VTA and tracking force dialed in. This is the last step. Listen to the dynamics of a piece od music you know well, use something that has some continual dynamic, like an uptempo drum and cymbal, as well as voice; specially the right channel. Then slowly raise the anti-skate a bit at a time and reassess. Go slowly and only move a little bit at a time. You should hear the dynamics in the right channel come up slowly as the anti-skate increases, then eventually both channels will begin to improve. Keep going a wee bit at a time and you will hear the dynamics and quality fall off pretty suddenly. Back it up a bit until they come back and ... there you go.

It is very apparent that the sound quality changes as the anti-skate amount changes. There is an apparent "best" place, which could vary from one setup to another and not necissarily coincide with a manufacturer's recommendations.
Doug, Thanks for the explanation, but by that loose definition, what is NOT a gain block? Only straight wire, most likely. But then, wire also affects sound. In the parlance I am used to, the term "gain block" would be interchangeable with "gain stage" and nothing else. Anyway, as the late great Gilda Radner once said (as Emily Latella on SNL), "Never mind".

In my system, with both the Triplanar and a Dynavector DV505 tonearms and any of my many MC and MM cartridges, no AS results in a R channel bias and some low level distortions that are cured by a minimal amount of AS. I start with zero and add teeny amounts until the problem is cured. I have you and others to thank for the concept that a minimum amount is best, but I cannot get away with none, so far.
Doug:
In most MC cartridges, the coil former and coils are located at the rear end of the cantilever, and are always being pressed into the dampers. Since the amount of pressure affects things like tracking and frequency response, it is the cartridge builder who sets the net pressure (during the building and adjustment process), and the pressure adjustment is locked down by screws so that the value cannot be reduced (or increased) inadvertently. If it does become reduced, chances are that the cartridge will ride too close to the LP surface (low-rider).

Due to the constant pressure between coils and dampers, "slower rise times" and "attenuated amplitudes" simply describe how most MC cartridges work normally. These are not issues that suddenly appear because the user happens to choose antiskating or VTF values that are higher than optimal.

What excess antiskating can do is cause uneven loading of the stylus profile within the LP groove, angular misalignment of the coil former and imbalances in the forces that act on the same. The antiskating effects manifest themselves in the horizontal plane.

Doug, I agree with you that improper VTF is conceptually similar to improper anti-skating. What's different is that, unlike AS, we need a minimum level of VTF to ensure adequate physical tracking of the groove (but uneven stylus loading in the LP groove is no longer an issue). And since VTF forces are typically 5-10 time higher than AS, compared to AS we get a far greater degree of angular misalignment of the coil former and imbalances in the forces that act on the same. And, it is in the vertical plane that we see the effects.

As problems to be solved, AS is far more intractable than VTF. VTF requirements don't change across the LP, so it is possible to understand in advance what value works best and specify this (although changes in ambient temperature and humidity may require some readjustments). In contrast, AS requirements change according to the LP groove radius and groove drag (caused by groove modulation and stylus profile). It is possible to solve the groove radius issue, but the groove drag issue is more doubtful, unless you are using a linear tracking arm or some kind of electronic servo arm.

I suggest that it is much easier to speak of a "right" and "wrong" VTF setting than AS.

cheers, jonathan
Very interesting.

After living with a VPI HRX for quite a few years, antiskating was not really offered, except for the wire twist, which always sounded worse. VPI has always copped a lot of criticism for this approach with pundits/experts stating that no AS will cause cantilever alignment issues.

Now, some on this thread intimate that AS will cause cantilever alignment issues. I assume this is when it is higher than the VTF?

Does AS coninciding with the recommended VTF cause cantilever issues?

So has Harry Weisfeld been correct all along that the best AS is no AS ?

I must admit I use antiskate now,as my tonearms have it. I may play around with less than receommended level's now

cheers
Lew,

With some (many?) cartridges you may never get away with zero A/S. IME it's quite cartridge-specific. We've heard variations between multiple samples of the same model. Paul believes this is due to sample variability in the behavior of elastomers. Each cartridge must be tuned individually for optimal behavior (sonics).

***
Jonathon,
Thanks as always for a truly informative post.

To be clear, my description of "slower rise times" and "attenuated amplitudes" wasn't a deduction from principles. It's what we actually hear. Of course I'm open to explanations other than cantilever damping, but they'd have to account for these observed phenomena.

While it's true that the cantilever is pre-loaded against the suspension by the cartridge manufacturer, when the user increases the amount of pre-loading he alters the behavior of the system. This is true in any spring-loaded system.

Example: like most off-road vehicles, my Land Rover has a long travel suspension. When driving by myself, my massive 140 lbs. don't add much to the 4,000 lbs that the manufacturer pre-loaded on the springs. Result? The vehicle rides high on the springs, over certain bumps it's a bit jouncy ("lively" or even "edgy" in audiophile terms). Now add three 200 pound passengers and a pile of gear. What happens? The springs are compressed toward the middle of their range, the vehicle's rise times are slowed, it's amplitudes reduced (it rides "warmer", in the OP's parlance).

Spring-loaded systems vary their behavior not just between pre-loaded or not pre-loaded, but also with the amount of pre-loading. Few elastomers respond linearly to compression.

I just can't think of a better explanation of why we hear "slower rise times" and "attenuated amplitudes"...

***
Downunder,

When I first posted about removing my A/S device (on "TriPlanar Tips"), I remember joking about HW being right all along. :-)