• 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

Question about anti-skating

MattL2

MattL2

New Member
Hi. I bought a blank/grooveless record to test anti-skating. I found that the stylus drifted when dropped in the center of the playable area. So I adjusted the anti-skating knob until the stylus stayed centered. But now I notice all of the sibilance is in the right channel. I read that if this happens, it means the anti-skating is not calibrated properly.

So which is it? Stylus stays in one place -- or sibilance is centered?

I should also note that if I get the stylus to not drift in one part of the record, it drifts in a different part. So if it stays put in the center of the playable area, it drifts when dropped near the edge of the disc (and vice-versa).
 
Register to hide this ad
Do not try to dial it in not to drift at all. Aiming for no drift typically means you end up with too much a/s.

Skating force varies across the entire record, so there never will be one perfect setting. Best practice is to place the stylus almost at the end and dial in a/s so the stylus moves in very slowly towards center. That is what Peter Lenderman from SoundSmith advocates.
 
A record has two sides to a modulated groove pulling on the stylus and a groovedless record has a single smooth point pulling on the stylus. This will lead you to setting the a/s too low.
 
MattL2 said:
. . . I should also note that if I get the stylus to not drift in one part of the record, it drifts in a different part. So if it stays put in the center of the playable area, it drifts when dropped near the edge of the disc (and vice-versa).
Click to expand...
Coolhandjjl mentioned Soundsmith's recommended method for setting anti-skate. Below is an excerpt and link to one of their articles. This description assumes the user does not have a blank disc to use. Any emphasis in the text is theirs.

"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 somewhat similar to what it would have if it were in a groove. This is due to a calculation of “force per unit area” with consideration of the rheology of the material – vinyl.

Suffice it to say that it is “similar” enough for this method to work well, especially since the method was reverse engineered/calibrated properly by Frank Schroder to be correct for 30-40% record modulation. It then becomes an easy matter to set the A-S and observe the movement of the arm. For a given VTF (any amount of VTF) – 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. You will have a moment to do this until the stylus “pops” into the run-out groove." https://www.sound-smith.com/faq/how-do-i-adjust-anti-skating-my-cartridge
 
I did that and found not enough time to really check before the stylus popped into the groove. I’m just too old to really see what’s going on in that short of time. I have Johnny Winter’s Second Winter. Blank side 4, perfect for setting the stylus in the area where SoundSmith recommends, it’s approx the last 1/2” of the LP before the label
 
Last edited:
A/S is just a guess. Things that change how much is needed include groove modulation, stylus shape, tracking force and as mentioned above the amount of the stylus that actually drags across the record.

there are plenty of ways to set a/s from just setting the dial to the same as the tracking force to using a blank record or using a tone modulated record.

The first is just a setting based on the decisions of the table maker for results.
The second, blank record, doesn't have the same full pull of the stylus and Soundsmith addresses that.
The third, tone modulated, relies on high modulation to have the stylus mistrack on one side of the groove before the other to allow setting an a/s that makes for even playback.

None are perfect. As discussed in the Soundsmith method, modulation makes a difference and those quiet passages need less a/s compared to the loud parts. But you are setting a single amount of a/s for the tonearm. Set it so your table sounds best and roll with it, I guess.

Magnepan provided instructions for the tone modulated groove method and I have been using that for years. Since a/s needs vary all over the record, I don't worry about it much once set, but I do notice I use WAY LESS anti-skate than the tracking force correlation with tracking force in the manual specifies. Glad I have the test record and understand the setting even if for some medium to high but not very high modulated grooves.

Your mileage will vary, can't duplicate this stuff.
 
Last edited:
Now you know why I prefer linear tone arms. That said I have a Mark Levinson which was developed in combination with VPI using the Prime signature as a starting place. It has the FAt Boy gimbaled arm. I set the skating for the best performance on the 70 band of my Ortofon test record and then back it off about 30%. I have never heard in tracking issues from my Dynavectors and the Dynavector in the Levinson sounds as good as the Dynavector in the Thorens with the linear arm so I am happy. If fact in some ways the Levinson sounds better as the Fat boy arm is less resonant than the linear arm. Both perform well, the Thorens for the Stereo system and the Levinson for the HT system.
 
Coolhandjjl said:
Do not try to dial it in not to drift at all. Aiming for no drift typically means you end up with too much a/s.

Skating force varies across the entire record, so there never will be one perfect setting. Best practice is to place the stylus almost at the end and dial in a/s so the stylus moves in very slowly towards center. That is what Peter Lenderman from SoundSmith advocates.
Click to expand...

