Lyra Titan i - in focus?

I was able to get all the movement I needed within the existing mounting holes. My rough guess is that I rotated the cartridge about it's zenith axis perhaps one (1) degree or 0.2 mm at it's rear edge. It's hard to say, but I rotated it as far as possible within the allowance and the cantilever lined up perfectly with the parallel guide lines at the two null points on the MINT LP protractor.

I also noticed that the stylus was off the arc by about 0.5 mm at the lead in groove, but appeared on the arc near the spindle. I could not see this but I could with the 10X loupe that is provided. So it took a bit of back and forth in very tiny increments to get it all lined up.

The overall sound became more clear and detailed and there is less tracking error at the inner grooves. The standard SME template is close, but the Mint is more precise. The problem is that one has to know EXACTLY the effective length of the arm (pivot to stylus) and that is nominal in the SME case because the mounting hole to stylus distance varies by cartridge sample and then you have to account for the headshell angle to do the math.

It was complicated, but I sent the figures to MINT and got the protractor.

Now, remember that I'm not suggesting that this is the solution to your particular issue. It is only a suggestion. VTA/SRA is also important as is VTF. Some would argue azimuth is also, but the SME V/V-12 don't have azimuth adjustability.

I also set the antiskate to the SME recommended setting corresponding to the VTF. The dial is calibrated. Others suggest that is too high a setting. I listened a lot to different settings and found the recommended setting sounded best in my system.

You also need to have clean records and a clean stylus.

Thank you for interesting information. I've found that I have to twist the pickup to the right (seen from front) in the SME shell to sound its best, and to appear best judging from optical adjustment with different protractors too. Is this in line with your experience? Regarding antiskate, I generally prefer it a bit more relaxed, a degree or two below the weight measure. This is related to arm damping also, I have tried a bit, but ended up not using it.

I recently did a comparison of the Titan i and the Ortofon Cadenza, in my arm and system. Very illuminating. The Cadenza sounded great, yet it is also understandable that the Titan is more costly. Potentially it offers more information.

Although the Cadenza sailed happily through the grooves, the Titan gave more depth and dimensionality, although this included problems also, like poorly recorded records. The two cartridges sounded surprisingly alike but the Titan was superior in overall musical information value.

I came away from the test feeling that I still have some way to go to get the Titan into focus. Disregard any earlier statements that this perhaps cannot be done.

Based on the advice in this thread, I am now trying out a few things. I ease up a bit on the turning of the cartridge to the right in the shell (I don't "bend" it to the right, but it is gently pushed, before I tighten the screws). Secondly I put the arm a bit forward compared to the SME protractor. Thirdly I improve azimuth by ensuring that the arm foot and base are parallel.

Does this sound better? My first impression is yes. Clearly there is more to be learned about adjustment than I thought.

It happened that I also have Titan i and SME V. but I also have TW 10.5 with my Raven 2. To me, the Titan is matched better with TW arm which they both sound detailed and neutral. I found SME V match better with carts that also have an emphases on emotions and a good touch on bass. I found Clear Audio match it well. The Titan will be glued to my 10.5 for a very long time. I am not expert but this is my opinion.