[DaveyW]

Hi All,

I’ve been reading Wayner’s “The things you can make out of paper” with much interest.
I know there are quite a few approaches to cartridge alignment and I agree that lining up by sight against protractors is a bit of a pain and sometimes seems to be almost impossible.
This is especially tedious if you’re a regular cartridge swapper.

I thought I’d share my approach which has saved me a lot of time.

I can’t tell you how many hours I'd previously spent sliding carts up and down headshells, checking null points, walking away and banging my head on the wall 

What I’ve tried to do is find a simple way to locate the cartridge tip exactly on the null point, and from here all I need to do is square it up.

The method relies on a cart being perfectly set up in the first place, I’ve typically tended to do this via the two point protractor method.
Do it, leave it, let my eyes recover then go back for a (hopefully) final check.

Set up then goes like this
a) Take the protractor of choice and extend it to the rim of the platter.
b) At the edge of the platter at the centre of the protractor make a small black alignment mark
c) Make a corresponding black mark directly beneath this at the base of the platter
d) With the set up cart sitting on the selected null point and the protractor aligned with the upper black mark, add a small marker on the base of the platter base, aligned with the lower mark.
This essentially is a locked reference
e) Lift the arm, drop the stylus onto the 2nd null point and add a second marker aligned with the lower platter mark.
This is a second reference

Future cartridge set up is then pretty straight forward.
a) Ensure that the protractor is aligned with the upper platter mark
b) Ensure that the platter is aligned with the appropriate null point marker
c) Ensure the cartridge sits in the headshell slots so that the stylus lands on the null point
d) Align the cart at that null point

This should be job done! But there is a quick double check that all is right

e) Lift the arm, move the platter to align with the second null point marker
f) Drop the stylus at this point – It should hit the 2nd Null spot on and be perfectly aligned

Here’s some pics to help explain, this example uses a Heybrook protractor, I now use it with Baerwald.









I know that Arc protractors offer a similar approach, but I’ve found this works well for me.
Also, now that I’m happy with my markers I’ve been able to make them much more discrete 

Probably not for everyone, but I thought I’d share out of interest as it’s saved me hours of set up time.

Merry Christmas All
Dave

[Wayner]

Thanks for posting your method, Dave. There are many ways to accomplish  this tedious task. I actually tape my platter to the plinth when I start  the process. My alignment tool has a stringer that points the card at  the tonearm pivot center, with the aid of the stringer and I first set  the overhang. From there, I go to the outer null point and try to move  the cartridge to get the angular alignment. After doing so, I go back to  the overhang scale to see if I've moved the stylus out of position,  because I did the angular sweep. Usually the second time of going back  and forth to the outer null point locks me in and then going to the  inner null point verifies the accuracy of the first.
 
 I see your method as well and I may experiment with that the next time I do a cartridge swap.
 
 Wayner

[BaMorin]

Hi All,

I’ve been reading Wayner’s “The things you can make out of paper” with much interest.
I know there are quite a few approaches to cartridge alignment and I agree that lining up by sight against protractors is a bit of a pain and sometimes seems to be almost impossible.
This is especially tedious if you’re a regular cartridge swapper.

 this example uses a Heybrook protractor, I now use it with Baerwald.


Merry Christmas All
Dave

Did you find a difference in the Baerwald that you prefered from the Heybrook?

Or do you find the Linn arm to be more "baerwald ready"?

[DaveyW]

Thanks for posting your method, Dave.
I may experiment with that the next time I do a cartridge swap.
Wayner

Thanks Wayner - It's good to share different approaches.

BaMorin wrote;

Did you find a difference in the Baerwald that you prefered from the Heybrook?

Or do you find the Linn arm to be more "baerwald ready"?

Hi Marc,
My back to back's were done using an AT 0C9 ML II and a Grado MCZ.
To be honest any differences were very, very subtle, I think this may be down to the fact that null points are actually quite close.
I believe I perceived a very slight improvement re. IGD at Baerwald with the Grado, I have since set up my carts (inc. my current Deneno DLS1) to this.

Cheers
Dave
 

[Photon46]

Wayner, I like you, like to lock down the platter during cartridge setup. Instead of tape, I've found a couple of gobs of Blu-Tack or similar material stuck against the plinth and the platter really works well also. Easy to remove and apply.

[BaMorin]

Thanks Wayner - It's good to share different approaches.

BaMorin wrote;
Hi Marc,
My back to back's were done using an AT 0C9 ML II and a Grado MCZ.
To be honest any differences were very, very subtle, I think this may be down to the fact that null points are actually quite close.
I believe I perceived a very slight improvement re. IGD at Baerwald with the Grado, I have since set up my carts (inc. my current Deneno DLS1) to this.

Cheers
Dave

Does your mother know how much I've been corrupting you?   

[Delta Wave]

Wayner, I like you, like to lock down the platter during cartridge setup. Instead of tape, I've found a couple of gobs of Blu-Tack or similar material stuck against the plinth and the platter really works well also. Easy to remove and apply.

My platter is inset into the plinth so I use a small, home-made rubber wedge that does the trick quite nicely.

[neobop]

Hi All,

Davey, your first 2 pics here are great illustrations of angular sighting error. It looks as if the extended center line and mark on the platter aren't lined up. This is no doubt due to the position/angle of the lens and illustrates just how important it is to take your time and get it right at the critical parts.

neo

[DaveyW]

BaMorin wrote;

Does your mother know how much I've been corrupting you?

OK OK cap dothed your way Sir!

Yes it was Bammer that recommended I go with Baerwald esp. with a Grado/Ittok combo.

Hi Neo
Right you are. Care and patience is very important.
Yeah! these pics were taken to illustrate the method as opposed to marking alignment. Everything was nicely squared up when looking from directly above.

Cheers
Dave

[Letitroll98]

I know that Arc protractors offer a similar approach, but I’ve found this works well for me.

Dave, you know how much I value your contributions on another site, and hopefully how much I'll continue to welcome your excellent contributions here.  So I know you'll forgive me for completely trashing you here and busting all over your post, to wit:  Please dear sir(s), explain to me how this, or the other methods described on this and other threads in the vinyl circle, is easier than using an arm specific arc template.  Arc templates equal dead perfect overhang and alignment.  There is no guesswork, either it lines up or it doesn't.  Of course I'm teasing about busting on your post, but seriously, when talking about paper templates, why is anything but an arc template considered?  Am I missing something?  (The above excludes apparatus like SoundTracker or Feickert etc.)   

[Delta Wave]

Not to rain on any parade here here but on paper protractors, if the hole is not EXACTLY punched out dead-center that could throw off your alignment by a considerable amount. The same goes with the printing... printing companies, having worked for a few I know they don't really put much "oomph" into what they consider to be novelty products. Just putting that out there for everyone's thoughts and consideration.

[DaveyW]

Dave, you know how much I value your contributions on another site, and hopefully how much I'll continue to welcome your excellent contributions here.  So I know you'll forgive me for completely trashing you here and busting all over your post, to wit:  Please dear sir(s), explain to me how this, or the other methods described on this and other threads in the vinyl circle, is easier than using an arm specific arc template.  Arc templates equal dead perfect overhang and alignment.  There is no guesswork, either it lines up or it doesn't.  Of course I'm teasing about busting on your post, but seriously, when talking about paper templates, why is anything but an arc template considered?  Am I missing something?  (The above excludes apparatus like SoundTracker or Feickert etc.)   

Hi Letitroll,

I know this is another contentious subject, everyone tends to their own personal preference.
I just thought I'd share my approach as it is a little different to the commonly used ones.
To answer your question of why not use an arc template - for me it's down to convienience, simplicity and time.
I'm routinely at less than 30mins (typically 20 mins) to remove and install a new cart yet still taking my time.
Handy if you want to deliver relatively quick back to backs.
As I said, not for everyone but thought it worth sharing.

Merry Xmas
Dave

[Wayner]

Not to rain on any parade here here but on paper protractors, if the hole is not EXACTLY punched out dead-center that could throw off your alignment by a considerable amount. The same goes with the printing... printing companies, having worked for a few I know they don't really put much "oomph" into what they consider to be novelty products. Just putting that out there for everyone's thoughts and consideration.

Even plastic ones are cut to shape with the hole, then printed, so the margin of error has not diminished, even with "store bought" tools.

Mine are printed from my CAD, scaled to as accurate as possible (always checked with a full length metric rules (errors are easily seen when the printing is not exact) and I even print a triangular hole for the spindle, which is cut out with an Exact-o knife, by hand. I print on 110lb card stock and then have the whole thing double laminated. Inexpensive, durable and accurate.

Wayner

[blakep]

Even plastic ones are cut to shape with the hole, then printed, so the margin of error has not diminished, even with "store bought" tools.

Mine are printed from my CAD, scaled to as accurate as possible (always checked with a full length metric rules (errors are easily seen when the printing is not exact) and I even print a triangular hole for the spindle, which is cut out with an Exact-o knife, by hand. I print on 110lb card stock and then have the whole thing double laminated. Inexpensive, durable and accurate.

Wayner

Yes, a simple triangle or square plotted onto the spindle hole and cut with an exacto knife after lamination is pretty much deadly accurate.

FWIW, my $3 (cost of 1 sheet of photo paper and lamination) Conrad Hoffman software generated protractor printed on a laser printer gives me exactly the same alignment as my $110 Mint LP.

I was a little sheepish after purchasing the Mint.     But it certainly is prettier and more impressive .

And I fully agree with Letitroll. If you know your mounting distance is accurate, an Arc Protractor is the only way to fly. Talk about simple and easy. Anyone that has not used one really does not know how easy the task can be.

[Wayner]

But I have, right now, 10 turntables and also do repair and alignment here at home, so I need a universal type that can handle almost anything thrown at it and the arc is simply machine specific. No big deal to make 10 different ones, I guess.

I am slightly leery of printing alignment tools from a file that has no reference dimensions to measure, as a confirmation as to the plotting scale. Not all printers do a good job printing at full scale, and the heavier the paper, the worse the scale will be in that longer direction as the paper tries to go around in the printer. Compensation is needed to handle these kinds of printing problems.

If the author of the protractor offers no scaling reference, you will never know if the tool is the correct size.

Wayner

[blakep]

The Hoffman software generated protractors have a scaling reference which is printed on each individual protractor.

[neobop]

No argument here, about the ease and convenience of arc protractors. But the qualifier, "If you know your mounting distance is accurate" is seriously underestimated. I'm not talking about a 1200 with stock arm. You can be pretty much assured that will be at factory spec. Take a look at Dave's LP12. Even if you have a factory drilled armboard, the mounting distance could be off slightly. In many cases this has to be verified or results checked with a good old traditional protractor.

ALL protractors or templates should be checked for accuracy. I read somewhere that a commercial protractor is off. I haven't verified this so I don't want to mention the name. It isn't any of the ones mentioned in these threads.

neo

[Wayner]

Neo brings up a point I raised a few months ago about DIY drilling of  armboards. If I ever do another one, I'm going to take the whole damn  thing down to the machine shop, so they can dial in the exact distance  from spindle to tonearm mounting hole. I believe most shops can get this  done to .0005" if not even closer.
 
 Wayner