Has anyone had experience with the Schroeder Arm

Gosh! I guess He's calling Himself Raul these days.

Kyrie eleison,
Raul eleison!

I've heard the Schroeder Reference, Graham 2.2 and Basis Vector:
- all on the same TT (Teres 340-2)
- same cartridges (Koetsu RSP, Koetsu Urushi, Shelter 901)
- same system, same weekend, same beer or wine, etc.

The Schroeder was simply in another league. The Graham and Vector could not match it for neutrality or transparency. I believe this was the unanimous opinion of the 5 or 6 people listening. The session took place over two long days, but it didn't take two minutes to realize the Schroeder was something special. For most of us our critical listening just flew out the window. We were transported by music. It's a lot of pennies, but worth every one IMO.

My Shelter 901 on the Schroeder sang like I've not heard it sing before or since. It had the dynamics and power it always has, but the Schroeder also uncovered a musical soul I never knew the 901 possessed. The Koetsu's sounded, well, even more like Koetsu's! But the main thing we heard from the Schroeder was music. It provided a virtually open pipeline to the recording. I try not to rave very often. Please understand this was, by a sizable margin, the finest component of any type I've heard.

FWIW we now own a TriPlanar VII. With the right cartrdige it comes closer to the Schroeder's transparency than those other arms, IMO of course. It seems more revealing or perhaps just more fussy about cartridges than the Schroeder. The TriPlanar displays the 901 as a bit overblown or edgy, a bit hi-fi. But put a ZYX Airy on it and you get pretty close to the Schroeder Ref's musical disappearing act.

My $.02...

Cmk,
Shroeder: superbly musical and relaxed
TriPlanar: musical and superbly detailed
Seems like a good summary of what I heard.

Thomasheisig,
It's certainly possible the Schroeder may roll off HF's more than the Graham. Not quite like a Koetsu's smoothing though, it's difficult to describe. Did you try changing the Shroeder's dampening?

How do you compare the TriPlanar to the Graham? You're the only person I've heard who has both.

sirspeedy,

It might be viable to shortlist a few cables based on others' feedback and demo them on your 2.2 to find the one you prefer. The Graham's armtube wire will certainly have some effect, but you should still be able to hear the differences in an A/B. At least you'd be hearing each cable between your own cartridge and phono stage. How each wire behaves between cartridges and phono stages that differ from yours is likely to be quite variable.

Obviously Cmk and I agree with your supposition about the Schroeder Reference's non-resonant design, construction and materials. The aspect of the Ref that most sets it apart from other arms is that bearing. Presumably this is largely responsible for it's (lack of) sonic character.

Enjoy the music while you enjoy the hunt!

Frank,
Thanks for elaborating on some of the measures you've employed to control mechanical feedback from the cartridge, including chaotically structured armwand materials and other construction elements. I know you've done a great deal of work in those areas and that much of it is proprietary.

Thinking about 4yanx's question about CLD: it seems to me that CLD is an attempt to emulate on a mechanical scale certain things that chaotically structured materials do on a microscopic or molecular scale. Multiple interfaces slow and refract the transmission of energy, while a mix of differently dense materials absorbs energy at different frequencies.

Compare this with electrical transmission in a single crystal wire vs. a kinked or multi-crystal one. Although one energy is electrical while the other is mechanical, the energy transmission behaviors of structured vs. chaotic materials share certain similarities. A single crystal tonearm wire is fast, efficient, phase coherent and quiet, but a single crystal tonearm (or armboard) would be unduly resonant. I too would be interested in your thoughts on CLD, if you're willing.

Judging by the relaxed and musically transparent character of the Reference, as actually heard by Cmk, Cello, Teres, 4yanx and myself, it's clear that your materials and bearing are successful in controlling many undesirable mechanical vibrations. If only your methods worked so well everywhere. Perhaps some vibrations are just too low to be readily damped.

Keep up the good work. Like 4yanx, I can dream.

On my Tri-Planar there IS play in the threads of the VTA tower. This is easy to overcome however. Once you've decided where on the scale you want to be, always approach that setting by moving the arm UP to it. This way gravity and the resistance of the grease in the threads are both working to ensure precision. If you move the arm DOWN to some setting then the grease in the threads can prevent it from being truely as low as the scale indicates.

It also requires a simple mod to cue straight. Takes only a minute so no big deal, though why Tri-Mai hasn't fixed this is a mystery.

Paul recently said he wouldn't trade our TriPlanar for a Schroeder Ref even in a straight swap. That's a pretty strong statement, since the Ref is the best sounding arm we've heard. It had a lot to do with our new ZYX UNIverse, which seems to be a perfect companion for the TriPlanar.

I spoke with the new owner of Wheaton at HE2004 and while I was trying to compliment his product I,at the same time told him of my concerns about the play in the vta scale as well as the fact that dialing in an EXACT tracking force required a "HUNT AND SEARCH" approach (with the non-exacting)way of sliding the counterweight as opposed to the EXACT threaded rotation of the GRAHAM.Tiny increments in downforce make all the diff. in a high res set up.His response to me was that he felt his counterweight system was good enough.

Sirspeedy,
I recently contacted him with exactly the same concern (lack of fine control of VTF). I even offered an easily-implemented fix/upgrade that would provide the needed control. I got a similar response, polite but noncommital. :-(

OTOH it's not at all difficult to devise your own fine VTF control. We set our C/W for the top end of the likely range for the cartridge. If we want to reduce VTF then one or more O-rings slipped over the end stub reduce downforce by .01-.02g each. Pretty simple and very quick.

When someone makes the perfect arm I guess we'll all buy one. Until then we each have to choose our favorite set of compromises. If the Schroeder Ref had tool-less VTA adjustability with a scale for repeatability, there'd be one mounted on my table today.

No argument that arms at these price points should not suffer obvious compromises. Obviously we agree about the ones the TriPlanar has. We decided to deal with them and so far that's working out well. You decided to change to the 2.2, which we've heard and used and don't like at all. Neither of us is right or wrong, we just chose the set of compromises that works best for us (not being ready to mortgage the house for an Air Tangent!)

Speaking of top linear trackers, have you heard the Kuzma Air Line? That's been sort of my dream arm since I saw the first reviews.