When statically balancing the stylus pressure as a means to completely bypass the tensioning spring on arms other than the RB 250, is it better to set the spring tensioning to the maximum level prior to getting out the ol' Shure balance beam scale, or to the zero level on the dial gauge? As I read elsewhere (December '04 issue of Stereophile in Art Dudley's review of the Rega Planar 5 and Planar 7 equipped with the RB 700 arm), Rega employs a seemingly bass-ackwards approach of using a stylus force setting calibrated clockspring whose force increasingly vectors "up" against the arm for dynamic balance as the stylus force scale is decreased (someone correct me (and Dudley) if that's wrong...), rather than vectoring the arm "down" against the record, so the advantage of setting the tensioning spring to its max level (~3.5gm) would be remove all spring force against the arm when relying on only static balance from the counterweight to set stylus force. However that also entails a theoretical penalty of having to extend the counterweight farther back on the arm which would result in more inertia to overcome for lateral arm movement as the record plays. The other method would be to set the tensioning spring to its zero setting (which, counterintuitively would place maximum "up" force against the arm by the spring), but with the counterweight closer to the arm's fulcrum. Or am I chafing at a gnat and swallowing a camel? Opinions?