Calling all SL-1200/1210 owners!

[Marco]

Yep sure have, mate - and I love it

It could probably do with some more weight, though, to enable me to position the full counterweight balance as close as possible to the arm's pivot point.

What's the best thing to do, send you the smallest brass counterweight balance for you to produce a similar heavier one, or what else?

Sorry to hear that you weren't keeping too well, John. I hope things are better now

Marco.

[thrunobulaxx]

you can send the smallest back and i can do you one at a higher grammage, do you think you can work out heath robinson style ( balance gauge and weight on the headshell) how many grams more it needs to be.
If memory serves that one had a total of 165g + or - 2g.

Was the stub hole diameter 14mm on your arm marco ? also what is the model No for the standard fitted arm to the 1210 ? is it a EPA100 with a differend C/W ?

[Marco]

Hi John,

Just to check I am getting this right...

The current situation is that with all three of your weights in place and moved as far forward towards the arm's pivot point as possible, I'm unable to obtain the correct VTF of 2.6g with my 103. I can only get 2.1g.

So I presume I need more mass on the counterweight balance to resolve this, presuming that I want the whole counterweight balance as close to the arm's pivot point as possible?

I always get a bit mixed up with this!

Once confirmed, I'll work out what extra 'grammage' I require.

Marco.

[thrunobulaxx]

If i`m understanding that properly it seems to me you need less mass at the rear end of the arm. or am i as confused as you tonight .or do as j7 sometimes does, add a couple of grams to the headshell in the form of a small polished disk, or something, test it with blue tac first to see if we are both out to lunch.
Send me the centre one down and i will reduce it, it would be hard to make another and get the diameter exactly the same as it is in the suite, i skimmed them down as one piece before splitting them.

John.

[Mike]

If i`m understanding that properly it seems to me you need less mass at the rear end of the arm. or am i as confused as you tonight

Nope, you are not confused.

If the weights are as far forward as they will go, you need to decrease mass at the rear to increase tracking force.

[thrunobulaxx]

Nope, you are not confused.

If the weights are as far forward as they will go, you need to decrease mass at the rear to increase tracking force.

Marco had me at it there for a few minutes, its bloody obvious innit.

Seems to me that you only need 0.5 to 1g off, as an experiment take out one of the screws temporarily, each one is about 0.6 g, start with one out and see if you can get what you want, if not enough try a second then third to give me some idea of the reduction needed.
you are trying to achieve quite an exact thing getting you VTW spot on with the c/w at the limit of its adjustment forwards. ;O)
I figure the slightest of skims off any of them will do the trick.

[Marco]

Yeah, I'm losing the plot

Too many broken bottles in my head today.

John, I'll send you the centre one to reduce the mass slightly - how much though I don't know

What I'm trying to achieve is 2.6g VTF, but with the counterbalance weight as far forward towards the arm's pivot point as possible. At the moment its slightly less half way along the stub - like in my avatar. I want it all the way along.

Marco.

[thrunobulaxx]

I just put my reply in my last post and cant be assed to redo it, sorry.

[Marco]

LOL. PM me you addy again, John

Marco.

[thrunobulaxx]

LOL. PM me you addy again, John

Marco.

Done, put it in your book this time

Dont forget to try getting your 2.6g VTW with a screw or two out, i need to know how much to shave off if you have to be butted right up to the pivot end.

Just a thought, the whole idea of the "3 piece suite" version is to be able to use 1 / 2 or 3 of the weights depending on cart/headshell mass, have you tried with the smallest left off, i would imagine you will still get close to the pivot albeit not butted right up ?