• 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

Cartridge alignment

J

Jared R

Member
So confused. I bought a
Audio-Technica AT-VM95ML cartridge for my Technics SL D2 turntable. If it is mounted with the correct overhang and square to the headshell but the protractor indicates it is not aligned, moving the cartridge back and forth and twisting it out of square changes the overhang, correct? So which is the proper method of alignment?​
 
Register to hide this ad
Jared R said:
So confused. I bought a
Audio-Technica AT-VM95ML cartridge for my Technics SL D2 turntable. If it is mounted with the correct overhang and square to the headshell but the protractor indicates it is not aligned, moving the cartridge back and forth and twisting it out of square changes the overhang, correct? So which is the proper method of alignment?​
Click to expand...
What protractor are you using?

Overhang is an outcome of alignment. Different alignments, different overhangs.

The alignment method in the Technics user manuals (52mm from washer to stylus tip, cartridge square) is close to, but not quite, the Stevenson alignment.

EDIT - Typically you will need to twist the cartridge a bit to align with a protractor.
 
Last edited:
spark1 said:
What protractor are you using?

Overhang is an outcome of alignment. Different alignments, different overhangs.

The alignment method in the Technics user manuals (52mm from washer to stylus tip, cartridge square) is close to, but not quite, the Stevenson alignment.

EDIT - Typically you will need to twist the cartridge a bit to align with a protractor.
Click to expand...
I am using a protractor from Hudson HiFi purchased on Amazon. It does not state Stephenson or any other info. But my question remains...which method is correct? Overhang or protractor? Your response ( and thanks for it) seems to indicate protractor.
 
My question was as regards the geometry of the product you are using. Oddly, Hudson does not appear to specify what alignment it is designed to produce.

There is no "correct" alignment. The Hudson thing produces one alignment. The 52mm method produces another. There are protractors available for all the common alignment geometries.

The alignment geometry produces two null points somewhere in the arc of the tonearm as it moves across the record. The location of these points varies by alignment.

In any case, the overhang differs by alignment. Unless you are trying to directly set the overhang, which is difficult with the Technics arm because it will not swing all the way to the spindle, just let overhang be the outcome, not the method. Conversely, an alignment is the outcome of setting the overhang.

By the way, some people are confused by the Technics 52mm method, thinking that 52mm is the overhang. Nope. It's just the distance from headshell washer (a fixed poin) to stylus tip (an adjustable point) required to produce the alignment they recommend, which in turn produces a certain overhang. In the case of the Technics method, it's 15mm.

Personally, I use a Stevenson alignment with my Technics SL1301. But honestly, I can't tell any difference vs using the Technics method.

EDIT: With a pivoted tonearm, it is possible to achieve perfect tangency at only two points as the tonearm travels in an arc across the record. These two points are known as null points (the distance between the spindle and the pivot point where there is no tracking error). So, all alignments are basically a compromise, with some providing less error on inner grooves, or less error on outer grooves, or less on both extremes but more in the middle, etc.
 
Last edited:
spark1 said:
My question was as regards the geometry of the product you are using. Oddly, Hudson does not appear to specify what alignment it is designed to produce.

There is no "correct" alignment. The Hudson thing produces one alignment. The 52mm method produces another. There are protractors available for all the common alignment geometries.

The alignment geometry produces two null points somewhere in the arc of the tonearm as it moves across the record. The location of these points varies by alignment.

In any case, the overhang differs by alignment. Unless you are trying to directly set the overhang, which is difficult with the Technics arm because it will not swing all the way to the spindle, just let overhang be the outcome, not the method. Conversely, an alignment is the outcome of setting the overhang.

By the way, some people are confused by the Technics 52mm method, thinking that 52mm is the overhang. Nope. It's just the distance required to produce the alignment they recommend, which in turn produces a certain overhang. In the case of the Technics method, it's 15mm.

Personally, I use a Stevenson alignment with my Technics SL1301. But honestly, I can't tell any difference vs using the Technics method.
Click to expand...
If the point is proper position of the stylus in the record groove throughout the playback, would that not indicate one alignment method more accurate than another? Thank you for your patience and schooling. I've been enjoying listening to records since the '60's and I don't recall even worrying about such matters back in the day!
 
Jared R said:
If the point is proper position of the stylus in the record groove throughout the playback, would that not indicate one alignment method more accurate than another? Thank you for your patience and schooling. I've been enjoying listening to records since the '60's and I don't recall even worrying about such matters back in the day!
Click to expand...

Nope. All alignments are a compromise. Except in the case of a linear tracking turntable. But for pivoted tonearms, there can only ever be two places where it's "perfect". Think about it; the arm travels in an arc. So the stylus at the end of that arm can only be perfectly centered in the groove in two places across that arc.

Maybe this AI-generated description of tracking error will help:

Tracking error on a turntable is the angular difference between the record groove's tangent and the cartridge's cantilever axis, causing audio distortion. This error occurs because a standard tonearm's fixed pivot point can't keep the stylus perfectly aligned with the constantly changing groove angle as it moves from the outer to inner tracks. Minimizing tracking error is crucial for accurate sound reproduction, and it is managed through correct tonearm geometry, cartridge alignment, and in some cases, a different tonearm design like a linear tracker. ​
​
My suggestion is that you try both the Hudson protractor and the Technics method. See if you prefer one over the other. Done.

This may help you use the protractor:
​
Square the cartridge with the inner grid, making sure that the stylus is on the correct point.​
Move to the outer grid, and set the stylus on the correct point.​
If the cartridge points to the outside of the record, move the cartridge forward in the slots, and start over.​
If the cartridge points to the inside of the record, move the cartridge back, and start over.​
When the cartridge is square in both grids, tighten the mounting screws, rebalance the arm, and set tracking force.​
 
Last edited:
Jared R said:
would that not indicate one alignment method more accurate than another?
Click to expand...
Not really. see posts above. fyi - my collected notes below
What you can do is try & pick the most appropriate one for your TT and/or tonearm. This one will probably give you the 'best' results. For example, Japanese TTs usually use Stevenson.
I like this site https://alignmentprotractor.com/ free printable protractors. I use this on my sl1210. I will rough it in with the overhang gauge, then align with printed protractor.


---------fyi -----notes from the internet
  • different alignment methods (‘schools of thought’)
    • Baerwald (Lofgren A), Lofgren B, Stevenson
      • Baerwald
        • GeoDisc uses the Baerwald
        • Baerwald's alignment method predates that advent of S-Shaped tonearms. I would only recommend a Bearwald alignment on a straight arm.
        • Baerwald "averages" the distortion over the entire playing surface.
      • Stevenson
        • Japan TT use Stevenson
        • Stevenson puts the stylus in the "perfect" place for the end of the record, where distortion is the highest
        • Never do Stevenson unless the cart can do no other alignment, mainly because of the increased distortion at the outer grooves.
        • If you play a lot of 7" singles it might be worth using a custom alignment optimised for tighter inner groove radii, like Stevenson or Rega geometry?
        • Theoretically, Stevenson’s alignment is better for records that contain a lot of dynamic information (crescendos) towards the innermost grooves and for this reason is better for classical music LPs.
      • Lofgren B
        • Fremer does not like the Stevenson alignment and believes the Lofgren B gives you the best overall performance.
Lofgren minimizes overall distortion across the record.
Baerwald equalizes distortion at the outside, middle and inside of the record.
Stevenson minimizes distortion at the inside where the most distortion exist.
  • Baerwald (Lofgren A) aims to equalize distortion at inner groove, outer groove and the peak between null points. Lofgren B aims to lower peak distortion between null points and Stevenson aims to lower distortion closer to inner groove
  • IME some carts just don't settle with other alignments if you don't use Stevenson. Depending what brand, you can't even do the others. Just one of those compromises if you don't do a Rega cart. Had a Sumiko Blackbird and couldn't shove it foward enough to even try Baerwald.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom