Time to choose: Baerwald, Lofgren, Stevenson ?
By Yip , the owner of the Mint Arc protractor ,one can order specific tractor calculated for the owners TT and tonearm. Yip has the data of the most tonearms but needs the (exact) dimensions of the spindle in addition. Those are not of the same dimensions. The price is about $110 . The address: mintlp.com/best I own three Mint protractors two of which are made for my Kuzma Stabi Reference , Reed 3 P and Triplanar VII. The third for my SP- 10, Mk2 and FR-64 s . |
Dear @astro58go: Here you can understand what you can do on your VPI tonearm: http://www.vinylengine.com/vpi-tonearm-geometry.shtml Regards and enjoy the music, R. |
A general rule? OK, I’ll admit that can be dangerous, but how about this? If you need to set up for 7" records (nandric, those large center hole 45s) or mainly symphonic classical, then Stevenson may be your best alignment. Otherwise, play other LPs (33 or 45 should make no difference) set up with the more common Lofgren/Baerwald. Of course Lew’s recommendation to follow your arm design may overrule this. But then that may also guide you as to which type arm to select based on the records you intend to play. I use a Dennesen Soundtracktor for alignment and that was designed to conform with Baerwald. I still have nearly 100 45s from high school but those are hardly ever played. And I enjoy many symphonies but they are a smaller percentage of my overall listening. So I’ve never felt the need to try the Stevenson. Now, the truly anal may choose to have multiple playback systems, each specifically set up to play a particular type of record. ;^) |
Hi pryso, If you mean with ''general rule'' any standards by cart or tonearm producers then , as J. Carr stated, there are no such rules. The arguments for Stevenson are rediculous as put forward by chakster. Consider my records collection of +/- 3000 pieces. I would need to check them all in regards to the distance of the inner grooves to the spindle as well regarding the question if the crescendos are in those grooves. As I mentioned in my post the assumption is that those inner grooves are the most difficult for the arm and the stylus. So if the tracking error of the arm is at its minimum on this part of the record then this means ''zero'' point on the tractor. Those zero points are elsewhere by Lofgren/ Bearwald. This is in accordance with their intention: the least possible tracking error on the whole recod radius. Those are not ''small diferences'' but different approach of the tonearm geometry. |
Hi nandric, you seem to be quite specific with language so I will try to clarify my intent. In my mind a general rule does not set a standard. It merely suggests something which may be followed or expected the majority of the time. So a general rule is not hard and fast (possibly an American expression?). For me, a standard would be more inclusive, defining all that met a minimum level of performance/results. My hope was to offer a simpler solution which does not require measuring "zero" points or specifically identifying crescendos. Instead, one might need only consider the size of the record and/or type of music utilized for the majority of their listening. In fact I recall reading that Stevenson stated his alignment was intended to optimize symphonic music playback. |
