Question about setting anti-skate

Kingfisher

Well-Known Member
My turntable has the Pickering XV-15 cartridge with a new JICO D1200 stylus. The tonearm weight is set at 1g, but the actual weight measured on a tracking force gauge is about 1.5g. (the Pickering's brush adds weight). Should the anti-skate be set relative to the tonearm's weight or to the measured weight on a digital tracking force gauge? (In other words, 1g or 1.5g?)
 
Last edited:
AFAIK the anti skate should be set to the actual force present where the stylus meets the record. In my opinion the only sure fire way to set anti skate is to find an old school stereo test/setup record such as those made by Shure or Realistic. They have a silent, groove free section where you can lower your tone arm and then adjust skating up or down until the tone arm ceases moving. That's the true setting for your particular unit.
 
My turntable has the Pickering VX-15 cartridge with a new JICO D1200 stylus. The tonearm weight is set at 1g, but the actual weight measured on a tracking force gauge is about 1.5g. (the Pickering's brush adds weight). Should the anti-skate be set relative to the tonearm's weight or to the measured weight on a digital tracking force gauge? (In other words, 1g or 1.5g?)

Most likely neither. Look at the cantilever so it stays the way it is. Before lowering the arm, and after lowering it should should point the same and not skew.
 
In my (limited, I'll admit) experience, the AS scale is best ignored. I haven't come across a tonearm yet where it was even close.

As suggested, you can use a blank disc instead. Or an LP with large deadwax area. Many classical recordings leave a good deal "blank" because the playing time doesn't always work out to +/-22 minutes per side. Carefully lower the needle on the spinning disc and watch if it wants to drift in or out. In = you need more AS, out = less AS. Of course, if you use the deadwax, at most you have 1.8 seconds until the groove comes around again to catch the needle, but that's plenty of time. When AS is spot on, the needle will stay where you put it down.

This is not optimal because a modulated groove acts differently but it's a much better approximation than the tonearm scale.
 
If you are going to use the brush (this applies to all brush-using Pickerings or Stantons):

1) Balance the tone are with the brush attached to the needle & cartridge and the tonearm's VTF and Antiskate settings at ZERO
2) Set the VTF to what you believe is the optimum setting for the needle, then turn it up one additional gram because the brush is being used
3) Set the Anti-skate to the same numerical value as the VTF is now set

NOW -- if you have a more accurate stylus pressure gauge than the tone arm setting, use it to correct the VTF setting to the actual amount, but it still needs to be the sum of the optimum amount plus 1 gram.
The next question would be, is the tonearm's Antiskate dial accurate or not. I would suggest first leaving it where you have it, but then watch to see whether the needle seems to be pulled more to one side or the other of the groove, and adjusting it accordingly if that is so.

If you get sibilance, you may be expecting that the optimum VTF is lower than it really is. It is usually in the upper part of the suggested range for the stylus. Of course, exactly what is best can vary with different kinds of tonearms.
 
From my own experience, setting up a cart can be a tedious process to get it to sound its best on the TT it is installed on. A big majority of the time it is a T&E/set back and listen process. Each TT\TA\Plinth Design\Suspension Type\Etc. combo dictates the best sound from a cart.

I am just thankful I have it tuned in on the Thorens tables I own. My 1st cart setup on a Thorens table for VTF took me over 2 hrs to get it setup to MY satisfaction. Now, I can change a cart in a matter of minutes. Thanks to the Michell Techno-Weight counter weight.

Good luck with your setup.
 
Get a copy of Johnny Winter "Second Winter". It's a double album and side 4 has nothing on it, one giant run-out. Perfect for checking anti-skate.
 
Wasn't it established that the blank area method of setting anti-skate was inaccurate because it didn't take into consideration the dynamic grooves of actual recorded vinyl?
 
Wasn't it established that the blank area method of setting anti-skate was inaccurate because it didn't take into consideration the dynamic grooves of actual recorded vinyl?

No, its not well established. How do you set AS in a trak that bangs the stylus all over the place.
 
No, its not well established. How do you set AS in a trak that bangs the stylus all over the place.

I could recall reading a myriad of threads, on this site alone, wherein the overall consensus was that using smooth surfaces to adjust this setting wasn't accurate because it wasn't "imitating the movement" of playing grooved vinyl; in fact, I see this argued all over the 'net (stressing that the "use a smooth piece of deadwax to set AS" method is a myth).
 
Wasn't it established that the blank area method of setting anti-skate was inaccurate because it didn't take into consideration the dynamic grooves of actual recorded vinyl?

Actually that only comes on top of it - and also poses a certain problem, 'cause which degree of modulation would one preferably set one's anti-skating for: rather for a very high degree, so that it formost helps to avoid mistrackings during the most demanding passages - or rather for an average degree of modulation, so that it would foremost help to avoid uneven wear?

However, there already is a systematic difference between the "tip of tip on blank surface" and the "tip in groove" scenario, because in the former scenario the "normal force" for the created friction is pretty exactly equal to the tracking force (minus a tad due to vertical skating), whereas in the latter scenarion it is pretty exactly equal to two times the tracking force divided by the square root of two (= roundabout 1.4 times the tracking force). So even compared to a tip in a completely unmodulated groove the blank disc method would result in ca. 30 % undercompensation. Theoretically. In practice the results might as well be more all over the place, as the very tip of the tip isn't really designed to come into contact with the record whilst playback - or, more physically speaking, different coefficients of friction may apply to the two scenarios.

Hence I'd rather vote for the test record/modulation test rack method as the more scientifically correct approach. However, that would of course at first result in a setting for a, depending on the capabilities of the cartridge (or cart/arm combo), pretty to very high degree of modulation. So the next question would be, whether one would like to reduce that setting and by how much - to suit a more average degree of modulation or for some sensible compromise in between...

Back to friction: A part of the problem is that what one learns about friction in school physics lessons is pretty idealised/simplified. I.e., basically our "school book table of coefficients of friction" only applies to "flat, smooth surface against flat, smooth surface" and a couple of other conditions - and wherever these conditions don't apply, things become quite a bit more complex and complicated, so that rules like that contact area size or speed would have no influence on the friction also don't really apply anymore.

Greetings from Munich!

Manfred / lini
 
I've used (and promoted) the blank disc method for years. I have zero IGD, totally even (though undetectable) stylus wear, the cantilever is perfectly centered, the stereo image is perfectly centered, there is no record wear and to top it of, almost all of the machines that I have (10) come very close to the actual setting recommended by the manufacturer of the tables. Without using a blank disc, there are people with vintage machines that don't even know if their AS even works.

BTW, there really isn't such a thing as a smooth disc, unless you are using glass, and glass does not work. I use polycarbonate (Lexan) and the stylus leaves marks on the disc, therefore, it is cutting tracks in the disc. With almost every table, I can get the arm to stand perfectly still. I will continue to use the blank disc, because it has proved to me that it works for proper set-up and the results of the musical experience confirms the effort.

Those that doubt that the blank disc works have more then likely never tried one.
 
The stylus that drags the bottom of the grove can be adjusted using AS so it does not climb a groove wall. But the most benefit of adjusting the AS comes to those styli that sit up higher in the groove.

I wouldn’t let the stylus drag against the flat smooth side of an LP, I’d use the stylus protector from what came with a new cartridge and lube the protector with some liquid soap then cue it down onto the blank side of an LP !!!
 
Last edited:
The brush reduces the need of anti skating was my experience with my Stantons and Shure V-15's. I have been using a linear arm since the middle 70's and the compromise of using anti skating is not necessary. Mis tracking is no longer an issue.
 
A frustrating topic I used to over-think about, before realising it's a compromise because forces acting on the stylus vary across the side of each LP.

I use an LP with acoustic guitar in both channels, setting bias to approximately the value of tracking force or as the TT manufacturer recommends. Any music with similar instruments/ volume in both channels will do, preferably something with a bit of pace & treble detail.

Then, viewing from the front of & level with the cartridge, lower it slowly part way into the first track (not the raised lead-in) to see if the cantilever deflects one way or another, Then repeat about 2/3 of the way across the side. Adjust if necessary so that as the cantilever settles, it doesn't deflect & remains centred.

Music should sound equally lively in both channels - when bias is noticeably slewed one way or another, the channel with too little will tend to sound dull, especially treble notes. The guitars on the track I use will sound identical in volume, liveliness and sparkle. I think it's a bit of a fallacy that incorrect bias moves the central image - I don't notice that even when anti-skate is poorly adjusted.
 
Back
Top Bottom