Left Channel LP Distortion

Azmoon... I have tried anti=skating. The proper adjustment of a/s is impossible. The amount of a/s depends on soooo many variables (loudness, complexity of recorded signal, vtf, sylus shape, etc.) that are constantly changing, it is virtually impossible to set it correctly. VPI suggests no anti-skate. Having a VPI arm, I tried it, and then tried it on a number of arms. I found that anti-skate always (tuff word - I haven't tried ALL arms) effectily dampens once side of the stylus (outside). Also, all arms I've tried has a mechanism for anti-skate, that interferes with the purity of the signal. I don't use any anti-skate with very satisfying results. To each his /her own.

Tvad, Stringreen, et al: Isn't a bit disingenuous (in a nice way) to recommend using low or no anti-skate with the Triplanar, as a blanket statement? IME, the amount needed will vary depending on the cartridge and probably also depending upon the LP. I tried going without AS with my Triplanar/ Urushi combo, and there was mucho distortion in the R channel. I gradually increased AS from zero to the point where the recording sounded "right" (an LP I know by heart) and ended up with the normal Triplanar weight just a bit less than half way up the shaft that it mounts on. When I mentioned this finding once before, including the additional fact that my Urushi sounds best with "some" damping, someone here suggested that this was evidence that one should not use the Urushi on a Triplanar. I beg to disagree on that. The reason we pay big bucks for this tonearm is because it is so adaptable to use with a wide variety of cartridges. There's no reason to throw those features out the door and limit one's self to only perfect matches. So I would advise a newbie to listen w/ no AS and then gradually add AS as you perceive it to be needed.

What Dan_Ed said^^^

The actual A/S setting you can get away with is cartridge- and tonearm-specific, but the underlying concept is valid for any cartridge.

Every A/S device in existence is based on inherently flawed engineering. They all pretend to counteract forces pulling inward on the STYLUS by pulling outward on the TONEARM. (A correctly engineered A/S device would pull outward on the CANTILEVER - good luck building that!)

The lateral pull of A/S on the toneaarm must be absorbed somewhere, but:
- the stylus is (hopefully) locked in the groove
- the cartridge is locked to the headshell
- the tonearm is locked to the TT.
The ONLY place in this system with any flexibility is the suspension inside the cartridge. Therefore, the lateral pull on the tonearm is absorbed by your cantilever mushing into the suspension.

Your cantilever is supposed to be tracing the most delicate undulations in the groove wall, so as to mimic the precise path of the cantilever that held the cutting stylus. But with A/S squashing the cantilever sideways into a pillow guess what happens: speed, high frequency response and micro-dynamic detail all get smothered. (Excessive VTF sounds almost exactly the same, for the same reasons.)

Some A/S is probably necessary for most cartridges to track really difficult passages cleanly, but the amount is far lower than is commonly applied. I use 3 tiny O-rings, which weigh only 11% as much as the metal A/S weight that comes with the TriPlanar. IOW, I've reduced A/S by nearly 90%.

And forget test records, unless you listen to music that sounds like a test record. Use your ears.

Joe Grado said to me not to use anti-skate that is was an unnessary evil. Funny thing though when I bought one of his wonderful tonearms a couple years later it had an anti-skate adjustment. Tom

How are you going to sell tonearms if you don't have anti-skate adjustment..that's why Harry at VPI has a device for his. Thedudiotweak..Did you know Joe? Did you know that he sang with the Met? Nice guy!!