There does seem to be two camps as regard to setting the arms
Camp 1 is the rega way with spring
Camp 2 with the spring too 3 then adjust with scales
A can off worms springs to mind
1 Like
Camp 1A is the rega way with spring
Camp 1B is the rega way with spring and then check with scales because you cannot trust the dial
Camp 2 with the spring too 3 then adjust with scales
Well Iāve just had a fiddle
Set spring to 3 then set cartridge on scales and bugger me it does sound better than the rega way
Gone is a tizzzzz sound that comes on some vocals on some records
1 Like
Yes i see that is why i was quite wary about any certainty not having a Rega arm to hand i really avoid comment unless i have practical experience to back it up. I do have a Michell Techno arm to hand but that avoids the issue by having a C/W only.
I do recall some think is an issue with spring ringing this is supposed to be a cause of the Grey Tonal sound Rega arms tend to have. One cure is to keep rotating the adjuster this removes the complete spring set up however this mod is not reversible.
I just read the Korfaudio Testing he did not believe was a measurable or audible difference to Gravity or Spring down force but if you can hear it in various set ups why not do it.
Perhaps the full effect is more noticeable for those brave enough to remove the spring entirely.
I
1 Like
Well I for one started hearing my, by then 20 year old, RB300 as grey sounding and it was all Naimās fault with their CD5x. Perhaps I should have looked into removing the spring but Iāve also seen the odd earthing arrangement blamed so a rewire was another possibility, either had the chance of leaving me without an arm if I attempted DIY or costing more than a Rega was worth to pay someone to do it for me. I replaced the Rega with an Aro instead, no more grey porridge but a considerably dented bank account.
1 Like
Thatās what I thought too, I check with a scale anyway (and the C/W + dial setup is always out), so doing it without the dial makes it simpler. And as Archie above found it beneficial, and he seems to not have had an obvious bias or preconceptions, why not.
Iām not going to ruin my P10 by trying to remove the spring though 
I didnāt remove the spring just incase I didnāt like the result just turned it to 3 so least resistance, and used scales and adjusted the counter weight to the desirable cartridge weight in my case between 1.7 too 2g I set it at 1.9 which sounded best to my ears
1 Like
In defence of Rega it would seem he was really thinking more M.M. than MC at the time he designed RB300 as his method of setting the T/W brings the C/W closer to the Pivot.
Bearing in mind that the only thing that arrests and reverses a dynamicly swinging arm back the other way is the cantilever/stylus groove wall interface this puts alternating loads each side of the groove wall, which aināt very deep. Also a M.M. puts less energy into the arm and so minimises any ringing. This means it is quite conceivable the STD T/W method could be best for compliant cartridges.
I note in the Korfaudio Testing he stated 2g as his test weight but did not say what compliance he was using to excite the Arm so technically the findings are not conclusive or would be conclusive for a particular compliance.
In the 1970s as M.M. compliances were getting higher the Ultimate Zero mass, Zero dynamic arm of all time was the Black Widow. The Absolute Sound (TAS) and Stereophile they would review the best British arms etc.all ways comparing with the Black Widow which invariably came out on top. And we were all going what in Hell is a Black Widow?
You see these RāDigest size mags carried no photos. Along time later i saw a photo of one it looked like a Knitting Needle.
Why does an MM put less energy into an arm?
Regarding the whole question, I have my usual problem: I would think that if enthusiasts try it without the spring, and measure it too, the folks at Rega wonāt forget about resonances when developing new arms that fit their own MC cartridges.
Anyways, I set it up yesterday but listening to music was more fun than running comparisons.
1 Like
I can sort of see where your thinking something like why dont they get it right in the first place.
The groove provides the vibrational energy, now think of a car suspension if it is stiff All the road surface comes through to you, if it very soft it is nice and comfy no juddering. The groove energy transmitted to the stylus and up the cantilever becomes absorbed by the suspension. MM. traditionally have softer suspensions than MC. It took a little while for the West to catch on to why the Japanese were using solid heavy arms high structural rigidity
with special bearings for MC. because they simply looked ridiculous.
We would find Rega would have the full kit and caboodle of Accelerometers, Resonance measuring devices etc. but it can simply come down to what they think is relevant or important and just as any thing to do with Arm Height fine tuning is not of their world such be it between one designer and another.
2 Likes
The principles that I use, having set up the arms on my own TTs for 40 yearsā¦
Depending on the biasing mechanism, when the arm is balanced and bias set to zero, expect some residual bias (outwards):
Use scales for setting tracking force:
Biasā¦set on recommended value and then use your ears (and remember there is likely to be some residual when set at zero, as above):
Use ears!:
For rega arms TTs, spacers diminish the SQ.
ā¦others will have had different experiences though.
1 Like
Just prior to the RB300 coming on the market MM.designs were available with Dynamic Compliances of 30cu as it was all about tracking at 1gm. Koetsu MC say 8cu.
The SME 3009 was the first arm to be wiped out with itās swiss cheese resonant H/S and itās infinite clearance V Block bearings which chattered when confronted with MC energy.
There are not many MM. only arms made to day so it is not surprising to see MM. designs changing and compliances becoming stiffer.
I think you mean the SME 3009. The 309 is rather differentā¦
I should know that i have a SME 309!
Well i have just had a go at this on my P10 with apheta3
Was running the standard rega way, balance arm with main weight, then turn dial to just before 2 and then adthe anti skate.
So i think i have done it right the other way, turn dial to 3, adjust main weight so that i have a downforce load of 1.92 on the stylus, left the anti skate as it was for now.
About to play some vinyl
1 Like
Let us know, I am still too lazy to compare 
Blacker blacks. Greater separation?
Just more of everything?!!
I am interested in why this should make a difference. And why if it is better Rega donāt pedal it.
1 Like
See the Korfaudio testing above - though the result is that it probably doesnāt, the ideas why it might have are interesting.
Thatās so often what I have a issue with. People buy gear from a company because their founders and staff spent several lifetimes understanding, building, and measuring devices. And when they receive the new item, they immediately know better!
Just makes little sense to me. If I didnāt think they know what they are doing, I would buy elsewhere. Maybe for lower-end devices where the manufacturer may have to limit spending on certain parts that are improvable. But if I started thinking that Rega understands the P10 so poorly, Iād get pissed off 
Well it sounds mighty fine, but it did before, better i donāt know right now.
But i guess its just another way to get to the same end point, only you need a gauge to do it this way and the rega way you dont, maybe this other way is more precise?
Going to leave it like this for a few days and see how it goes
Using just the weight or the weight plus dial, checking with the gauge is always more precise than the dial. Even if the dial was perfect, the result will always depend on the exact arm balance you adjusted while the dial was at 0. And my gauge result was never the same as the dial said.
And thatās why I am using the ānewā way, too. I guess it may not matter but I canāt see how it would be worse, and it is simply easier to set the dial to max and ignore it