|
|
Post by stereophile on Dec 27, 2006 21:26:59 GMT 7
This is a thorny issue in other forums.
Some brands such as VPI(Harry Weisfeld) doesn't believe in anti-skate. In their rigs, you simply twist the tonearm cable to adjust the anti-skate. Recently, they came out w/ an aftermarket anti-skate kit for some of their ttables.
In some brands like Technics, the anti-skate is set using a dial. In others like Project, a tiny weight is hung on a string.
Do you deadlock it as in using a blank track and set the anti-skate till it stops to drift, or do you use a test record like Hi-Fi News and adjust by listening?
I used to be a deadlocker, believing that this allows equal pressure on each side of the stylus. Lately I've been seeing or rather hearing the merits of adjusting by listening.
What do you do?
|
|
|
|
Post by m_shoe_maker on May 31, 2007 11:56:02 GMT 7
On my VPI JMW, I just follow designer Harry Weisfeld original recommendation. I'm not using his aftermarket / add-on anti-skate mechanism coz wala ko pera. ;D ;D Kidding aside, I still believe in his original way of thinking i.e. minimal anti-skate by just turning the tonearm cable a notch.  His JMW arms for years had no "real" anti skating mechanisms.  IMHO, he just created his add-on aftermarket anti-skate to make anti-skate fanatics happy. ;D More people happy, more sales, more profits. ;D ;D On my Technics table/arm, I just turn the anti-skate dial with the same setting as the VTF. Sometimes the anti-skate is a tad lower than the VTF. I use my HiFi News test LP just to test everything, and if I am feeling "O.C.". ;D ;D |
|
|
|
Post by stereophile on May 31, 2007 12:51:27 GMT 7
Thanks for replying, Fritz! Yes, Harry Weisfeld bellieves that there is no need for an anti-skate device for his arms. He believes that the VTF of your cart should suffice. You are right. Some ttable fanatics have clamored for this expensive(USD$150) add-on. I've set one up before on a Scout. I tell you it was a chore to do because of the minimal intructions without adequate photos. Suffice it to say, that it did what it was supposed to. I just hope they revised the instructions. Of late, I've been settling on a little drift inward vs deadlock on a blank track. The final check to me is by listening if there is an improvement(subjective). For my Technics rigs w/ an anti-skate dial, I usually set just a little less than VTF. Thanks again for your inputs, MSM!  |
|
|
|
Post by m_shoe_maker on May 31, 2007 13:08:38 GMT 7
You are right. Some ttable fanatics have clamored for this expensive(USD$150) add-on. I've set one up before on a Scout. I tell you it was a chore to do because of the minimal intructions without adequate photos. Suffice it to say, that it did what it was supposed to. I just hope they revised the instructions. Regarding those VPI JMWs, there may be truth that those aftermarket anti-skate mechanisms are overkill.  In Michael Fremer's turntable set-up DVD, there was a clip wherein Mr. Analog himself, with all his sophisticated analog tools, felt that there was no need for the anti-skate mechanism in the JMW arm he was working on. His final move was to junk the anti-skate mechanism, and leave the JMW as is. |
|
|
|
Post by jagner on May 31, 2007 17:02:51 GMT 7
In my case, dead-locking or letting the anti-skate slouch a little bit, I think, is dependent on the tonearm I use. for instance, To achieve my desired result: When I was using the Pro-Ject 9c tonearm for the KOETSU, my anti-skate is deadlocked at center (and anti-skate weight approx 3 x VTF of cart). However, when I use the KOETSU on MandyM's kamagong tonearm, I made my anti-skate weight near equal to the VTF.
|
|
His JMW arms for years had no "real" anti skating mechanisms. 
IMHO, he just created his add-on aftermarket anti-skate to make anti-skate fanatics happy. ;D More people happy, more sales, more profits. ;D ;D
