|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
172.9.116.164
Recently I noticed that a stereo central image would drift from center to the right over the course of an LP side. My conclusion is incorrect antiskate setting. I track at 1.8g and had a/s set at about 1.4g.
Using a Shure test disk, I placed the stylus onto the spinning "silent groove" and the arm moved to the center when set to 1.4g.
I increased force until the arm was stationary (2.5g). But when I lift the cueing lever, the arm quickly drifts to the outside as it is being lifted ! Obviously too much force.
Should I reset so that the arm very slowly drifts to the outside (less than 2.5g), or very slowly to the inside (slightly more than 1.4g) ?
Archives are inconclusive, with almost as many suggestions as questions raised.
Thanks !
Follow Ups:
Believe me, I HAVE!
I suggest you read Peter Ledermann's (aka, Retipper here) excellent page about setting up A-S...
Is his opinion God? No. But I have gotten much more satisfaction with my playback system following his suggestions (having my cart done by him 3 times hasn't hurt either!).
Dman
Analog Junkie
"....set the A-S so that the arm VERY SLOWLY drifts inwards when placed on the SURFACE (NOT IN A GROOVE) at the end of a record."
There's probably as many views of exactly what "VERY SLOWLY" means as there are inmates. Exactly what would define "RAPID" movement towards the inside, which would require more AS according to Ledermann?
IMO this advice is as nebulous as every other AS methodology.
years ago, setup a few different carts w/cardas test record groove-less track. In each case, the cart was snugged but left slightly loose, in order to twist/change its position in relation to the headshell. In every case, twisting the cart, even slightly, changed the way the arm traveled.
I've also noticed that generally, those who've adopted the blank disk method, end up applying too much as-force, to the point in which, visually, you can notice cantilever offset.
In my travels, minimum AS provides best results.
"There's probably as many views of exactly what "VERY SLOWLY" means as there are inmates"
I agree and furthermore,
"If one sets the stylus on a smooth surface of a record (at the end, in-between the run out grooves) the tip of the stylus has a drag on the surface that [is] somewhat similar to what it would have if it were in a groove."
The problem with that is the amount of drag on a flat surface of is dependent on the shape of the end of the tip of the stylus, the part that never touches the vinyl when the stylus is in the groove, and that shape is not the same with all styli.
Tre'
Have Fun and Enjoy the Music
"Still Working the Problem"
Is once you use a grooveless part of a record my experience is it becomes grooved via the needle then the cartridge tends to follow that. I only get one or two shots to get it right. Plus I need a little bit more room/time then afforded by the runout. Frank and Peter are both friends but for me that method is not practical. I end up doing it by ear.
Thanks Tre' for the link, I've seen that before but it was nice to read it again.
> The problem with that is the amount of drag on a flat surface is dependent on the shape of the end of the tip of the stylus,
> the part that never touches the vinyl when the stylus is in the groove, and that shape is not the same with all styli.
You're right! However, I'm inclined to think that since Peter Ledermann and Frank Schroder recommend using a flat vinyl surface to approximate skating force, it probably is as good as any other method. Moreover, it is definitely better than using highly modulated grooves such as those on the Hi-Fi News test record and other test records. If you use any of the test records you will end up with way too much antiskating.
Another method that provides a very good starting point is to simply set antiskating in accordance with the tonearm manufacturers instructions found in your tonearm owner's manual. There is no definitive method for setting antiskating and it's obviously not that critical to get it exactly right since there is no way of knowing whether or not you have it exactly right.
On the other hand, just because there is no definitive method of setting antiskating doesn't mean antiskating is not necessary. On the contrary, I believe it is very necessary and should be set as close as possible to the optimal value. Consequently, I believe Peter Ledermann's and Frank Schroder's method is just as good if not better than any other method.
Best regards,
John Elison
I have read Peter Ledermann's method before and my guess is that this method was derived form observation of stylus wear rather than theory. The forces acting on a stylus on a grooveless record are very different from a stylus in the grove. I don't think you can bridge this gap with theory. Fortunately, Peter has the experience. I tried email him about this but did not get an answer. I suspect he gets too many emails from armchair theorist, so I did not take it badly. Also, I am not a customer, but I plan to be.
Dave
> The forces acting on a stylus on a grooveless record are very different from a stylus in the grove.
Well, you are certainly welcome to your own opinion. After all, the only thing any of us are doing here is offering unsubstantiated opinions.
Therefore, it is my opinion that friction from a grooveless record surface is often quite similar to the friction of a stylus in a groove. I will agree the two are usually not the same, but I believe they are reasonably similar in many cases. I think it depends on the shape of the stylus. It wouldn't surprise me if a conical stylus exhibited almost identical friction against a grooveless vinyl surface as when tracking an unmodulated groove. Still, it's only my opinion. Like you, I've never done any measurements.
All I really know for certain is that when I'm perfectly happy with my antiskating setting, it seems to match Peter Ledermann's idea of correct antiskating when I test it on a grooveless vinyl surface. Consequently, I believe Frank and Peter's idea of adjusting antiskating has definite merit.
Best regards,
John Elison
It is different enough that when you set so that the needle does not move in or out, the anti-skate is to much. I know this because I have tried it with a groveless record.
Dave
I agree that it's important.I like this by ear method.
The link below has a step by step with instruction as to what to listen for.
Scroll down to "Anti Skating"
Another method is to check the ware pattern with a microscope.
Tre'
Have Fun and Enjoy the Music
"Still Working the Problem"
Edits: 05/04/16
It may work just fine for some, but not for others...
To quote from Soundmsith's antiskate page-
"When you have it adjusted right, the arm will track on the SURFACE of the record (not in the groove) at the end of the record on the un-pressed flat space where the run-out groove is it should track SLOWLY INWARDS toward the center at a MUCH SLOWER RATE than IF IT WERE ACTUALLY in the end groove. If you do that, then the best average Anti-Skating is set correctly."
That tells ME how fast it should move...
Dman
Analog Junkie
Anti-skating is usually properly set when the arm slowly drifts inwards (towards the spindle) when dropped on a grooveless record. If you set it so that the arm remains stationary it will be set too high.
My 1970's memories are (and have always adopted this) that the force should exert a slight outward movement near the label and stationary near the edge (thread/weight method on a blank surface) - and seems to be confirmed by
http://www.audiomods.co.uk/papers/randhawa_pickupdesign.PDF Wireless World 1978
where I read p.66 col.3 as meaning that a modulated groove increases the skating (inward) force relative to a blank surface...the opposite is being stated hereabouts..
Quite how you can move a central image from one side by bias-compensation to the centre seems bizarre.
In olden days (pre-suspended TT) the required outward force was achieved by simply tilting the TT chassis.
Sometimes wonder if many of you can 'play an LP' properly...this nonsense seemingly started with 'subjective golden ears' pontificating, circa 1980 onwards...
I based my advice above upon what Origin Live recommends.
Less is (or can be) more, and I don't think the blank cut really tells you anything. Others disagree. Try it without anti-skating and see if the image stabilizes.
With my arm/cart (Hadcock/Musicmaker) anti-skating enables the arm to track the more severe trackability cuts on test records, but I like the sound better without anti-skating. As it tracks all music well, I leave if off.
WW
"A man need merely light the filaments of his receiving set and the world's greatest artists will perform for him." Alfred N. Goldsmith, RCA, 1922
You will find more than one long-winded thread on Anti-skating and the skating force.
Like BCR said, there need not be any relationship between the AS setting and the VTF setting. The skating force is a moving target, changing as the stylus traverses the LP from outside to inside and not always in one direction (that is, not always up or down but up AND down in magnitude). Thus it is impossible to get it exactly correct for all conditions. Further, there is some controversy on this, but the skating force is generated in part by the fact that there is a friction force between the stylus and the groove. Therefore, setting AS based on the run-out surface of an LP (where there is no groove) is not the best idea although some do it that way. Further, if the tonearm drifts in the direction of the applied AS when you cue it up in the air, that is to be expected; I don't see that as a reason to believe you have too much AS applied.
If the arm was stationary at 2.5 grams and that fixed the drifting problem then it is correct. Don't worry what it does when you lift the cueing lever. The anti-skating adjustment on my tonearm is set at 3/4 of a gram higher than the tracking force. There is nothing written in stone on correct adjusment,your ears are the best evaluator!
Post a Followup:
FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: