• The move to the new server is done. There are some software and database maintenance updates in process. This has us passing the hat around to help out. We appreciate any donations. Seriously, even a dollar helps. The payment page may be found here - https://www.audiokarma.org/support.html

Best allignment method on Technics SL-D3

Sultan swing

Sultan swing

Active Member
Which allignment method shoud I use while mounting an AT95e on a Technics headshell:

1. Technics overhang measure - 52mm from the stylus tip point to the end of the rubber?

2. Technics Baerwald Arc Protractor downloaded from VE - I substracted the overhang (15mm) from the effective length (230mm) and it's 215mm, so according to VE, I can use that for my SL-D3 s-type tonearm.

3. Stevenson protractor - also from VE. This one was recommended to me by some of you for my Sansui s-type tonearm, so, is it a good option again?

Which one is going to give me the best result?
Would all three of them give me the same result?

Also, should I buy that KAB Technics protractor thingy for 2.75$ ?
Does it really simplify that much that it's a necessity?

Thank you all!
 
Register to hide this ad
YES! on the KAB Technics protractor thingy

This is what I do: I use the above mentioned thingy then check with "Stupid Protractors" (Baerwald) once mounted on arm

Takes about 3 mins in total
 
Last edited:
OK. But the AT95e should be here this week and that KAB thingy at least two weeks if I order it today... So, before I buy it, what's the safest and best way to go?
 
The overhang gauge is going to be the simplest way, but the data I recall from VE says Baerwald produced the least distortion on a Technics that was tested. I might not be remembering exactly right. If you use the Technics gauge, your overhang should be as specified by Technics. If you use a Baerwald protractor, you will need to move forward to an overhang of well over 17mm.
 
IMO... Just download one of those protractors (Technics Baerwald Arc Protractor) and take your time and be careful adjusting the cart
 
If I move the cart forward, to allign it with Baerwald protractor, could this be a better solution - the longer the "arm", less tracking error?
 
I just want to clarify something I said...

I do NOT use the Baerwald Arc Protractor.

After I use the KAB Technics protractor thingy I double check with the "Stupid Protractors" (Baerwald) from VE for parallel alignment
 
Even the Stupid Protractor for Baerwald should result in an overhang of 17.8 mm on a turntable with a pivot-to-spindle distance of 215 mm. The Technics-specified overhang is closer to Stevenson (than to Baerwald) by about 2 mm.
 
I understood you, Frank.

As for the space in slots, I'll see that this week, because I'm waiting to the AT95e to arrive... So you recommend that I set it on 52 mm from stylus tip point to the end of the rubber, and then move it another 2.8mm forward?
 
I use the Stupid Protractor just to make sure the cart is square in headshell

I maintain the 52mm set with the KAB/Technics thingy
 
Sultan swing said:
So you recommend that I set it on 52 mm from stylus tip point to the end of the rubber, and then move it another 2.8mm forward?
Click to expand...

Only if you want to attempt a Baerwald alignment. Or you could look at it from the side and adjust first so that the tip hangs 17.8 mm past the center of the spindle (effective length of 232.8 mm) and then twist the cartridge to align with the 2-point Baerwald protractor.

Personal opinion only...If it were my turntable, I'd probably square it at 52 mm first; then adjust later if I sensed an audible reason to do otherwise. Edit...I see I'm actually paraphrasing and agreeing with Frank on that point.
 
Last edited:
Ok, I think I'll do that way.
52 mm with a ruler and then adjust it to be perfectly alligned with the grids on Baerwald.
And then some day, I'll buy that KAB thingy.
 
Just to be clear, I would not adjust the cartridge to align with the Baerwald grid with the Baerwald protractor on the spindle and with the stylus tip at 52 mm. I could see using the grid to help see that the cartridge is square in the headshell, but twisting it in the headshell with the tip at 52 mm won't give you either the Technics spec or Baerwald.
 
Sultan swing said:
O.K., now I'm confused.
Click to expand...



:banana:

Abbott and Costello, Who's on 1st, would be proud of this thread

Abbott_and_Costello_9396.jpg
 
I might not be putting enough information in my replies.

First: Baerwald alignment is often done by aligning to only two points, but those two points can be met accurately at only one effective length for a given pivot-to-spindle distance. For a turntable with a pivot-to-spindle distance of 215 mm, the effective length of a Baerwald alignment must be 232.8 mm.

Second: With the Technics alignment, the effective length is specified as 230 mm and of course the pivot-to-spindle distance remains fixed at 215 mm.

It is at least in theory not possible to achieve the Baerwald alignment on this turntable with the stylus at 52 mm from the mounting point because that results in an effective length of 230 mm, when we know Baerwald works at only 232.8 mm. As you pull the stylus back closer to the pivot point (until you get to 52 mm on the headshell), you have to position the cartridge closer and closer to square.

This brings to mind the Stevenson example again. Since its effective length would be only 230.9 mm on this turntable, the cartridge would be closer to square than with Baerwald.

I see now I didn't make it simpler with that explanation, :sigh: but the long story made short is: At 52 mm, the cartridge is intended by Technics to remain square to the headshell.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom