My Xpression Ii/2M Black Alignment Obsession

[Garven]

Over the past couple of months I’ve been experimenting with every possible cartridge alignment scheme/approach possible for my Project Xpression II with an Ortofon 2M Black (originally a Bronze body upgraded with a 2M Black stylus). I decided to write this message to share my experiences/musings so far and get some feedback/thoughts/suggestions from a couple of the forums I read.

I tried various arc protractors, Baerwald, Lofgren B, Stevenson, but I discovered that my Project 8.6 arm simply would only allow the stylus to reach the arc for Stevenson. Project specs that 8.6 arm with an effective length of 218.5mm, an overhang of 18.5mm and an offset angle of 25°. My spindle to pivot distance is thus 200mm (confirmed to be accurate by measuring my tt). Unfortunately, this turned out to be the absolute end of the slots in my tonearm. Placing my 2M Black as far as it would go resulted in the stylus setting down exactly on a 218.5mm arc and lining up with the grid for a 25° offset. Baerwald was just out of reach at 219.04mm (0.604mm seems really tiny when you look at it on a ruler but it look like a huge distance between an arc and a stylus!). Lofgren B was a full mm away so that was out of the question! As an aside, why would a company the stature of Project design turntables, even entry-level models such as the Debut and Xpression, where two of the most popular alignment strategies are not possible? If I understand the calculations correctly, simply mounting the tonearm just 1-2mm closer to the spindle would have made all three alignment strategies possible.

So I settled on the Project spec alignment (218.5 effective length, 18.5mm overhang, 25° offset). It didn’t sound bad at all. Everything seemed to fall into focus and the background was very quiet (I’m amazed at how much alignment impacts blackness of background). However, the highs sounded a bit grainy and harsh. Plus, I had a “torture test” of several favorite LPs containing spots where sibilance “bursts” bugged the heck out of me, all of them recent reissues that seem to have been cut with a lot more dynamics than back in the day (The 30th anniversary Dark Side of the Moon, Rickie Lee Jones’ self-titled LP, James Taylor’s Sweet Baby James, Dire Straits Communiqué, Classic Records Led Zeppelin II). As long as these didn’t track smoothly, I just couldn’t move on from my obsession with alignment. With the Project spec alignment, they were better than before, but still bugged me. As for the Stevenson alignment, it didn’t sound too bad, per se, but the highs seemed a bit unfocused and increasingly strange sounding closer to the inner grooves (strange since Stevenson is supposed to be the most accurate in that area). I found the guru protractor at one point and initially I was astonished at how good that seemed to sound, calculations and negative comments of the regulars here and on other forums be damned! Eventually, however, I noticed some tracking problems and finally came to the conclusion that it seemed to mask alignment problems rather than cure them.

Finally, I think it was while reading somewhere around the net (possibly here), that I saw a suggestion by John Elison of changing the offset value to 24.858°. I fired up Adobe Illustrator and drew myself a new arc protractor, carefully checked the printing accuracy and proceeded to align the 2M yet again. This time, my rig is sounding better than ever before.

As for the torture test records, they’re all sounding better with a couple of exceptions. I’m wondering if maybe my having played some of them frequently before using bad alignment might have permanently etched the sibilance into the grooves.

Am I simply reaching the limits of a 2M Black on an Xpression II? Would moving up to a better turntable improve this situation? For example, those of you with the bigger Project tables, are you able to reach a Baerwald or Lofgren B arc?

Or is it a case of a flaw in the 2M design, i.e., the stylus is too bar back in the cartridge assembly (unlikely given Ortofon’s experience).

Or am I simply expecting too much perfection. I see it often said on various forums that not all records will track perfectly. Could it be that these new reissues cut without the compromises done in the past for consumer level devices simply require a high end rig to track well?

I might add that VTA comes into play in this story as well. I always tried to set mine with the line on the side of my tonearm parallel to the LP surface or slightly tail down. However, I looked carefully one day where the at the actual top edge of my cartridge was sitting and it occurred to me that the mounting “plane” of my tonearm is pointing down towards the front and is not at all on the same plane as that line on the side of the tonearm! I found that dropping my tonearm VTA as far down as it will go seems to line up the top of the cartridge parallel with the LP surface and the difference in sound is astonishing. Cymbals are gaining that sweet, ringing “brush-like” clarity they have in real life. I also notice the sibilance problem is reduced on those few remaining “torture test” records. Combine this with the Project motor noise problem I’ve always had (reinserting the transit screws is the only thing that helped mine and only at 33. When I switch to 45, even those screws don’t help. Plus the tweaks I’ve seen around the net of putting foam, etc., between the motor sling and the plinth body didn’t work for me). Needless to say, I doubt my next turntable will be a Project!

Anyway, this is a lot longer than I intended, but it’s all been on my mind over the last couple of months. I’m getting closer to the sound I always hoped vinyl would give me, but I still need to get the remaining issues out of the way. Eventually I’ll upgrade the turntable/cartridge, but for now, I’m stuck with it (a part of me wonders if ordering an AT440mla or 150MLX and putting up with the brightness for the sake of tracking might be a cheaper short-term solution. I used to have a 150MLX until the stylus came off and I decided to go for the 2M Bronze. It didn’t track as well but I put that down to my not having lined it up properly).

Thoughts? Advice?

[Bob_in_OKC]

What's your tracking force? Have you ever considered an OM20?

[Garven]

Tracking force is 1.5g as per Ortofon recommendations. I've tried higher but it doesn't improve the sibilance problems to any degree and seems to mute the soundstage.

My first cartridge was an OM20 Super. Same issues as now but with lesser tracking ability and much more surface noise.

[Purnendu]

Hi Garven,
The xpression comes packed with the Ortofon 2m red. In principle the Black should therefore be a good match. However, having obsessed over my project xpression for half a dozen years it did seem to me that the tt is not capable of getting the best from a superior cartridge. The arm is not up to mark and there are rumble issues etc. Its not really made for them, and the flaws start showing up. I moved up eventually to a 9.1 and that helped much more than the fussing I lavished on the xpression. The black on the rpm 9.1 would probably be a great match. There is a huge difference between the 9cc tonearm and the 8.6.

Its a lovely table all the same. I
Purnendu

[Bob_in_OKC]

I had a Music Hall MMF-5 with an 8.6 tonearm and it seemed to me I got better results with lighter cartridges. For example, my Goldring 2200 didn't track very well on it. It tracked quite well with a Goldring Eroica, though.

[Garven]

Someone on vinyl asylum reminded me that the Baerwald specs will fit the 8.6 arm if one uses the DIN inner groove specs instead of IEC. I'd actually tried this before but didn't spend enough time with it. The problem with getting deep into an obsession (for lack of a better term) with alignment is that one forgets that there are always compromises with a pivoting tone arm. So although I tried the Baerwald DIN specs, as soon as I encountered a sibilant or two, I dismissed it as not a solution and moved on to something else.

I revisited several alignment sttrategies last night with some fresh arc protractors I drew in Adobe Illustrator (Conrad Hoffman's arc prog is great but doesn't allow for custom settings such as the 24.858°offset I found John Elison suggesting to someone for a Project Debut). In the end, a very careful alignment with magnifying glass and flashlight to the Baerwald DIN arc protractor seemed to provide the best all-round results. So that's where I'm at now.

As I wrote on the asylum, it amazes me just how seemingly tiny variations in angle/distance, etc., affect sound quality. I've often read that line contact styli are more sensitive to alignment, so I'm thinking such is the case with the Shibata on my 2M Black.

[Bob_in_OKC]

My reason for inquiring about or suggesting the OM20 was partially because of the tendency for the fine stylus shapes to be sensitive to alignment. The other reason was that theory of mine about lighter cartridges. I've also wondered whether the heavier counterweights Pro-Ject offer would help. I have a Debut III with the stock OM5E. I've considered getting a 2M for it but have still been thinking on my lighter cartridge theory...which might be flawed.

[Garven]

My reason for inquiring about or suggesting the OM20 was partially because of the tendency for the fine stylus shapes to be sensitive to alignment. The other reason was that theory of mine about lighter cartridges. I've also wondered whether the heavier counterweights Pro-Ject offer would help. I have a Debut III with the stock OM5E. I've considered getting a 2M for it but have still been thinking on my lighter cartridge theory...which might be flawed.

Yes, fine line stylus shapes are more sensitive to alignment but they also track quite well one they are lined up. I went from an OM20 Super to an AT150MLX and it astonished me how much less surface noise I heard. When I switched to a 2M Bronze, the surface noise was about the same as the AT, but it seemed to be a better match for my Xpression II's tonearm as the low-frequency vinly whoosh I'd always heard from the OM20 and especially the AT seemed to disappear into a CD quiet blackness on decent pressings. Although the resonance numbers weren't that far apart (about 9Hz for the 2M and 11 for the AT), as soon as I mounted the 2M, the sense of it being a better match for the 8.6 arm was definitely there. Surprisingly when I changed the 2M stylus to a Black, surface noise increased at first but once it broke in, the noise backed down to the same level as with the Bronze stylus.

As for the counterweight, my Xpression II came with the lighted weight same as the Debut (I believe the XprIII comes with the medium weight since it now ships with a 2M Red). When I added the AT150MLX the heavier Project counterweight was on backorder so I found a metal washer about the same size as the back of the weight and glued it to the back. This seemed to work quite well, although the scale seemed to be off a bit. When I ordered my 2M Bronze, I also ordered a medium Project counterweight so that definitely wasn't the issue with my sibilance problems.

Last night I went back to the Guru alignment just for a re-confirmation since when I came across that protractor before Christmas, I was amazed at how good it initially sounded. Same thing last night. When you set the stylus down in the outer grooves, there's this great sense of rightness to the sound with rich highs and great soundstage. However, on the inner grooves, it sounds congested and distorted if you have an LP with grooves close to the label. So back to the Baerwald DIN alignment and all was ok again from outer grooves to inner ones.

[Marsh]

I have basically the same setup, with the AT150MLX mounted on the Xpression III. Do you have a source for downloading your Baerwald DIN protractor? I'd like to hear the difference. Cheers

[Alec124c41]

There are protractors under Tools at the top.
You can also use Conrad Hoffman's generator from the Cartridge and Preamps section.
One thing bothers me with this thread. The OP insisted on using a pre-specified offset angle.
If you use a protractor, the cartridge will be adjusted to the protractor, and the angle will be different for Stevenson and Baerwald, as will the overhang.
Just use the protractor, and the angle will take care of itself.

Cheers,
Alec

[norfolkbarry]

I have an Xpression 2 table I use in my B-system and likewise have found it impossible to get any cartridge to align to the Lofgren A settings. I have concluded that Pro-Ject must have been aware of this when they manufactured the device but made sacrifices to hit their price point. Mine came with the Sumiko Oyster cartridge and I have concluded that the table is simply not worth the effort and frustration involved in trying to properly align a cartridge. I hear from others that this problem is peculiar to the Xpression table, but I doubt I would ever buy another Pro-ject again given my experience.

My experience with my Basis/Graham table is that proper cartridge alignment solves a multitude of problems. The last tools I needed to get me there were a small 4mm bubble level to rest on my headshell and a magnifying lens headset like watch repair workers use. When I got my azimuth and VTA perfectly level, my Helikon worked like never before and several LPs I have thought were bad pressings now played without a trace of distortion.