Anyone here really good at setting up turntables living in Orange County CA?

M

MusicDirector

New member
Joined
May 21, 2013
Messages
2,013
I may need some help.
I've only set up 3 tables my whole life and I'm not sure I got it right these days. The more I read the more confused I get. I'm not hearing anything glaringly off, but that doesn't mean it's perfect necessarily.
It took me about 1.5 hours to set up my first table (Pioneer PL510). I don't think that is uncommon for the first one. It took me about 45 minutes for the second one (Pioneer PL530) and I think I cut it short because I could not get both points A & B to agree so I just went with one. My Denon currently with the Shure cart took about 45 minutes as well and a check with the protractor that came with the cart shows it pretty close, but I am not sure.
I am going to be attempting to set up my Denon DP47f with an Ortofon 2M Bronze and while I can balance a tonearm and adjust tracking and antiskate, I have a devil of a time with alignment and protractors. I get kind of dizzy and a headache with those. (I'm convinced they use one of those things at the eye doctor on me because I get the same reaction when they make me look at that card until they magnify it or whatever they do). I know many folks hate that turntable, but give me a break, I like it and right now it is conveinent for me in my living room system.
I don't mind how long it may take me, for me, 45 minutes is a speed record were I am concerned. My concern is getting it right so I don't ruin my records. I had a Sony LT table once that ruined the first record I put on it and I never played it since. In my book a cartridge is easier to replace from an availability stand point than a few of my records. I've been watching Michael Fremer set up a table and got lost about half way through anyway. He has uber set up gear and goes too far with the microscope and such I feel. I've also been reading up on the subject and it gets confusing with all the geometry measurements and strange calculations and such.
I am a bit more challenged with poor vision and almost no experience. When I've done my 50th table I might just start to have experience.

I'm getting a DB systems protractor in hopes it will be easier on me.
I have a high-end dealer near me, but he says he doesn't believe in alignment and claims tracking force is the biggest worry, he also wants $100 to set it up for me. Of course, I'm not calling on him even if he did it free with that philosophy.

Just in case, I'm wondering if there is anyone here who lives in Orange County CA that is really good at setting up tables and would not mind giving me a hands-on training should the need come up?

~Eric
 
Jeff from AV Solutions is the best I've ever talked to.

I will try to help if I can....but Jeff is the man.
 
Oh my god, I n=knew Rob had a video and I've watched it twice. It does well for my Pioneer table, but I just discovered his write up! Why did I not click on that before? It's nice and concise. It might be "TT set up 101", but beyond that you get into oscilloscopes and microscopes and other places I don't want to go or should not go. In reading it I discovered part of my problem outside bad eyes and not having a degree in geometry is the table I'm trying to set up. The Denon is weird, good table in my opinion, but weird. Denon used a proprietary protractor as they set up those tables at factory. They did not include a protractor with the tables for the consumer. At least they thought enough to provide overhang measurement (16mm) and Tonearm effective length (220mm) in the sparse manual. The table does not have VTA adjustments (neither to my other pioneer tables), but the Denon also doesn't have separate tracking force and antiskate adjustments like my other tables. The Denon does all of that with one knob and it's done electronically. So in spite of my new purpose made digital tracking force scale I just bought, there may be no way to verify the tracking force on the Denon. I'm hoping a Universal Protractor will work on this table for alignment. (It should in theory). My main concern is getting it so it doesn't ruin my records. One thing for sure, no two tables are alike. ~Eric
 
Eric according to the first photo under cartridge replacement in the manual page 9, you get to 16mm overhang from the center of the spindle by using the shortcut shown in the photo. This is with the cartridge square in the head shell and 38mm from the stylus tip to the back if the head shell collar. This should give you Stevenson alignment. At to whether or not the digital scale will work, there is an easy way to check. Turn the power on only. Lift the arm with the arm lifter button and then move it over the platter with a record on it. If the platter does not start up then you can use the scale to verity against the electronic setting the same way. With most of these scales you need to put the scale on the bare platter to compensate for the height of the scale platform. This should then make the scale platform almost equal to the height with the mat and an LP. If still want to use the DB protractor you can still use the shortcut to get the overhang in the ballpark before you start alignment. Regardless though, if you just follow the shortcut method you will be very close and certainly don't damage any albums.
 
Last edited:
Jack said:
Eric according to the first photo under cartridge replacement in the manual page 9, you get to 16mm overhang from the center of the spindle by using the shortcut shown in the photo. This is with the cartridge square in the head shell and 38mm from the stylus tip to the back if the head shell collar. This should give you Stevenson alignment. At to whether or not the digital scale will work, there is an easy way to check. Turn the power on only. Lift the arm with the arm lifter button and then move it over the platter with a record on it. If the platter does not start up then you can use the scale to verity against the electronic setting the same way. With most of these scales you need to put the scale on the bare platter to compensate for the height of the scale platform. This should then make the scale platform almost equal to the height with the mat and an LP. If still want to use the DB protractor you can still use the shortcut to get the overhang in the ballpark before you start alignment. Regardless though, if you just follow the shortcut method you will be very close and certainly don't damage any albums.
Click to expand...

Thank you Jack. I don't think I understand the first bit about the spindle. Wouldn't it be easier to mount the headshell at the right measurement in the first place? Are you measuring from the spindle to the stylus? I thought the manual said the overhang is 16mm from the stylus to the back of the headshell collar. That diagram tells me nothing, just confuses me. They mention nothing about 38mm. I don't have a Stevenson protractor and I do not trust the ones on VinylEngine as I have no way of checking if the accuracy of them. Besides plain paper throws it off anyway and I don't have any stock board or a way to print to stockboard. Thanks for the tip on verifying tracking force. I was just thinking that perhaps I need to power up the table. I tried to do it with a general digital scale and the power off and could not get any reading. Then I started thinking that if the table sets the force and anti-skate electronically then it must do so when I power it on. I now have a digital stylus force gauge which will help. I also assumed to remove the mat from the platter. I don't think the platter will spin unless I press the Start button. I figure my best bet is the DB Universal protractor it can be used with any table I figure it can also be used with the Denon?
 
Eric, when you read in the manual's where they say the overhang is 16mm, they mean that if you place the tone arm as close as you can the spindle then the stylus tip is 16mm past a line through the center of the spindle to have correct overhang. As to the shortcut, no it doesn't say 38mm in the text. You have to look on the left had side of the photo I directed you to and you will see a line they have drawn from the stylus tip to the back of the collar. Beside that line it says 38mm, That is the "shortcut" distance for this Denon straight pipe tone arm to get you to 16mm overhang, just like 50mm is the "shortcut" distance for Denon S shaped tone arms. These short cut methods developed by their engineers gets you to the alignment they thought was correct, which was Stevenson for them in that era. If you want to use the DB, which will be Baerwald to tweak you can still start with the 38mm square in the head and be safe. Every Japanese vintage table I have in house, eight, was setup with the company's short cut method as the starting point and then verified with a protractor. Also if you bought your M97xe new you should have that protractor which is Baerwald just like the DB.
 
Jack said:
Eric, when you read in the manual's where they say the overhang is 16mm, they mean that if you place the tone arm as close as you can the spindle then the stylus tip is 16mm past a line through the center of the spindle to have correct overhang. As to the shortcut, no it doesn't say 38mm in the text. You have to look on the left had side of the photo I directed you to and you will see a line they have drawn from the stylus tip to the back of the collar. Beside that line it says 38mm, That is the "shortcut" distance for this Denon straight pipe tone arm to get you to 16mm overhang, just like 50mm is the "shortcut" distance for Denon S shaped tone arms. These short cut methods developed by their engineers gets you to the alignment they thought was correct, which was Stevenson for them in that era. If you want to use the DB, which will be Baerwald to tweak you can still start with the 38mm square in the head and be safe. Every Japanese vintage table I have in house, eight, was setup with the company's short cut method as the starting point and then verified with a protractor. Also if you bought your M97xe new you should have that protractor which is Baerwald just like the DB.
Click to expand...

Thank you Jack! This really helps! So I need not worry about trying to obtain "perfect" in this? My records will be fine with "as close as you can" and not have any faster wear than normal for the nature of the beast? I was looking for instructions in text in the manual or in my case hoping and sweating. LOL! So that's why the spindle looks like that! (Those sneaky bastards).:P Now I can see how this makes things a little easier for this table...whew! I don't know how to tweak an incorrect protractor to be correct and I certainly can't do a mathematical combo of metric and geometry. (Turn a Baerwald into a Stevenson and visa versa). Do you know where I can get a Stevenson protractor on stock card at least? Yes, I bought my M97xe new and I do have that protractor, but since it is not the correct one to use...or is it?
 
Eric, you can use the Baerwald or the Stevenson either is correct, just a different philosophy. If you get the cartridge stylus to 38mm and square as shown in that diagram you should be dead on Stevenson or at least >95%. If you want to check with the Shure (Baerwald) that is fine you just may have to move the cartridge slightly forward or twist it slightly one way or the other. So if you have enough distance in the head shell slots to move forward a little for Baerwald then the Shure one works fine. I just stuck holes through the grid set points with a straight pin. I don't know of a Stevenson on card stock. I printed one out and after trimming it down to a rectangle like the Shure one I cut out part of a cereal box and glue it to that with a glue stick and let it dry. Used a single hole punch for the spindle hole. Works fine for verification.
 
Jack said:
Eric, you can use the Baerwald or the Stevenson either is correct, just a different philosophy. If you get the cartridge stylus to 38mm and square as shown in that diagram you should be dead on Stevenson or at least >95%. If you want to check with the Shure (Baerwald) that is fine you just may have to move the cartridge slightly forward or twist it slightly one way or the other. So if you have enough distance in the head shell slots to move forward a little for Baerwald then the Shure one works fine. I just stuck holes through the grid set points with a straight pin. I don't know of a Stevenson on card stock. I printed one out and after trimming it down to a rectangle like the Shure one I cut out part of a cereal box and glue it to that with a glue stick and let it dry. Used a single hole punch for the spindle hole. Works fine for verification.
Click to expand...

Thank you Jack! I'll do the pin hole trick on mine. I don't have any cereal boxes, but I have file folders, that should work the same, so I'll print out the Stevenson from VinylEngine as I like the idea of cutting it to match the Shure protractor. Great ideas Jack! One other question: (at least for now) So it's no harm if the overhang is a couple or so millimeters off if need be for using the Baerwood (should I decide to do so)? Jack, you are a lifesaver! I was not expecting to hear from someone who actually ones one of these Denons! I'm so glad you came along!! Completely different set up than my Pioneer PL510. Thank you ever so much!!!
 
Eric, no harm if you have to move it a little for Baerwald. Chances are you will only have to move one slightly forward or backward. I usually try twisting the inner one forward or backward if I can and leave the outer screw alone. Don't think it matters, just my habit. Another thing you can try "for fun" if you want and it may be easier to deal with considering your sight problems, is Conrad's Arc Protractor. It is easier for "old eyes" to see that arc than those little grid lines. Just a thought if you want to try, otherwise just set it by the shortcut and listen for a while and see if you think it needs tweaking.
 
Jack said:
Eric, no harm if you have to move it a little for Baerwald. Chances are you will only have to move one slightly forward or backward. I usually try twisting the inner one forward or backward if I can and leave the outer screw alone. Don't think it matters, just my habit. Another thing you can try "for fun" if you want and it may be easier to deal with considering your sight problems, is Conrad's Arc Protractor. It is easier for "old eyes" to see that arc than those little grid lines. Just a thought if you want to try, otherwise just set it by the shortcut and listen for a while and see if you think it needs tweaking.
Click to expand...

Thank you Jack. You have made this soooo much easier! I was sweating bullets mounting the Shure M97xE and of course judging by the info you just gave me, I botched it. I have the overhang off by 22mm! A quick glance check of alignment per the Shure protractor seemed to be at least close, but who knows with the overhang off by so much. When I first tried a record I had zero highs and distant mids, it was awful. Then I bought a Phonomena II and it worked like magic, but still not quite there, but close. I bet my set-up was part of that problem? I made the error of using conventional turntable set-up procedure on the Denon. That works good for my Pioneer and tables like it, but not on the Denon real well as I am now shown. I have a magnifying head visor thing with a light on it that helps a little, but you can't get in real close due to the size of the visor. Magnification (and good light of course) is key for my eyes. I might still try that Conrad one for kicks sometime. I know you need to have the accurate pivot to spindle measurement though and I do not have that. (I don't know where the pivot point is on the Denon or any table). I will be mounting a Ortofon 2M Bronze with this info. Many audio folks do not like the Denon DPf series tables and now I think I know one reason why = set-up and the fact that there is no adjustment for anti-skate and track force (it's done electronically). Also, they are kind of light in plinth weight. Personally, I think they are nice looking tables and really not bad performers for what they are when you get down to it. I do like my Pioneer PL510 (currently in my vintage system) better for different reasons, but the living room system is in a cabinet as such that the turntable has to sit on top and it's kind of tall, so it requires an automatic table. Thank you so much again Jack.
 
Eric, yes the overhang of the Shure may be part of the problem you heard, but with the Shure the capacitance of the TCC-750 doomed you to failure from the start no matter what you did. The Shure from my experiments likes the total capacitance of the TT wiring and the phono preamp to be below 250pf. The native capacitance of the TCC-750 alone is 220pf, so no TT you added would work with that preamp. If you Denon's cables are like mine and all of the rest of my TT's from that era they should be at or around 100pf, which is more than acceptable. So when you substituted the Phonomena, whose 150pf is still high by my standards, you were inside the acceptable limits. So if you still have the Shure on there and readjust the overhang to 38mm and square you should find it better until you mount the Ortofon. No matter what you do the Shure will never sound like an AT or Ortofon 2M series on the top end as it was not designed that way nor was any Shure in history. Since you now have the Phonomena and can run most any cartridge you want I would suggest a Denon Dl-301 Mk II for less money and a better sound. You have dip switches on the Phonomena to accommodate it and it is a different animal altogether. This last part only applies if you haven't already bought the Ortofon. This is a long time trusted authorized dealer for Denon. Denon DL 301MK2 Moving Coil Cartridge | eBay
 
Jack said:
Eric, yes the overhang of the Shure may be part of the problem you heard, but with the Shure the capacitance of the TCC-750 doomed you to failure from the start no matter what you did. The Shure from my experiments likes the total capacitance of the TT wiring and the phono preamp to be below 250pf. The native capacitance of the TCC-750 alone is 220pf, so no TT you added would work with that preamp. If you Denon's cables are like mine and all of the rest of my TT's from that era they should be at or around 100pf, which is more than acceptable. So when you substituted the Phonomena, whose 150pf is still high by my standards, you were inside the acceptable limits. So if you still have the Shure on there and readjust the overhang to 38mm and square you should find it better until you mount the Ortofon. No matter what you do the Shure will never sound like an AT or Ortofon 2M series on the top end as it was not designed that way nor was any Shure in history. Since you now have the Phonomena and can run most any cartridge you want I would suggest a Denon Dl-301 Mk II for less money and a better sound. You have dip switches on the Phonomena to accommodate it and it is a different animal altogether. This last part only applies if you haven't already bought the Ortofon. This is a long time trusted authorized dealer for Denon. Denon DL 301MK2 Moving Coil Cartridge | eBay
Click to expand...

Thanks Jack. Yes, someone else told me that same thing a few months ago about the TCC preamp. It worked fine for digitizing vinyl in my vintage system with my Pioneer TT, but it was bad when I hooked it up the the Denon and my modern system. I've heard of guys who change the wiring on their TTs and stuff, but I'm not about to even entertain that kind of thought even in a dream. I do not have anything close to that kind of skill.
How does one know what the capacitance of the TT wires are anyway? That's not in the manual for sure.
I can't run MC carts as I don't have the downstream gear to support them. This table used to have a Sumiko Blue Point and it was one of the worst MC carts I've ever heard even on a system that supports them (the guy I bought the table from for example). I'm not a big fan of MC carts so far, having heard a few on different systems. That said I have not heard the Denon cart you refer to. I can't do ebay anyway. I'm thinking of also trying a AT95E on the Denon someday for kicks. It's a great cart for my Pioneer, performs well beyond it's low cost.
 
Eric if you have a DMM that will measure capacitance then it is simple. The next time you have the head shell empty to change cartridges, put the empty head shell back on the tone arm and then unplug the inputs from the receiver. Attach the positive clip of the DMM to the center pin of the RCA cable and the negative to the shield of the cable and you will get a capacitance reading. If that Denon follows the pattern of most TT's from that era and they are the OEM ones, you should get a reading of about 100pf give or take 10%. You only need to measure one. You will get your most accurate reading if the cable is fully extended and straight.
 
Jack said:
Eric if you have a DMM that will measure capacitance then it is simple. The next time you have the head shell empty to change cartridges, put the empty head shell back on the tone arm and then unplug the inputs from the receiver. Attach the positive clip of the DMM to the center pin of the RCA cable and the negative to the shield of the cable and you will get a capacitance reading. If that Denon follows the pattern of most TT's from that era and they are the OEM ones, you should get a reading of about 100pf give or take 10%. You only need to measure one. You will get your most accurate reading if the cable is fully extended and straight.
Click to expand...

Wow and a DMM measuring lesson?!!! Thanks Jack. I do have one of those, but never used it. It's a cheap one (meaning not a Fluke), but probably just fine. It came with something else I bought as a promo gift. Yes, the cables are OEM. I don't mess around with modifying any gear because I don't know what I'm doing and I figure it was made the way it was for a reason. I'm also of the "if it ain't broken, don't fix it" crowd.:)
~Eric
 
Eric, I understand if you don't think you like the sound of MC cartridges, but don't understand why you say you don't have the downstream equipment to run them. With the Phonomena you have all you need to run just about any MC in existence. Also with the Denon tone arm's Q damping system, cartridge compliance is really not an issue unless you try to use an extremely low compliance cartridge like the Denon DL-103. Just a thought and you may just like the Denon DL-110 which is a HOMC you can run just like a MM cartridge. It is less than $150.
 
Jack said:
Eric, I understand if you don't think you like the sound of MC cartridges, but don't understand why you say you don't have the downstream equipment to run them. With the Phonomena you have all you need to run just about any MC in existence. Also with the Denon tone arm's Q damping system, cartridge compliance is really not an issue unless you try to use an extremely low compliance cartridge like the Denon DL-103. Just a thought and you may just like the Denon DL-110 which is a HOMC you can run just like a MM cartridge. It is less than $150.
Click to expand...

Oh, I thought I needed separates or something to make a MC cart sound good? If all I need is the Phonomena, then I may try the Denon DL-110 someday. :)If it works then I can finally see (or hear in this case) what all the chatter is about between MM and MC. It will be interesting to see what the Ortofon 2M Bronze sounds like (I already have it as of a week ago). It may have been a waste of money for the price and sound no better than my AT95E which is a good sounding cart to my ears. I may also try the Ortofon on my Pioneer PL510.
Thank you Jeff.:D:audiophile:
 
Just caught up to this discussion. It sounds like you're getting it sorted out. I'm in OC (FV) and would be glad to lend a hand if you need it.

John
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top