What sort of anti-skate is this?

dubbacha

New Member
Hi.
This anti skate "device" is found on my CEC made Audio Reflex DD-1979 turntable that has an identical arm to the JVC VL-5. Is this an extremely cheap and basic anti skate or is it effective? It has a small weight on the vertical piece that can be removed and I guess replaced with something heavier or lighter. Also the JVC VL-5 manual says it's only effective for VTF between 1.5 and 2 grams. Should I disable it is I go over or under that limit?
Thanks20180413_005732.jpg 20180413_005753.jpg
 
There is nothing inherently wrong with that design. In fact it can be better than some systems that use more elaborate hidden spring assemblies that might not work as designed or even wear out or fail. Yours does not appear to allow the weight on it to adjust which is too bad but not a deal breaker. Similar designs like this one below allow a more variable anti-skate force to be applied by sliding the weight.

s-l300.jpg
 
Cool. Thanks for the replies.
@tnsilver. The vl5 manual says you should disable it if you're using a VTF outside of the 1.5-2 grams.
@Montycat I'm sure I could find alternative pieces that I can use to add weight. I like how the force increases as the arm proceeds to the center. I actually think this works better than the spring antiskate on my pl12d.
 
Cool. Thanks for the replies.
@tnsilver. The vl5 manual says you should disable it if you're using a VTF outside of the 1.5-2 grams.
@Montycat I'm sure I could find alternative pieces that I can use to add weight. I like how the force increases as the arm proceeds to the center. I actually think this works better than the spring antiskate on my pl12d.

Is the weight portion a single piece and/or is it removable? In the pic above the rod the weight is on might be fixed but at least the weight slides, but yours does not appear to. If you can remove the weight or the rod it is on you could perhaps change either part and have more control over the degree of anti-skate applied.
 
Is the weight portion a single piece and/or is it removable? In the pic above the rod the weight is on might be fixed but at least the weight slides, but yours does not appear to. If you can remove the weight or the rod it is on you could perhaps change either part and have more control over the degree of anti-skate applied.

Yeah you can remove the weight but it's one small screw holding it in. No possibility of adjustment. I know a blank disk is not the most accurate way of measuring anti skate but when I drop the needle onto deadwax it stays put so I guess it works.
 
I have a VL-5, and that thing performs better than it ever should for what it is. I certainly wouldn't disable it if you are planning on using cartridge tracking at greater than 2g. Some AS is better than none. Cartridges tracking around 1.25g or less can be hit or miss. Depends on the cartridge. The good news is that it's easy to flip on and off to compare results.

That tonearm will be a little on the heavy side for a super light tracking cartridge, anyway. That being said, I've had good luck using it with a light tracking Shure, even with it installed on the beastly JVC headshell.
 
Ok thanks for that. Right now I have a Shure m44g on it mounted on a Empire headshell that's pretty much the same shape as my pioneer one from my pl12d. I use this tt for mono records. I am shocked by how the m44g sounds. I get no distortion or sibilance or even end of side distortion and this is a conical stylus that hasn't been broken in. Is this a good match? I don't know the lengths of this tonearm either So I used the same overhang as my pl12d and it seems fine.
 
Ok thanks for that. Right now I have a Shure m44g on it mounted on a Empire headshell that's pretty much the same shape as my pioneer one from my pl12d. I use this tt for mono records. I am shocked by how the m44g sounds. I get no distortion or sibilance or even end of side distortion and this is a conical stylus that hasn't been broken in. Is this a good match? I don't know the lengths of this tonearm either So I used the same overhang as my pl12d and it seems fine.

Welcome to the site,

Your better off doing the restoration on The 12d ( not that there is anything wrong with your other table).

http://mr-ives.blogspot.co.uk/2013/07/restoring-pioneer-pl-12d-turntable.html

The 12D after a few simple upgrades is a fantastic table. I have more expensive tables, but in my main set up right now is my 12d. :)

Good luck with the project.

Kind Regards,
John
 
My Thorens TD160 with fancy schmancy Benz-Micro MC cart sits idle these days, as I do all my vinyl listening on a CEC BD-2000 I got for cheap. I love this table!

Thanks for the info about the range being between 1.5-2g. My arm is not quite the same, so I don't know if it applies, but I have increased VTF to 1.5 from 1.25, in case it does matter.

The similar anti-skate rods on the BD-2000 arm has a similar weight on the shorter rod. It does have a tiny screw (like the lateral balance weight on the other side of my arm), but I haven't been able to budge it yet. Time to lubricate with some off-spec homebrew biodiesel!

You might want to check on the underside of your AS weight, to see if there is a similar small screw. The only thing with your AS small rod, is that it looks like it is too short to move that weight at all (mine is more like the photo Montycat posted above). Maybe it is still adjustable, despite how it looks in the photo?
 
And look at that how-to guide jobrewer posted. I followed that to do maintenance on my CEC.

I also put a few pounds of dollar store plasticine under the platter, under the chassis, and in the plinth. Speed stability and accuracy is now dead on, wow&flutter is inaudible, it is almost impervious to footfall (also using sorbothane feet - but it was a twitchy b*tch when I first got her), and resonances are almost inaudible to me. Sounds like a million bucks, and I got it for $30 CAD (and I only really bought it cuz I thought the attached Dust Bug arm brush was cool and cheaper than ordering one on the internet).

If there is a good-condition and quality belt on there, and you have oiled the spindle bearing and motor, you are enjoying excellent vinyl playback. These 70s CEC belt drives and their arms are the last bargain in vintage turntables.
 
Welcome to the site,

Your better off doing the restoration on The 12d ( not that there is anything wrong with your other table).

http://mr-ives.blogspot.co.uk/2013/07/restoring-pioneer-pl-12d-turntable.html

The 12D after a few simple upgrades is a fantastic table. I have more expensive tables, but in my main set up right now is my 12d. :)

Good luck with the project.

Kind Regards,
John

Thanks :)
I have restored my near mint pl12d and it has an at450e (universal/pmount version) and I am still shocked by how good this thing sounds, how easy it is to work on and how precise it is nearly one year later. I have another one though, a "mk ii" that I will restore soon and give to a family member. I got this dd-1979 direct drive for 17 dollars and it is near mint too and complete. The platter is HEAVY (3lbs). Speed is dead on. And the rumble is actually lower than the pl12 for some reason. I saw that blog and it helped me a lot. Thank you.
 
Last edited:
And look at that how-to guide jobrewer posted. I followed that to do maintenance on my CEC.

I also put a few pounds of dollar store plasticine under the platter, under the chassis, and in the plinth. Speed stability and accuracy is now dead on, wow&flutter is inaudible, it is almost impervious to footfall (also using sorbothane feet - but it was a twitchy b*tch when I first got her), and resonances are almost inaudible to me. Sounds like a million bucks, and I got it for $30 CAD (and I only really bought it cuz I thought the attached Dust Bug arm brush was cool and cheaper than ordering one on the internet).

If there is a good-condition and quality belt on there, and you have oiled the spindle bearing and motor, you are enjoying excellent vinyl playback. These 70s CEC belt drives and their arms are the last bargain in vintage turntables.
And look at that how-to guide jobrewer posted. I followed that to do maintenance on my CEC.

I also put a few pounds of dollar store plasticine under the platter, under the chassis, and in the plinth. Speed stability and accuracy is now dead on, wow&flutter is inaudible, it is almost impervious to footfall (also using sorbothane feet - but it was a twitchy b*tch when I first got her), and resonances are almost inaudible to me. Sounds like a million bucks, and I got it for $30 CAD (and I only really bought it cuz I thought the attached Dust Bug arm brush was cool and cheaper than ordering one on the internet).

If there is a good-condition and quality belt on there, and you have oiled the spindle bearing and motor, you are enjoying excellent vinyl playback. These 70s CEC belt drives and their arms are the last bargain in vintage turntables.

I should mention that the table this arm is on is a direct drive. Audio reflex dd1979. There is almost no wow or flutter on this. I used rpm calculator app to check the speed and it won't budge. Perfect. As I understand there was an issue with this arm with the roller bearings caused by a loose screw. I'll have a look at that soon but the arm moves freely from side to side.

I don't think my anti skate weight can move, only come off completely. Maybe I can find some substirutesfor weights. There is also no lateral balance weight on this like other audio reflex tables with a similar arm. This table needs new feet too. The originals crushed under their own weight lol.

The problem I'm having now is overhang. I have no data for this arm and I fear any measurement I do myself will be off. I measured 200mm from spindle to pivot. And the manual for the VL-5 says the overhang is 11mm but that's for the VL-5 table. Not sure of mine. Seeing as I use a conical stylus. Is it THAT critical?
 
I am on the look out for a PL12D now, since it looks so similar to my CEC (is it really not made by CEC, as many say?).

Some say it is since there are tables that look identical to it. I thought pioneer and technics did all their stuff in house though.
 
Maybe post a new thread asking about the overhang in the title?

I found out the CEC's overhang when a knowledgeable Aker responded to my query.

(My overhang is 49mm. Not that will help you)
 
Maybe post a new thread asking about the overhang in the title?

I found out the CEC's overhang when a knowledgeable Aker responded to my query.

(My overhang is 49mm. Not that will help you)

49mm is the stylus to far side of the rubber washer distance on the head shell not overhang. Overhang is styluss to spindle. I use a protractor I printed out from the protractor generator on vinyl engine which screws up the 49mm measurement. I'll start another thread. Thanks for the help and insight. :)
 
Looks a lot like Garrard's antiskate implementation. Works fine, just make sure the pivot for that weight moves freely otherwise the arm will bind.
 
The JVC-made Audio Reflex MR-109 and MR-110 had the same type of bar and weight anti-skating (I owned an MR-110 – my first decent turntable in around 1976), but the weight was fixed in position so it was only suitable for tracking forces of 1.5-2g. The only real difference between the MR-110 and the JVC VL-5 was the cosmetics, which used vinyl ‘wood’ veneer on the Audio Reflex, and black rather than silver finish around the buttons on the JVC.

The direct drive DD-1979 (guess when it was released?) looks to have a similar tonearm and anti-skating, although not exactly the same. That bar and weight anti-skating was very effective and cheap to make, so continue to use it.

The only time you’d ever need to disconnect it was if you put a very compliant cartridge on it that tracked at 1g, but as that wouldn’t be a particularly good match to the tonearm, one that tracks at about 2g is better - the Shure M44G is OK, tracking at 1.5g, with the anti-skating working.

Audio Reflex equipment was always Japanese, Taiwanese or South Korean-made, and excellent value for money, although they never sold any really high-end stuff. The Korean company Inkel, who OEM-made the (excellent) Audio Reflex amplifiers for them in the 70’s and 80’s, bought the Sherwood (American) and Audio Reflex (Canadian) brands in the early-80’s, and marketed them both under the Inkel brand, and more recently, the Sherwood brand, which they still use as their export brand in most parts of the world.

The DD-1979 is almost certainly a better performer than the Pioneer PL-12D, because of its direct drive motor - it will be quieter and have lower wow and flutter (better speed stability), and it's a newer design (1979 versus 1974). From a 1981 Stereo Buyer's Guide price list, the Audio Reflex DD-1979 had wow and flutter of 0.06% WRMS (PL-12D 0.1%), rumble of -61dB weighted DIN-B (PL-12D -47dB) and a tonearm of 220mm effective length (PL-12D 221mm). The PL-12D was a much older design. of course. So the Audio Reflex is the better turntable of the two, except perhaps for the tonearm (fairly similar, with Pioneer perhaps having a slight edge), even if it's a much-less well-known brand. Incidentally, the 1982 Stereo Buyer's Guide shows that it was then an Inkel DD-1979, a slightly better-known brand, which is still around today, but of course, it was still a Japanese-made turntable, as Inkel's specialty was amplifiers.
 
Thanks :)
I have restored my near mint pl12d and it has an at450e (universal/pmount version) and I am still shocked by how good this thing sounds, how easy it is to work on and how precise it is nearly one year later. I have another one though, a "mk ii" that I will restore soon and give to a family member. I got this dd-1979 direct drive for 17 dollars and it is near mint too and complete. The platter is HEAVY (3lbs). Speed is dead on. And the rumble is actually lower than the pl12 for some reason. I saw that blog and it helped me a lot. Thank you.

Yea I really like my PL12D, man 17 bucks! talk about a deal. I think the best turntable deal I was given was a Kenwood KD550 for 40 bucks. It was quite rough tho. :)
 
Back
Top Bottom