^^^^^^ This is what I do too but I then listen to a bunch of records and make any minor adjustments to Anti Skate so it sounds best to me. I'll add it is important to have the azimuth of the cart's stylus set prior to messing with anti skate. Adjust one and you likely will need to revisit the other.
 
The problem with setting the stylus down in the runout groove is that my turntable automatically retrieves the tonearm back into its start position when the record is over.

So I'm trying to set the a-s based on sound but it's hard because whether the a-s is at 0 or 3 I'm still hearing the syllabance mainly in the right ear. It is a 40 year old turntable...

So I'm thinking I should just leave it at 1.6 since that's what my tracking force is set to.
 
MattL2 said:
The problem with setting the stylus down in the runout groove is that my turntable automatically retrieves the tonearm back into its start position when the record is over.

So I'm trying to set the a-s based on sound but it's hard because whether the a-s is at 0 or 3 I'm still hearing the syllabance mainly in the right ear. It is a 40 year old turntable...

So I'm thinking I should just leave it at 1.6 since that's what my tracking force is set to.
Click to expand...
Have you experimented with tracking force? I had a Grado Blue years ago, not the new Grado Blue3, but unless I was using a damped arm, it tracked better for me when near the upper limit of its range, which used to be rated as 1-2 grams. I also once had a Grado Green1 stylus that became quite sibilant after just a few months of play, and it took a new stylus to regain good performance.

Edit: My assumption based on seeing your past posts is that you're using a Grado Blue, but that might no longer be the case. Also, I've run turntables with either no antiskate at all or antiskate set to a much smaller number than the tracking force, and never experienced unbalanced sibilance, but that has also been with tracking force near the maximum. Has this been an issue on all your records?
 
Last edited:
Perhaps I missed it, but what TT and cartridge/stylus are we talking about here? And do you hear sibilance from the right channel only on certain albums or on all of your albums.?
 
Just wanted to add - before you attempt to set any anti-skate force, triple check that the turntable platter is absolutely level!
 
It is a Technics SL-1700 Turntable. It has a Grado blue cartridge with a Grado red stylus ( I know that is weird but the salesman at the hi-fi stereo shop said they were out of blue replacement styluses and a red would work perfectly well.)

I was judging the sibilance only being in the right ear based on one particular album. There is a song with soft music and female vocals so there is a lot of sibilance, and I was using it as a "test song". But I will experiment with other albums. Maybe it is just the way that album is mixed/mastered.

I will also try, as many have suggested, using my grooveless LP and set the stylus right next to the label and adjust a-s so that it moves in slowly towards the center.
 
The Sound Smith/FS method doesn't make sense to me as the results for a microline or shibata are way different than for a conical or elliptical stylus.
It would seem that if you did it using their method one would need a massive amount of AS and I am not buying that as making sense at all.
If someone could elaborate as to what is going on then I would appreciate it.
 
The SoundSmith method resulted in much less a/s compared to when I was using factory settings. And that’s on three decks. One has a conical on it, the other two have Stereohedron styli on them (similar to Shibata).
 
Last edited:
Paul K said:
The Sound Smith/FS method doesn't make sense to me as the results for a microline or shibata are way different than for a conical or elliptical stylus.
It would seem that if you did it using their method one would need a massive amount of AS and I am not buying that as making sense at all.
If someone could elaborate as to what is going on then I would appreciate it.
Click to expand...

Peter L at Soundsmith started noticing that the L channel side of the diamond tips he was receiving to retip were MUCH more worn than the R side cut. He hypothesized that this was because AS recommendations for tonearms provided too much skating compensation, with the result that the R side made good contact at the expense of the L side. So he came up with his suggestion that you get as slow a movement as possible towards the spindle in the dead wax method, instead of getting the tonearm to stay perfectly still (or move toward the outer groove).

It's maybe not definitive "proof", but his vast experience makes it a convincing hypothesis.
 
doctor fuse said:
Peter L at Soundsmith started noticing that the L channel side of the diamond tips he was receiving to retip were MUCH more worn than the R side cut. He hypothesized that this was because AS recommendations for tonearms provided too much skating compensation, with the result that the R side made good contact at the expense of the L side. So he came up with his suggestion that you get as slow a movement as possible towards the spindle in the dead wax method, instead of getting the tonearm to stay perfectly still (or move toward the outer groove).

It's maybe not definitive "proof", but his vast experience makes it a convincing hypothesis.
Click to expand...

I understand that point. My main contention is that it doesn't make sense with line contacts because the antiskate is way higher than what seems to be necessary. I use this method with conical and elliptical styli and the resultant settings make sense. Line contacts and ML not much. I have an SEK 2 microscope so I am also monitoring wear.
 
I found this pretty helpful. It is a relatively simple explanation of the soundsmith a-s recommendation:

 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom