Don, My experience is very different from yours. I could not settle for a fixed SRA setting for 80% of my LPs. Fremer seems to agree with you on this, but I find it well worth the effort to make adjustments for each LP. I use the scale printed on the side of the SME paper protractor to measure the distance between the top of the arm board and the bottom of the arm rest. This is extremely accurate. It needs to be because I adjust VTA for each record and write down the proper setting for repeated use later. LPs of the same thickness have different ideal SRA so I listen to each record for a dynamics and also for a specific relationship between a note's fundamental and its harmonics and then know which setting I prefer. This does NOT correspond to record thickness. I am trying to match the original cutting angle when the record was produced. This process is time consuming and I adjust to within .5mm for my entire collection. Keep in mind, with a 12" arm, a .5mm change in height corresponds to less than a 1/4 degree in SRA. TINY but clearly audible on a transparent system. This is why I disagree with Fremer's 92 degree SRA setting for one's entire collection. I have heard the difference tiny changes to SRA can make.
The range using my measurement system is 16mm to 18.5mm, so there are six different settings, at .5mm increments. Most fall between 16.5 and 17.5. Unfortunately, the SME arm does not have as convenient an arm height adjustment as some tower/offset designs with calibrated, rotating dials and simple set screws, but the mounting to the armboard is extremely rigid, and this is the trade off that SME decided to make. With changes of more than 1mm, I also slightly adjust VTF for each record. I don't bother with overhang adjustments once set for the average 17.25 mm arm height.
Most people think this is excessive, but it is worth it to me. Just yesterday, I took over a few of my LPs to a friend's house because I wanted to hear his new Technics SP10 Mk3 with SME V-12 arm and AirTight Supreme cartridge. We adjusted his arm to play an LP of Mozart's string quintets. My notations showed that on my table the arm height distance is 16mm. It sounded good in his new rig. Then we played my copy of Sheffield's Drum Track. This notation says 16.5 mm. Out of laziness and curiosity, we left the arm at 16mm. The kick drums were sluggish, the cymbals were splashy/whitish, dynamics were less pronounced and the gap in timing between the notes' fundamentals and their harmonics was too long. We raised the arm .5mm, to correspond with my notations of how this record sounds best on my system, and viola, everything sounded better and my friend was very pleased. Of course he has seen me make these adjustments in my system for years and has heard the remarkable differences between tiny adjustments to arm height.
I tell this anecdote only to illustrate that I agree with you that adjustments are very important, the listener, if a serious hobbyist, may want to learn how to make them himself. The effort can be very worthwhile. Yes, it takes experience to learn what one is doing. But this is a hobby and that can be a big part of it. I understand Brian's comments also. There are many customers who simply are not interested in spending the time to do this stuff. They want the services of a good dealer and Brian seems to be able to provide this service and has earned a strong customer following. I wish there were more such dealers.
My good friend Al M. who only has digital in his system has learned to appreciate what vinyl has to offer from hearing some good analog. I have demonstrated for him just what a .5mm change in arm height can do to his beloved string quartets. He was astonished at the difference and commented that if a reviewer does not go to this degree of effort, how can he truly know what a cartridge or tonearm is capable of sounding like? It was an astute comment.
I don't understand your comment about "cards that gave you some sonic changes". You must have me confused with someone else. I have never tried any such thing.
I am not interested in putting washers at the mounting screws on my SME headshell. I have looked at my styli under extreme magnification, and they are mounted correctly. They also sound great. Incidentally, one can very slightly adjust the tilt of the arm at the arm base before tightening the locking nuts around the arm pillar. This adjusts azimuth, though the arm will be slightly out of plumb. There is a small amount of slop even though the arm collar is spring loaded. I use a tiny spirit level at the headshell to make sure that it is level before locking down the arm pillar. This is the same method that SME founder Alastair Robertson Aikman used, but did not write about. I would like some way to adjust azimuth, but SME does not offer it on this arm.
Zenith is an interesting adjustment. People don't think the SME arms allow for this either. However, the cartridge mounting holes are slightly larger in diameter than are the mounting screws, so the cartridge can be slightly rotated around the stylus zenith for proper alignment. I actually find that this is the most useful feature of my custom made MINT LP Protractor. It has inscribed alignment lines at the two null points so that one can align the cantilever, rather than the cartridge body, properly at the null points. This is much more accurate. Even though the SME headshell has two mounting holes and not slots, I would not consider simply re-installing a cartridge without also confirming alignment. That is just sloppy because there is enough play for the zenith angle to have rotated.
I also find the SME sled mounting feature for adjusting overhang to be much easier than slots in a headshell because of the zenith issue. The SME solution seems much more stable and accurate, and convenient. This is an ingenious solution which solves both the issues of a rigid mount to the arm board, and extremely precise and stable adjustability.
Finally, I have done much experimenting between dynamic and static, (or a combination of the two), tracking force with my various SME arms. Dynamic sounds better to me in my system. The various additional weights for the counterweight sled also allow one to move the sled as far forward and close to the pivot point of the arm as possible given different cartridge weights. This lowers the moment of inertia of the arm and improves sonics. I have tried the damping trough and prefer it with out any damping.
The SME V-12 is certainly not perfect. I would like fewer internal wire connections, for instance. I am sure that other arms sound better and have more adjustments and they can be made more easily and repeatedly. But, it is an excellent arm and if properly set up, it can sound pretty amazing.
BTW, I think Andre Jennings is the gentleman who sets up Jon Valin's cartridges. They are good friends and I think they live near each other.
View attachment 25867
Valin does his own setup. So does Fremer.
