That should say, ...707, 727 and 747...
Tonearms with no anti-skate adjustment
I am in recent possession of a Grace 704 uni-pivot tonearm, which has no anti-skate adjustment. This is not optimal IMO, but should I really be worried?
- ...
- 47 posts total
I was very proud about myself when I got 90 microns ''pure'' from my combo Sumiko 800 + Ortofon MC 30. But then I have read Van den Hul's warning not to use too much anti-skate needed for such values. Too much anti-skate was worse according to him then no-skate at all. By all his carts one get anti-skate values for his sample. The other problem is that this ''force'' also depends from record radius. So, obviously, the same anti-skate for the whole record is also problematic. I ever owned the only tonearm with ''variable'' anti-skate : Sony 237 with an ingenious ''curved'' lever with different anti-skate related to record radius. In addition there was provision for stylus shape. I give up anti-skate not because I don't believe the theory but because there is no way to do this correct. |
@cleeds - That is mistaken. Anti-skate is used to compensate for a force that an offset pickup arm exerts that gives it a tendency to "skate" towards the spindle.Thanks for the correction - That was what I was attempting to say in my rather "clumsy" manner. I also forgot to include the important aspect of Anti Skate, which is " that gives it a tendency to "skate" towards the spindle" Again - thanks for the clarity Cheers |
moonglum Unipivots are generally designed to be as stable as that configuration permits. This means that ”lowering the tail end” increases downforce not decreases it as you have suggested.It isn’t clear what you mean here when you use the word "downforce." If you lower any statically balanced pivoted arm - regardless of bearing type - you will decrease VTF, all other things being equal. That’s just simple physics, and what I was trying to clarify. |
- 47 posts total