[BC] Turntables (WAS:Achieving good S/N)

[Robert Orban]

At 06:56 PM 1/3/2006, you wrote:
>From: "Dennis Cope" <dcope at intercom.net>
>Subject: RE: [BC] Turntables (WAS:Achieving good S/N)
>To: "Broadcast Radio Mailing List" <broadcast at radiolists.net>
>Message-ID: <FHEKLNBJMBMGGGEECFCJOEHNEEAA.dcope at intercom.net>
>Content-Type: text/plain;       charset="US-ASCII"
>
>
>Opinions needed.
>
>Stanton ST-100 High-Torque Turntable with S Tone Arm or,,,  Stanton ST-100
>High-Torque Turntable with straight Tone Arm??

IIRC, it does not make the slightest difference in tracking error as long 
as the distance between the pivot and the stylus is equal in both arms and 
as long as the cartridge mount allows you to readily adjust the cartridge 
azimuth. The only thing that counts is the azimuth angle  of the 
stylus/cartridge motor with respect to the arm pivot, which allows for zero 
tracking error at two (and only two) discrete points on the record. There 
is some disagreement as to where to place those points (should the mean 
square tracking error be minimized over the entire record, should the 
maximum tracking error be minimized [minimax error], or should the error be 
minimized at the inner grooves, where tracking distortion is more likely to 
be audible?). Once you decide that, the rest of the design just involves 
plugging numbers into some long-established equations, which I believe were 
first published in the AES Journal.

I would expect the two designs to have different resonant characteristics, 
however. This is important; it is one important thing that distinguishes 
one arm design from the next.

Bob Orban