Shure tracking force gauge or a digital one?

Rob S. · « **on:** 11 Feb 2010, 02:41 am »

hi,
I've got a Shure $25 gauge that came with my VPI classic TT. Am I going to get any better cartridge setup results using one of the digital gauges? If so which one do you recommend?

Rob S.

45triode · « **Reply #1 on:** 11 Feb 2010, 01:51 pm »

hi rob,

this info i had saved on my computer for later reference ( i own a shure gauge as well):

On a related note, every Shure gauge I've cross validated measures about .3 grams optimistic - with a 2.5 gram reading being in fact be closer to 2.2 grams. If have a Shure gauge, you can work around this error to some extent.
Frank Schröder clued me in to this trick. Position the Shure gauge so that the 2 outer pads at its base overhang the record platter. This will lower the scale slightly. Depending on your tonearm, you may not be able to cue your stylus down, but if you can, you'll get closer to an accurate reading. The scale will be slightly tilted, so take this into account as you line the pointer up in the mirrored area.
Repeatability and precision will still be an issue for you, and for this you will need a more sensitive scale, but at least you can get closer to the real number with this trick.

pls be advised, that i do not know the source anymore. hope this helps, best, oliver

thegage · « **Reply #2 on:** 11 Feb 2010, 02:22 pm »

A digital gauge will certainly give you a more accurate reading, but whether that is meaningful or not is debatable. Cartridge manufacturers give a range of tracking force, not an absolute number, because each cartridge is different, and one may need more tracking force, another less. And the tonearm adds another factor. It may sound like a pat answer, but really the only way to set VTF for your setup is to listen. I wouls say the Shure is fine for getting in the ballpark, then you can go up or down from there in small increments. If that sounds like too much work, then you can get a digital gauge, set it at the recommended force, and stop worrying about it.

John K.

Wayner · « **Reply #3 on:** 11 Feb 2010, 08:47 pm »

I have a couple of the Shure gauges. I usually balance my tonearm/cartridge using the zero balance technique, then dial in the weight with the counterweight scale. I then use the Shure scale to check and it's almost always within .1 grams of the actual weight. While this isn't the most accurate, I don't believe that it is off .3 grams, more like .1. But if you want to be more precise, I also like the looks and price of the Audio Additives scale for $79 from Music Direct. It's suppose to be accurate to .01 grams. They can bust real easy as the load cell is very delicate, FYI.

Wayner

2gumby2 · « **Reply #4 on:** 13 Feb 2010, 04:03 am »

Take a look at the scales at this link:
http://www.phonopreamps.com/scales.html

analognut · « **Reply #5 on:** 13 Feb 2010, 04:56 am »

I gotta agree with Wayner. My Shure scale is certainly within 0.1 gm or closer of what my SME V arm says I'm tracking at.

gerald porzio · « **Reply #6 on:** 13 Feb 2010, 07:57 am »

I used the Shure Ga. in my vinyl daze.

BobM · « **Reply #7 on:** 13 Feb 2010, 01:22 pm »

You don't need any fancy shmantsy "vinyl/audiophile" guage. There are plenty of digital guages on the internet that cost about $25 or so. Just get one that goes down to .1g or better and you should be OK.

Yes, the digital ones are far better than one of the balance a piece of plastic kinds, and they can actually cost less.

Ericus Rex · « **Reply #8 on:** 13 Feb 2010, 01:54 pm »

I got one of these:

http://cgi.ebay.com/Precise-digital-stylus-gauge-Denon-Ortofon-EMT-Shure_W0QQitemZ300377971236QQcmdZViewItemQQptZLH_DefaultDomain_0?hash=item45efec1a24

And at the same time got a set of these:

http://cgi.ebay.com/W4K044-Weight-Scale-Calibration-CAL-Weights-1100mg-100g_W0QQitemZ200300933113QQcmdZViewItemQQptZLH_DefaultDomain_0?hash=item2ea2ddaff9

...just to test it and it turns out to be very accurate! The resolution is in .01 gram increments and all my tests using various calibration weights were accurate to within .03 grams!

You can get cheaper ones, no doubt, but whatever you get I recommend getting a 2 gram calibration weight so you know how accurate it is.

blakep · « **Reply #9 on:** 13 Feb 2010, 04:40 pm »

Same scale as above but for less money:

http://www.dealextreme.com/details.dx/sku.16269

You do have shipping costs and it makes sense to purchase a 5 g calibration weight that comes with the one for $50.

Canrong makes all of these scales and, in many cases, they were sold rebranded for big $$$ a few years ago. I have the 5g version which measures to the thousandth gram point as opposed to hundredths (bought it about 3 years ago for $65). I like the extra accuracy and there have been some reports of some of the Canrongs crapping out quickly or burning through batteries. The cheaper ones may be more prone to this but I am not sure; at $15 you could buy 2 or 3 and it wouldn't be a big deal.

FWIW, I had my wife take mine in to the lab that she works at and compare it with some very sophisicated lab scales. It was accurate to within .007 grams!

A digital scale is the way to go. While, ultimately you are going to be setting by ear, once you've established an optimum tracking force, the digital scale is going to allow you to reset much more accurately and quickly than something like the Shure. I like that.

AudioSoul · « **Reply #10 on:** 13 Feb 2010, 04:59 pm »

I have a digital gauge. But I never use it. There are long periods between use and the battery keeps going dead. And they are expensive (about $8.00) so I went back to my Shure scale and it works great. It's good enough for me....

Wayner · « **Reply #11 on:** 13 Feb 2010, 05:56 pm »

I will say that if you have a damped tonearm, you may get erroneous readings from the Shure gauge. Not sure how the digital would behave, I wold guess, OK.

Wayner

toobluvr · « **Reply #12 on:** 13 Feb 2010, 06:50 pm »

I use the Shure gauge and think it works fine. This was confirmed in two ways:

(1) a buddy brought over his digital scale, and we compared it against several VTF settings that I established with my Shure. In every case, the Shure was w/in .1 gram of the digital.

(2) his buddy, someone who sets up tables for a living, swears by the Shure's accuracy and feels a digital scale is not necessary.

I mean really...how accurate do you need to get?

100% scientific precision is not needed. Set VTF roughly with the Shure (or any scale for that matter), then make small changes and use your ear to dial it in the rest of the way.

My method is to use the Shure to set VTF at the midpoint of the mfrs rec'd range, then go heavier and lighter in small steps and fine tune with my ear.

So to answer the OP's question....
In my opinion, you will not get better setup results with a digital scale. I would however give greater attention and care to offset angle and overhang. Getting those dialed in properly yields huge benefits. The impact of VTA varies depending on stylus type.

blakep · « **Reply #13 on:** 13 Feb 2010, 07:50 pm »

Quote from: toobluvr on 13 Feb 2010, 06:50 pm

I use the Shure gauge and think it works fine. This was confirmed in two ways:

(1) a buddy brought over his digital scale, and we compared it against several VTF settings that I established with my Shure. In every case, the Shure was w/in .1 gram of the digital.

(2) his buddy, someone who sets up tables for a living, swears by the Shure's accuracy and feels a digital scale is not necessary.

I mean really...how accurate do you need to get? 100% scientific precision is not needed. Set VTF roughly with the Shure (or any scale for that matter), then make small changes and use your ear to dial it in the rest of the way.

My method is to use the Shure to set VTF at the midpoint of the mfrs rec'd range, then go heavier and lighter in small steps and fine tune with my ear.

So to answer the OP's question....
In my opinion, you will not get better setup results with a digital scale. I would however give greater attention and care to offset angle and overhang. Getting those dialed in properly yields huge benefits. The impact of VTA varies depending on stylus type.

I guess it's all relative and will vary from indiviudual to individual. I find that the sweet spot for VTA with my setup is fairly narrow, within a range of about .030 grams. For anyone who finds that extreme, here's a thread at Audiogon in which a number of reasonably respected posters feel the range in their system is closer to .010:

http://forum.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/fr.pl?eanlg&1227474838&openfrom&1&4

Accuracy to .1 doesn't cut it for me. I track right at the 2.6 mark. If I track at 2.5 or even 2.55 things are going to be getting a bit edgy and spitty. At 2.65 to 2.7 muddy and bloated. Is it earth shattering? No, but I can hear the difference and I'd rather have it dialed in-it sounds better. Combine that with the fact that when manually making small adjustments with the counterweight you can easily change the tracking force by .5 to .75 grams and it makes it virtually impossible dial into a tight zone. A good digital scale will allow you to do it in a minute.

$50-$60 is a small price for me to pay for the convenience and accuracy which allows me to fine tune like that but it may not be for everyone.

toobluvr · « **Reply #14 on:** 13 Feb 2010, 08:18 pm »

All good points Blakep.

But I did not say that slight changes in VTF would not effect the sound.

And of course I know that a digital scale will provide VTF readings that are more accurate, and faster, and more easily repeatable. But that was not my point.

My point was that on initial cartridge setup, getting to a VTF starting point can be accomplished perfectly well with either scale. After that, you fine tune by ear. So anyone can get to the "correct" VTF using either scale, and there is absolutely no advantage to the digital over the Shure.

For example, I assume you initially got to your perfect 2.6 VTF by first using your scale to get in the neighborhood. Then you fine tuned by ear. So your ear determined your final and ideal VTF. Someone using the Shure would do the exact same thing, and would get the exact same ideal VTF.

Now, repeating very accurate settings is a different story, and this is where the digital scale shows its superiority. Once you know your perfect setting (determined by ear), I agree that the digital scale is much better at accurately measuring it and then repeating it quickly in the future.

So to summarize, the Shure is perfectly fine for initial setup, but once the precise sweet spot is known, a digital scale is better for repeating it.

blakep · « **Reply #15 on:** 14 Feb 2010, 01:34 am »

Quote from: toobluvr on 13 Feb 2010, 08:18 pm

My point was that on initial cartridge setup, getting to a VTF starting point can be accomplished perfectly well with either scale. After that, you fine tune by ear. So anyone can get to the "correct" VTF using either scale, and there is absolutely no advantage to the digital over the Shure.

For example, I assume you initially got to your perfect 2.6 VTF by first using your scale to get in the neighborhood. Then you fine tuned by ear. So your ear determined your final and ideal VTF. Someone using the Shure would do the exact same thing, and would get the exact same ideal VTF.

Now, repeating very accurate settings is a different story, and this is where the digital scale shows its superiority. Once you know your perfect setting (determined by ear), I agree that the digital scale is much better at accurately measuring it and then repeating it quickly in the future.

So to summarize, the Shure is perfectly fine for initial setup, but once the precise sweet spot is known, a digital scale is better for repeating it.

Well, not quite. The $50-$60 Canrong (measuring to 3 decimal places) has a maximum margin of error of .007 grams or less. The Shure, as you point out, is accurate within .1 grams (and everywhere in between 0 and .1 grams). Assuming a tight range for sweet spot of VTF, the Canrong, by the very nature of its mucher higher accuracy (and repeatability within the zone of that higher accuracy) will allow you to get into the right zone much faster with an initial setup to help you pinpoint the sweet spot.

If you believe the sweet spot is narrow, the Shure simply doesn't cut it. If you don't then you can save $25 (or $50-$60 if the Shure is a freebie).

Combine the much higher accuracy of the digital scale within its margin of error with repeatability in that much smaller margin of error and you have a scale which is better for both initial setup and readjustment if you value both accuracy and your time.

toobluvr · « **Reply #16 on:** 14 Feb 2010, 02:50 pm »

What we got here is a failure to communicate!

Quote from: blakep on 14 Feb 2010, 01:34 am

Assuming a tight range for sweet spot of VTF, the Canrong, by the very nature of its mucher higher accuracy (and repeatability within the zone of that higher accuracy) will allow you to get into the right zone much faster with an initial setup to help you pinpoint the sweet spot.

But why would you assume that? I just broke out my Music Direct catalog, and apart from some Clearaudios and Grados (which recommend a single VTF point and not a range) most cart mfrs have a wide recommended VTF range. Most are in the .4g range but some as wide as 1g! Again, with a range this wide, the Shure gets you there just as easily as the digital. Precision of .001 is not required for initial setup!

Quote

If you believe the sweet spot is narrow, the Shure simply doesn't cut it.

By its very definition, the VTF sweet spot is always "narrow". Matter of fact, it is a single point! But you seem to be missing my point. At initial setup this point is unknown. First you must get into the VTF range, and then start stumbling around in there using your ears as a guide. Either gauge will accomplish this equally well, and accuracy to three decimal places provides no benefit whatsoever.

Quote

Combine the much higher accuracy of the digital scale within its margin of error with repeatability in that much smaller margin of error and you have a scale which is better for both initial setup and readjustment if you value both accuracy and your time.

I have already said the digital is better for quickly and accurately repeating an already known or desired exact VTF setting. But this is the only way that it is superior.

I have nothing at all against digital scales. I think they serve a purpose, and I intend to get one myself. But the truth is the truth, and you are wrong when you say the Shure is inferior for initial setup. The only requirement here is a scale that gets you into the recommended VTF range, and both scales do that equally well.

Matter of fact, the Shure will work perfectly fine even if the rec VTF is only a single point. The Shure will get you onto the block, and as you walk up and down it your ears will be the spotlight that illuminates the addresses and finds the right one.

Now that I think of it, even in this single VTF point scenario I don't know that the digital is superior. Sure, it will get you to that point quicker and with greater precision, but am I gonna stop there? No, I'm still gonna adjust around it and use my ears to select the final setting. Just like I would do with the Shure.

At this point we are getting into this territory

Folks here can decide for themselves.

macrojack · « **Reply #17 on:** 14 Feb 2010, 03:30 pm »

Some audiophiles like to argue. I can't deny that I'm as vulnerable to that temptation as the next guy. Usually it comes down to some unwinnable contest between the practical and the theoretical, although competing theories sometimes come along to raise the reading on the absurdometer.

I have a Technics EPA-100 that has some kind of dynamic damping adjustment intended to make the arm adapt to any cartridge compliance. It seems to work rather well but I find that the chart indicating which setting is appropriate to which compliance needs further tweaking. In all likelihood, the VTF setting is the same. On top of that I have on the fly VTA which affects VTF and overhang when adjusted.
Geez, let's get all this stuff involved and have a real barnburner of a dispute.
All those variables should be enough for 30 or 40 pages.
See, like I said, I'm tempted by this crap too.

P.S. I have a little grey plastic see-saw affair that came to me with a B&O cartridge about 35 years ago. It works plenty well and I haven't had to replace the batteries yet.

blakep · « **Reply #18 on:** 14 Feb 2010, 04:46 pm »

Quote from: toobluvr on 14 Feb 2010, 02:50 pm

What we got here is a failure to communicate!

Clearly.

I'm sure the typical tonearm counterweight measures accurately to within .2 or .3 grams as well making it perfect for the job and rendering both the Shure and digital guages redundant for "initial setup" as well using your definition.

To me, initial setup is getting to the VTF that sounds "the best", not getting within the manufacturer's recommended range which, as you point out, can be rather wide.

I guess we just have differing opinions on what "initial setup" is.

Using your definition, the Shure would certainly be perfectly adequate for it.

Mike B. · « **Reply #19 on:** 14 Feb 2010, 04:54 pm »

I have a old plastic radioshack copy of the shure scale. It is not that reliable and best suited to my days with cheaper carts. I recently bought one of the $45 digital scales off Audiogon. It is easy to setup and gives a easy to read output. It is a bit of an extravagance since I will not use it that much.