|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
108.235.157.25
I'm not very experienced with setup equipment usually preferring to have a professional set up my turntables, but I've been wanting to learn turntable setup. I feel no one but me will take the time to sit there and do all the different things with the care that I would.
So I watched Fremer do some setups on the youtubes (Axpona) and saw he uses a Wally Tractor Universal as one of his tools... I was a little sticker-shocked at the $250 price however...
Is something like this a "must have"? Or can I get close with something more economical?
This isn't a "what ridiculous price" question... I know it's low volume etc etc... I just don't know if I can do the job almost as well woth something cheaper.
Follow Ups:
Looks like Manny found his answer, but for any others looking for cartridge set up tools I offer this option.
The Dennesen Geometric Soundtracktor was I believe the first alignment tool of this type. The Wally Tractor and Feickert are both later refinements. The Dennesen is long out of production but both metal and (less expensive) plastic versions come on the used market from time to time, and for quite a bit less than the current models.
I was fortunate to find a metal Dennesen years ago just as they were being discontinued. After years of using arc protractors (up to and including the DB Systems) it has been a pleasure to find the simplicity and accuracy of the Dennesen. The one caution -- the tonearm must have some means of identifying the exact pivot point, not all arms do. To take advantage of the accuracy of this type device, locating the pivot point is critical. I've never used a Wally or Feickert but they appear to have the same requirement. Avoiding the back-and-forth process of aligning to the two marks on an arc protractor is truly appreciated.
"The piano ain't got no wrong notes." Thelonious Monk
I use this.
The arc protractor is a great solution, but requires that you have the pivot/Spindle distance and other parameters known to a high degree of accuracy otherwise you will be going around in circles wondering why you can't perfectly track the arc or simulataneusly achieve the expected nulls.
The other problem with the arc protracter is to ensure that the orientation is correct and fixed i.e the pivot stylus line is pointing at exactly the pivot centre. Otherwise you are trying to adjust overhang with a moving target.
If you really don't object to spend the amount you quoted, a better solution would be say the Feickert or Pro-Ject Align It. Using the Technics SL1200 as an example, even though the Pivot_stylus distance is meant to be 215mm, there are going to be small errors in this figure (as I recently established with my decks) which mean that you never perfectly follow the arc on an arc protracter. So the Linear Offset type jigs solve the problem.
These designs have a trammel which you position over the pivot centre. The linear offset is predetermined so by positioning the trammel tip, you automatically fix the position of the inner null so you can adjust overhang and offset with a reduced number of variables.
The ProJect allows you to adjust the linear offset within a limited range defined by their arm range so the inner null can be 63, 66.1 or I forget the innermost one (I think it is 60).
It has some faults - notably the lack of a proper grid around the nulls. However, I drew up my grid in FreeCAD and placed my sheet over the so that it is a non-issue for me.
Regards Anthony
"Beauty is Truth, Truth Beauty.." Keats
With an arc protractor, there's no need to line up anything with the center of the tonearm pivot. You simply adjust overhang until the stylus hits the arc line from one end to the other. But as you mentioned, knowing and verifying the spindle-to-pivot distance is critical with an arc protractor (my Nottingham was 6 mm's off as sent by the factory).
" there's no need to line up anything with the center of the tonearm pivot"
By ignoring the pivot/spindle line you have an extra step and increased risk of error as you iterate to the preferred overhang. If you line up the pivot/stylus line to the pivot centre, you should (in theory) have the correct Linear Offset already configured so that you have greater confidence in simply setting the overhang and offset to match the null rather than flicking back and forth between 2 null points and checking the locus of the tip with respect to the arc.
Also, any error in the pivot/stylus distance will mean you won't actually be tracking the arc "perfectly". Having said that, it is unlikely that doing the setup "by eye" will get perfection anyway so this is all "in principle".
Regards Anthony
"Beauty is Truth, Truth Beauty.." Keats
Linear offset? I don't even know what that is.
*If* the arc is properly configured for the pivot-to-spindle distance and the arms effective length, the pivot point is entirely irrelevant when using the protractor to adjust overhang and/or tangency.
"Also, any error in the pivot/stylus distance will mean you won't actually be tracking the arc "perfectly."
Well, that is quite true. However, the whole point of using the protractor is to set the overhang so the stylus tracks the arc "perfectly" at which point the pivot-to-stylus distance will also be perfect.
Having said that, it is unlikely that doing the setup "by eye" will get perfection anyway so this is all "in principle".
