Petition launched to reintroduce Technics turntables (Update: The SL-1200 is Back!)*

GR

 

I think I understood correctly. I use the weight to balance, then I set the scale ring on the back of the weight to zero and then I turn to the VTF as per the scale ring. Since I don't have a digital scale, I was wondering how the Technics arm weight scale does against a digital scale.

 

I've been using turntables for decades & never really bother with using the measurements on counterweight collars because some have proved inaccurate in the past.

Originally I used a Shure gauge & these days a digital version as these guarantee accuracy. Not that I'm saying manufacturer calibrations are poor but I prefer it this way & old habits die hard.

In actual fact, I just install a new headshell/cart, twist the counterweight approximately back or forward for the difference between the old/new & then set using the gauge (ie finally dialling the counterweight itself to adjust force). I then twist the calibrated ring (that has no bearing on force) to show the weight I have just set.

 

I like your technique but I worry about the accuracy of a separate scale too. My hope is that Technics got this right. Maybe someday I'll get a scale and compare the two.

 

My digi scale has a separate tare weight & measures to two decimal points (tare 5.00g) so I know it's accurate each time to a calibrated reference. I store the weight with batteries out & slot them in when I need to.

 

What's the make and model? I use a balance scale for reloading that measures to the single grain but it wouldn't work for a stylus. Having a good reference weight ought to alleviate my accuracy concerns. I bought a measurement standard for my calipers for the same reason.

 

I bought it from ebay a few years ago, however, this looks extremely similar & includes the tare weight:
NEW Vesion Professional LP Digital Turntable Stylus Force Scale Gauge led dzr 667853652987 | eBay

 

I have one of these, watch the parallelility ( made up word ) of your tone arm, as the stylus rest on the gauge is raised. Now, the gauge itself is really accurate but unless your tone arm is parallel (and then parallel to a record after you’ve calibrated), then it won’t be tracking at the weight the gauge is telling you.

 

I remove the mat so that the top of the gauge is at the same level as an average playing surface.

 

Thanks! I'll look into that one.

 

maybe they should make the 1200G, GAE and GR illegal.

 

That's very similar to the model I've had, and mine is still working fine after 5+ years. I have a 100 G weight that I use to calibrate, and double-checking against an old-school scale once in a while, it is very accurate.

 

Have you had more time to test out the Herbie's mat?

 

Yes, and I still like it. I got a second one and put it on my other table. The improvement was also noticeable there, even though that system overall is less resolving and more forgiving. I am generally skeptical of aftermarket tweaks, but I think this one is worth the cost.

 

Posted in the offshoot thread but got no replies.

Those of you that have the herbies mat, what size would you get to match the stock mat size specs exactly? I’m guessing 3 mm tall and 292 mm wide?

 

I got this idea from another member here. You bend a credit card to create a lip at record level for the stylus to rest on. The card can be laid or taped onto the digital scale. These scales "tare" everytime you start them, so the weight of the card get zeroed out when you turn it on.

 

290 mm, I believe. However, I went with the 285 mm for my GR, which leave the metal edge around the platter showing. Nice effect.

 

This hurts my brain. I'm sure it can get you somewhat in the ballpark, but I would be shocked if this was acceptably accurate. A digital stylus scale is $10-15 on Amazon. It's worth the expense regardless of your stylus and record costs.

 

The science is all there. The card is factored out of the equation by the tare. There's no reason it would be less accurate of a digital reading. just because you extended the scale's resting plate.

 

Unless it introduces some error due to the eccentricity. Ought to be able to check with a known weight placed on the same point as the stylus.

 

Except for the flex of the tape holding it to the scale, and the principals of leverage of any bend in the card or bend in the folds. Maybe it works better than expected, but 2 folds, tape, and leverage coming from of the scale seems like enough variables to spend $10 on Amazon. It seems feasible, but I would prefer a little more precision with my stylus and records. But that's just me.

 

Whatever works for each of us is OK with me - I just prefer to lift off the mat before measuring, it only takes seconds & the less variables for error the better.

 

Tape won't flex at rest. Is there a scale on Amazon that is 1.5mm thick? That's the height of this scale.

 

The Amazon ones are about 5mm. But given that cartridge manufacturers sell digital scales that are similar (or even exactly the same) as the ones on Amazon, I'd imagine they give their tracking force ranges with those scales as the standard. I honestly could be totally wrong though. I would still just worry that a bent card might have some flex to it. Probably not much, but we're talking about very tight measurements here. If you've tested a known weight and it comes up correct to the 10th, than you'd have nothing to worry about. But without doing that, I'd personally prefer to spend a few bucks to have a tool made for the job.

 

Unfortunately it looks like the card is acting like a lever (or leever as they say) and multiplying the down force by a certain amount.