[THROWBACK]

. . . publish their Stylus Rake Angle (SRA) specs?

Let's say Michael Fremer is correct: that the ideal SRA is 92 degrees. One way to achieve that in your own setup is to go the digital microscope route. I have done that and it takes some real doing. To do it right takes me over an hour with more than a few frustrations along the way.

But the cartridge manufacturers could make it a lot easier. Most of them say simply to make sure the tonearm is level. That has its own problems: with tapered tonearms, it's not easy to tell when the tonearm is level. And a "level" tonearm does not necessarily produce a 92-degree SRA. 

I suggest that the mfgrs publish an SRA spec as follows. 1) Mount the cartridge in a tonearm; 2) set the recommended tracking force (VTF). This is important because VTF affects SRA. I.e., the heavier the VTF, the less the SRA. 3) level the top of the cartridge body (this mitigates the optical problems of a tapered tonearm); 4) Iterate between 2) and 3) until these interrelated parameters are all set properly; 5) measure the resulting SRA and publish the result.

Here's how the consumer would use the SRA spec. Let's say the published SRA spec is 90 degrees.  The consumer would set VTF and level the top of the cartridge. To achieve 92 degrees with a 9-inch arm, the consumer would have to raise the back of the tonearm by 8mm (the ROT is 4mm per degree).  That's it. Easier than messing with a microscope and probably close enough such that a little twiddling by ear would finish the job.

Of course, manufacturers would make it easier yet if they all produced cartridges with a standard SRA of 92 degrees . . .

. . . if Michael Fremer is right, of course.

[Wayner]

First, I think there are a bunch of assumptions made from the beginning, that are not anchored in stone. I don't blame you because I too was once thinking that the 92° rake angle was correct. I now think it's at least BS, or more correctly, it is stylus type related (shibata, fine line, elliptical....).

We have to ask ourselves why do we even want to have a lead in angle on the stylus? If any of you have run a metal or wood lathe in high school or at work, you will know that answer. It helps to relieve stylus "chatter". The real question is why 92°

Now I have another question. If cartridge manufacturers are on the ball, and their instructions tell the consumer to put the arm at parallel, how do we as consumers/audiophools know that is the right answer. Perhaps cartridge manufacturers build in the rake angle so when the arm is parallel, it is correct. They want the cartridges they sell to sound right, right?

Besides, raising the ass end of the tonearm does have some drawbacks, the first being that most arms do not have enough adjustment to get to 92°.

I'm back to arm parallel and I like it..... 

[Minn Mark]

+1 from another happy "parallel arm' user.  Maybe I'm a happy idiot but,.....I am happy with the sound I achieve.
 
Mark

[Gzerro]

I agree with Wayner that manufacturer's design the cartridge to work best with the arm parallel, anything else would make no sense. If a cartridge required a radical arm position to get the correct SRA I would consider it defective.

That said, I suspect there are differences, but most are probably due to manufacturing variation. It wouldn't take much for the stylus angle to be off a degree or two. It probably also changes slightly over time as the cartridge suspension breaks in and wears, and then of course VTF changes will have a small effect as well.

Even if you get it perfect at 92 degrees, even Fremer admits that is just a compromise, and that the cutting process can vary by 2-3 degrees depending on the record, and of course different record height makes a difference also.

It is so easy to set SRA by ear that I just don't get the whole USB microscope thing.