I have absolutely no problem getting the stylus to track the arc from end to end with a high degree of accuracy. A strong light, a 10X magnifying glass or loupe, and some patience are all that's required.
Have you ever used an arc protractor?
Linear Offset is the distance "K" in the diagram above, which is the sine of the offset angle multiplied by tonearm effective length.Linear offset is also the average of the two alignment null-point radii.
Brian Kearns wrote an excellent treatise on cartridge alignment , which is in the Vinyl Asylum FAQ. His definition of Linear offset is as follows:
Linear offset: The perpendicular distance between a line through a projection of the cantilever on the record surface, and the centre of the tonearm pivot.
Best regards,
John Elison
Edits: 09/29/16
"Linear offset? I don't even know what that is."
It is the basis of tonearm design and alignment.
Imagine a right-angled triangle with the hypotenuse defined by the pivot/stylus distance and the pivot centre and stylus tip being 2 vertices. Then the opposite side is the linear offset (opposite the offset angle).
The linear offset is a constant which can be associated with a desired set of null points and is independent of the tonearm length. For example, if you wish to have 66.1 and 120.9mm then the linear offset will be 93.52mm. If you wish to implement the same null points as a Technics SL1200 (at 58.8 and 113.5), the linear offset is 86.16mm.
Whether you have a 12" arm or 9" or 7" arm (but who would want one that short!), the linear offset can be used to define the exact position of the stylus and the offset angle unique to the arm being aligned. Hence any pivot/spindle distance can be accomodated with a unique solution for overhang and offset whilst still achieving the desired null points.
"However, the whole point of using the protractor is to set the overhang so the stylus tracks the arc "perfectly" at which point the pivot-to-stylus distance will also be perfect."
Yes, that is an obvious statement. However, your argument is predicated on an assumption that the pivot/spindle distance is known "exactly" and that the printer was correctly scaled in both axes to give "perfect" dimensions, the spindle hole on the protractor was a perfect snug fit around the spindle with no slack and doesn't shift during use; as you swing the protractor back and forth to set overhang you risk enlarging the spindle hole.
Do you see where I'm going with this?
There is no such thing as an "exact" measurement. Everything has a tolerance and all you have done is introduce an additional uncertainty as you attempt to find a solution that minimises the deviation from the arc.
"I have absolutely no problem getting the stylus to track the arc from end to end with a high degree of accuracy."
Good for you! It is highly unlikely that you hit the arc perfectly (which as mentioned before assumes the pivot/spindle distance was perfect as well) except by sheer luck. It is very easy to prove this to yourself with a compass and drawing two circles on a line representing the effective length; the first being the correct radius for the arc and the second such that the second circle radius hits the end of the line representing the stylus tip but with a shifted "pivot" position on the line. Obviously the larger the radii the smaller the deviation, but if you do small circles to magnify arc differences, you will have a better understanding of the errors.
Now the REAL question is whether any of this really matters? Probably not....
:)
Regards Anthony
"Beauty is Truth, Truth Beauty.." Keats
"Do you see where I'm going with this?"
No, not really. Appears that sight-lining of the pivot is no longer important or a source of error, so let's create some new issues maybe? The protractors I've used were made using polycarbonate or some other hard plastic as the substrate, so enlarging the spindle hole would be a herculean task using only the near-frictionless rotation on the spindle. The pivot-to-spindle distance is specified by the tonearm manufacturer, or can be easily and accurately calculated from the arm's effective length. And it can be verified easily and accurately at the point of use with a steel ruler with metric gradations. You make it sound like these parameters are either impossible to achieve or require a team of NASA scientists to get right.
"It is highly unlikely that you hit the arc perfectly (which as mentioned before assumes the pivot/spindle distance was perfect as well) except by sheer luck."
Seriously? What's highly unlikely here is that you've ever used an arc protractor.
If you don't like the arc-type protractor, that's fine. There are a number of different protractors that enable proper cartridge alignment, and the arc-type is only one. Personal preference also comes into play, as some will find the arc easy to use and some won't. I simply take issue with ascribing faults to it that either don't exist or aren't true.
"The pivot-to-spindle distance is specified by the tonearm manufacturer, or can be easily and accurately calculated from the arm's effective length. "
Could you remind me again how far off you said your Nottingham arm was?? 6mm wasn't it?!
I see where I'm going wrong.... use the specifications.....calculate from arm's effective length....
LOL!!
Regards Anthony
"Beauty is Truth, Truth Beauty.." Keats
Yes, the Nottingham was 6mm off when it arrived from the factory. Perhaps someone wasn't paying attention when it was assembled, perhaps (and more probable) was that it moved during shipment. So what? I reset the pivot-to-spindle at the specified 210mm and went on with life. What this has to do with the use of an arc protractor escapes me -- the alignment would have been off with any protractor if the p-to-s distance hadn't been corrected.
I'm done here, but feel free to change the argument a few more times and entertain yourself.
I've measured Nottinghams way off, and some other, more well known, significantly more expensive arms too. One such famous arm had varying armtube lengths, in error of up to 7.5mm, yet the alignment system keyed to the headshell and was one of the major "claims to fame" of this brand! Another brand at the premium price point had error of 9mm when using their own mounting locator, with up to 9mm differences from arm to arm due to assembly variations regarding the 3 hole flange mounting pattern's orientation to the tonearm, which is offset from the mounting pattern (not on the same center). This flange is drilled from templates, "transfer drilling", not to dimension. For that you pay $5k or more. It's hard to know who to trust in these matters unless you make your own templates and check pivot to spindle distance on the turntable yourself. For proper dimensions and offsets you can definitely trust the numbers on John Ellison's site.
This is precisely why the Linear Offset jigs are easier to use for those situations to get the "correct" nulls unless the error is so large that you run out of travel in the headshell slots.
The point bcowen has difficulty in grasping is that an arc protractor requires the EXACT matching parameters used for the arc otherwise there will always be an error tracing the arc.
As I mentioned sometime back, the real question is if small errors really matter (ie are audible), but if one were to determine which tool was "more accurate", then I'd go with the Linear Offset jigs all day long unless I knew for certain that the pivot was "correctly" located.
Regards Anthony
"Beauty is Truth, Truth Beauty.." Keats
I think I can measure pivot-to-spindle distance fairly accurately. I measure from the center of the top of the spindle to the center of the pivot point on top of the tonearm. Next, I use a box and some playing cards to elevate a ruler at the spindle so it lays across the top of the tonearm and appears parallel with the platter surface. Then, I measure the distance above the top of the spindle to the level ruler. This gives me two sides of a right triangle, the hypotenuse and the short side opposite the angle at the tonearm pivot. The other leg of the right triangle is the pivot-to-spindle distance.
For example, I measured the distance from the center of the spindle to the center of the pivot on my Technics SL-1200 to be 217.5-mm. Next, when I placed a level ruler from the top of the tonearm pivot to the spindle, it was 31-mm above the top of the spindle. Using Pythagorean's theorem, the pivot-to-spindle distance would be the square root of (217.5 2 - 31 2 ) = 215.279-mm. Technics specifies the pivot-to-spindle distance to be 215-mm.
If you are careful, I'm pretty sure you can achieve an accuracy to within +/-0.5-mm. If so, that is plenty accurate enough to construct an accurate arc protractor.
What do you think?
Thanks,
John Elison
Hi John
I'm not disputing that an arc protractor is a useful tool that is far better than a simple 2-point protractor. Nor do I dispute its potential accuracy (nor your calculations which I'm assuming you were describing in detail for the benefit of the wider audience... LOL )!
Also, I agree that in practical terms, obsessive levels of accuracy are probably unnecessary. Therefore putting to one side whether accurate alignment really matters and what is an acceptable tolerance range...
All I was suggesting was that in the absence of any solid data for an arm or confidence in the manufacturing tolerances, that a Linear Offset jig will enable a faster and potentially more accurate alignment(allowing for the same error due to parallax which can't really be quantified).
The key reason being that users need not care about the design parameters or small mounting errors (within the headshell slot adjustment range) of the arm.
The arc protractor requires a degree of care in use - for example one should start with the outer null to minimise the overhang uncertainty since the deviation from the arc near the spindle will be magnified given the greater radius from the spindle. This process adds greater uncertainty in both overhang and offset in the freedom of rotation off the spindle-pivot reference line based on an individual assessment of "good enough" agreement with tracing the arc particularly when considering that any error in the pivot-spindle distance between the protractor and the actual arm position will mean that the arc will never be perfectly traced under magnification.
On the other hand, the Linear Offset jig holds the reference line (for the better designs!) and therefore defines a unique and correct arc position for the arm at the null point irrespective of the mounting position and therefore reducing the "back and forth" step of tracing the arc at the outer and inner nulls and eliminating the issue of protractor/arm mismatch.
The point being that the OP was prepared to spend significant $ on a Wally Tractor and since the same amount of $ (actually less) could purchase a ProJect Align It I thought it worth providing as an option. The one limitation of this jig is that they don't provide suitable grid lines, but that was an easy modification and I was able to customise my grid and have exactly the linear offset that I wanted.
Just for the record, I use a combination of arc protractor and jig. When I was a schoolboy, the first tool I made to try and understand why our Dual 505 Mk3 sounded so terrible after I changed the cartridge to a DL110 from the supplied ULM165 (similar to OM10) using the supplied gauge was an arc protractor. The only data provided was the effective length and the offset. I couldn't understand how the manufacturer would allow such a wide range for the stylus position in the gauge so I constructed the protractor to work out what the preferred position in the gauge should be and followed a similar method to you to establish the spindle/pivot distance.
Suffice it to say that at that age I didn't know anything about Stevenson, Baerwald etc or the preferred null points, nor did I know about the impact of changing the cartridge height from the standard OM10 on VTA....
Regards Anthony
"Beauty is Truth, Truth Beauty.." Keats
> The arc protractor requires a degree of care in use - for example one should start with the outer null to minimize the overhang
> uncertainty since the deviation from the arc near the spindle will be magnified given the greater radius from the spindle.I think what you mean is that one should first align the arc protractor so that the stylus rests on the arc at its outermost position near the edge of the LP. Then, move the arm to its innermost position near the spindle and observe whether the stylus still rests on the arc. If it overhangs the arc, move the cartridge backward in the headshell slots until it rests on the arc and start the alignment sequence over again. It will converge very quickly to the point where the stylus follows the arc through its entire range of movement. When that happens, you can adjust offset using either of the two null-point grids. I always choose the inner null-point grid where alignment is more critical in eliminating inner groove distortion. Of course, unlike your linear offset protractor, all arc protractors have two alignment null-point grids so you can double check your alignment.
> Just for the record, I use a combination of arc protractor and jig.
It is imperative to do this if you are concerned about ultimate accuracy because there is no way to double check the accuracy of your linear offset protractor since it has one alignment grid only. Using an arc protractor with two alignment grids, there is no need for a second protractor to check accuracy. The arc protractor contains two alignment grids specifically for that purpose.
Most everything in this hobby is based on personal preference. There is no question that your linear offset jig allows you to achieve the initial steps of alignment very quickly. However, as you yourself admit, you really need another two-point protractor to satisfy your desire for accuracy. I don't need a second protractor because my arc protractor has two alignment grids specifically for double checking accuracy.
> The point being that the OP was prepared to spend significant $ on a Wally Tractor and since the same amount
> of $ (actually less) could purchase a ProJect Align It I thought it worth providing as an option.While this is true, you really need a second protractor to confirm the accuracy of your linear offset protractor whereas you need nothing else when using an arc protractor. Furthermore, Ken Willis makes excellent arc protractors that cost considerably less than $150. Or, if you have the ability, you can make your own arc protractors for free using Conrad Hoffman's Custom arc template generator for phono cartridge alignment. Of course, it really boils down to personal preference.
Best regards,
John Elison
Edits: 10/05/16
I always wonder why posters' use vague terms like "famous or well known" manufacture and just not name the brand??
A 6-mm error in spindle-to-pivot distance would constitute a disaster because there would be no way you could achieve the designed alignment with a 6-mm error in spindle-to-pivot mounting distance. Normally, there should be no more than a 1-mm error, which is easily compensated by the length of the headshell slots. Furthermore, even if your arc protractor has a 1-mm difference in its spindle-to-pivot distance compared to your tonearm's, the alignment you achieve will still be very accurate because the error in overhang from a 1-mm spindle-to-pivot error will be only about 0.08-mm.
Based on my many years of experience in tonearm alignment, I believe the arc protractor is the best and most accurate type of protractor to use with tonearms having a fixed spindle-to-pivot distance with adjustable effective length.
Best regards,
John Elison
I greatly prefer the arc-type protractor too. Had a Wally for the RB-250, and am using a Best for the Nott. Liked the Wally better with the arc etched directly into the glass (the Best uses an applique), but the Best was half the price and without the indeterminate delivery time frame of the Wally.
I like Conrad Hoffman's Custom arc template generator for phono cartridge alignment . It is a software program that enables you to print your own custom arc protractor for any tonearm. It is free to download and it only requires your time and effort to make your own custom arc protractors. If you take care to make an accurate protractor, it will provide as precise an alignment as any $250 protractor.
John...some printers aren't as precise as required...just sayin'
I've owned a number of different printers over the years and all of them were very precise. None of them were all that accurate, but all of them were precise. Do you know the difference between accuracy and precision?
If a watch gains exactly two minutes every day it is not very accurate. But, since it gains exactly two minutes every day it is very precise. If it gained two minutes one day and lots three minutes the next day, it would not be accurate or precise. Anyway, all the printers I've owned were very precise.
Conrad Hoffman's arc protractor program has adjustments for accuracy. If you make your own protractors you should measure them in all directions and adjust the X/Y accuracy factors in Conrad's program until you get an accurate printout. His program is designed for precise printers that are not necessarily accurate.
Good luck,
John Elison
I see what you mean John....but to Me, if the watch gained 2 minutes a day, I'd bring it back for recalibration and adjustment....never the less, you say that there is a means to do just that on the program....good. I use a MINT and find it accurate and easy...precise and accurate....also easily corrects for parallax errors.
> but to Me, if the watch gained 2 minutes a day, I'd bring it back for recalibration and adjustment.
That's my point exactly! Did you not understand my explanation?
If your watch gains precisely two minutes every day it can be adjusted to keep accurate time. However, if it gains two minutes one day and loses three the next, it can never be adjusted to keep accurate time.
Therefore, if your printer exhibits good precision, it can easily be adjusted for accuracy using Conrad Hoffman's arc protractor program. His program contains printer accuracy adjustments. You obviously have never looked at his program. It's free and works very well unless you have an apple computer. It's designed for regular PC computers only.
Good luck,
John Elison
Printed the protractor out. Excellent. I happen to have a box of old mylar overhead projector transparency sheets that are perfect for this.
Fantastic! Thank you.
In the past, Wally had a bad reputation for not being able to deliver his product promptly. Not sure if he has cleaned up his act since.
I partook of the Cartridge setup as MF demoed in the Analog Planet article --which stated send you
results to Wally M and he will diagnose and reply
I did and nix,nada-waited 3 months in vain for reply--I'd give Wally a BIG miss
not to mention Mr Fremer's credibility endorsing this fellow
Meh!
D
If I order anything I will let you know. I think the fact that Fremer likes his stuff does lend a modicum of "street cred" to the product.
I find his dry humor entertaining. He does have that patter down. Fremer's not Wally... don't know Wally.
I have one and think it is a wonderful tool. It is better than the paper printed since they are only as accurate as you can make the hole for it.
Here is one http://www.canuckaudiomart.com/details/649297517-wally-tractor-universal-alignment-tool/
If you like the Wally Tractor I would check out Ken Willis's Accutrak. He can make it to have a couple of different alignments for the same tonearm, one alignment for three different tonearm or a full disc one that has all the usual P-S distance arcs. He is fast and honest. I've bought 4 and have been happy with them all. You can usually have one within the week rather than who-knows-when with Wally.
Highly recommended!
That looks pretty sweet, and the price is extremely reasonable. Thanks for posting the link!
I ordered one for my MMF-5 and emailed him for one for the Sony PS-x5.
Oh no... here we go. :)
You ordered which one? The Wally thingie or the Ken Willis Accutrak. If the later, I am sure you'll be happy. Ken is a great, stand-up guy. I mat him at Axpona one year and really enjoyed my chat with him and JE.
Accutrack. I want to compare the free version to the Accutrack which is (compared to the Wally) much cheaper at 60 bucks. Yes the Wally is universal, but I only have two turntables. At 60 each, I'm still way ahead of the game.
What I'm going to try is setting up with the free one first, and listening then seeing how well or not it lines up with Accutrack. Then if it's off, go by Accutrack and listen again.
I think it will be more a reflection of my skills than as a review of the actual tools, because Ellison is very knowledgable, and probably able to use the free tool to easily get good results. But I am NOT knowledgable, skilled or experienced in cartridge setup and I think I may benefit from Accutrack picking up the slack.
We will soon find out.
Don't forget Ken can put more than one TT/Tonearm combo on one protractor at least he used to. I have one with two SME-V arcs as well as one for my Terminator T-3 tonearm a linear tracker.
I did not know that! I am hoping he can do that. That would really make the thing a bargain.
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: