Thanks Sarcher30 for the clarification.
123 responses Add your response
Thank you, Frank. Unfortunately for my bank account, you've removed one reason for not buying an LT. Congratulations to you for the inherent rightness and simplicity of your idea. You might suggest to Xactaudio that they should explain the presence of that cylinder supporting your tonearm in the photos. (Maybe they did; sometimes I am a sloppy reader.) |
Lewm, The spindle to the center of the mounting hole distance (1 inch hole for the post) is 277 mm. I have made a new arm board for my SP10 mk2a plinth to accommodate the Schroeder LT. I am expecting the LT in a month or two. You should have no problem mounting one on the MK3 as long as you can accommodate a normal 10.5" arm. I did have to drill a hole all the way through the whole plinth as the tonearm cable exits the bottom of the post. The difficulty will be mounting it to TT's that can only accommodate 9" arms. They may want to eventually design a shorter version for those TT's. |
Sorry to be such a blabbermouth on this subject. I saw a full photo of the LT on the Xactaudio website. It seems I was correct in the first place; there is a large cylindrical base, not seen in the videos, within which must reside the bearing for pivoting the pivot point. I hope that would not delimit the use of the tonearm on a wide variety of turntables (e.g., my SP10 Mk3 or my L07D). Probably it would not fit on the L07D, at first glance. |
Yes, I want one. I wonder whether Frank Schroeder can create a base that would allow other tonearms to operate in the same manner. The problem would be that nearly every commercial tonearm has an offset headshell. The only production arm I know about that does not have an offset headshell is one of those Nottinghams. There are also a few with adjustable headshell offset angle. Still, if he could produce a base for $1500 or less, he would sell quite a few of them. |
Hi Peter no chatter and zero vibration, you can "hear" this in the stellar resolution this arm has. Other arms I had to remove damping troughs, fine vtf weights, anti skate mechanisms even finger lift b/c they chattered, rattled or colored the sound. The magnets keep the bearing in the underneath race centered in the race so they never touch unless your physically moving the arm by hand to its rest position. Hope this explanation helps |
The first video is a very good demonstration of the mechanism of the Schroeder. I had not previously realized that it's pivot swings in full view. I thought the working bearings were underneath, somehow. Fascinating and ingenious, because it's so obvious and simple. Could not help notice the Abolare linestage, using two 12AU7s, my least favorite audio tube, and for only $32,500!!! I have never heard a 12AU7 I could love, and no linestage imaginable should cost that much. Sheesh. But I do like Rockport speakers and The Beat turntable. |
Hiho, Thanks for the explanation. It is much clearer now. As long as that angle is 90 degrees, the stylus does not need to trace the radius of the LP. It is constantly hitting a different radius as the LP rotates which is why it is always tangent while a normal pivoting arm only hits two radii, (at the null points) during the entire side. That is why the arm base does not have to move that 5" or so. This arm is constantly adjusting. |
Just think of the stylus to the armwand as a straight line and the stylus to the spindle another straight line and the two lines form an angle and as long as that angle always maintains 90° then it doesn't matter what the base is doing or whether the arm goes in an arc or not. And it will track tangentially. The same theory applies to the Thales tonearm, except it pivots at the headshell, whereas the Schroder has a fixed one with no offset angle. The Schroder does not use the Thales geometry but having an understanding of the Thales semi-circle will give you a better idea. The advantage of the Schroder and Thales tonearms is that they do not have to use linear bearings with its enormous horizontal mass. The Schroder also has advantage over the Thales of having little to almost no skating force, hence the absence of anti-skating adjustment. Ingenious indeed! Thales semi-circle _______ |
The first video is fascinating. The second one does not really give a sense of what is happening. I would think that for it to have truly linear (tangental) movement, the stylus must follow a straight line moving along the exact radius of the LP, theoretically ending at the spindle or center. It looks like this is accomplished by the base moving in and out and being hinged at two points and moving along an arch. But I don't see that the base moves the entire 5" or so that represent all of the grooves on the LP. It's a very intriguing design and a difficult geometry problem to visualize. The bearings must be extremely silent and free of slop for there not to be any chatter considering all of the movement at the base where it can vibrate. Could Arnie or jfrech add some clarification? |
Hi, Here is a youtube video link from this past RMAF that "might" give you a better feel for how the Schroeder LT arm operates. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QYqcQl5pLgU I also have the arm installed on my Beat TT and I would echo what John has said about the sonic performance of the arm. I've tried to describe as best I could what I hear with the LT arm on my system page. Hope that helps a little. Arnie |
lewm, I think sarcher30 hits it about right. All I know is this arm makes some seriously beautiful music...I feel like I have a whole new vinyl front end...not just a arm... it's pretty impressive...honestly I was a ways down the road on a very pricey phono stage...thinking that was my next step...now I no longer feel I need to upgrade my phono...so in this context...it's actually the lower and better priced alternative. I have some pics on my system page for those interested... |
Lewm, That sounds logical. It's not quite the same as being a little off on overhang with a normal pivoted arm. On a LT arm if you are a little off it will be off the same amount all the way across the record unlike a normal pivoting arm. The cartridge can be adjusted back and forth in the headshell on the Schroeder LT to make up for any error with pivot to spindle distance. As long as the P2S distance is not so far off that you run out of adjustability at the headshell you will be ok. |
I finally found some real world comparison from a fellow member Atif, with permission: "I have both the Schroeder SQ for my mono setup and the Schroeder LT for my stereo. Both arms are excellent. Very dynamic and naturalsounding. Tonally perfect and airy and 3-dimentional. The LT has more weight and authority in the base. It also does everything at least a little better than the Sq especially in the inner grooves of a record. I've been a happy longtime customer of Mr. Schroeder." |
Mark is right about the design's "exquisitely elegant simplicity." And this picture gives you all the clues on the design of its tangential guiding mechanism. _______ |
Dave (Intactaudio), Totally concur with your last post. Patents are like locks: they help generally honest people remain honest by imposing barriers to temptation. They will not deter a determined burglar (or a deep-pocketed competitor). *** I'm with Johnnyb53 on the question of learned listening techniques vs. aural acuity (i.e. bat's ears). My hearing is less acute today at nearly 60 (yikes!) than it was at 20 or 30. Yet my ability to hear and understand music and sonics is greater and it continues to improve. Example: fifteen years ago I couldn't adjust SRA by ear, even in my own system. Today I can adjust SRA by ear in a resolving but unfamiliar system, even with an LP I've never heard before... in 2 minutes or less. My aging ears aren't growing more bat-like, my brain has learned what to listen for. The Sherlock Holmes metaphor was quite apt, IMO. In, 'The Sign of Four' (the first Holmes story), Holmes explains to Watson that he was quite consciously training his mind to improve specific skills needed for his chosen profession. In particular, he was honing his powers of observation and deduction by acquiring two things: 1. awareness of phenonomena he was likely to encounter at a crime scene; 2. knowledge of the sources of such phenomena. While Sherlock Holmes raw intellect was presumably well above average, it required specific training to make him a great detective. Contemporaries of equal or even greater intellect (e.g., his brother Mycroft) were inferior detectives because they had not developed and practiced the necessary skills. Another example would be the reputed 100 names for snow used by Inuits vs. the few names used by people who don't need such depth of knowledge about the stuff. The Inuits' senses are presumably no more or less acute than yours or mine, but they've trained their brains to a profound level of skill in an area of particular interest and concern. Likewise, the dedicated audiophile. |
08-04-13: StringreenI think this is turning into an obsession for you. Bifwynne: Nope, I never did target shooting growing up. There was one instance when I was 18 and fired a 12 ga. shotgun just once. It's the only time I ever fired a gun. I can't remember if I wore ear protectors or not. My ear didn't ring or feel funny after I shot it. But if there was an instance that compromised my right ear, it was probably when I was 7, at a noisy children's convention and the kid next to me cupped his hands around my ear and talked directly into it in a loud voice. I could feel my eardrum shudder at the excess SPL. It could also be the narrow diameter of my ear canals. I can't wear any sort of in-canal earbuds, not even the expensive ones that come with varying diameter pads. And it's obvious when I try them that the right canal is narrower. |
Lew, others: There is no hidden level of complexity: Frank's genius created a design of exquisitely elegant simplicity. There's an explanation of the geometry in a post on another forum, not sure if the mods will allow the reference but here goes: previous post on diyaudio check post #222 for the geometry. |
Stringreen, An experienced listener does not need "bat ears" or even "normal" hearing to detect subtle differences among audio components. Will said experienced listener always know why one thing sounds better than another? Will he or she always be able to pick out the most expensive and exotic over the cheap and mundane? Was Bismarck a herring? No, to all 3. However, to dismiss the pursuit of audio Nirvana as if it were the province only of the aurally exceptional is a bit anti-intellectual and tends to kill the argument. |
Sherlock is fiction, but his character is based on a professor whom Conan Doyle had in med school, a guy who practiced an acute level of observation. There are mentalists (such as depicted in the CBS TV series) who have sharpened their powers of observation to see things others don't. It's based on technique, not on vision acuity. While it's true that the Fremer test has a casual relationship to the scientific method, his #1 turntable is the $100K Continuum Cliburn Reference Turntable with the pivoting Cobra tonearm. If anything, the supporting mechanism and vibration control should have favored at least one of the pivoting tonearms. Yet even with all that in its favor, I noticed a more linear and natural quality of the playback coming off the tangential arm. And I don't think Fremer was pushing the virtues of tangential tracking. After all, his reference table has a pivoting arm, and when I pointed out my preference for the tangential arm he pointed out what a hassle they are to own, operate, and set up. I've done a lot of noise and vibration tweaking over the last several years and have grown familiar with the effects of lowering the noise floor. What I heard with the tangential tracker was an entirely different quality, and one that doesn't lend itself to easy description with standard audiophile jargon. But I heard the difference. So I stand by my response. I may have slightly better than average hearing (but only just); the thing I've concentrated on is how the brain responds to what it hears. I know for a fact from a hearing test that I have a -6dB dip in hearing response, centering at 6 Khz, in my right ear. I have trouble interpreting speech when I can only listen with my right ear. Talking on a phone held up to my right ear is out of the question. |
Where are the current owners of the Schroeder linear arm, they must be too busy listening to amazing distortion-free music to comment on this thread. I hope some might speak up, specially if they can compare an air bearing type of linear arm to the Schroeder. I have lived with a Model 2 fw arm for several years, it continues to amaze me, not only because it routinely teaches what music feels like but also because my digital front-end can't come close to its charms. |
Hi Doug, even with an IP contract in place, you are still at a situation where a corporation with deep pockets can do what they want to litigate the life out of the small guy. sadly it happens and many corporations operate by simply comparing the numbers and if it is determined that stealing a patent or ignoring an IP contract will make more $$$ in the long run, that is what is done. i guess what i am saying is that contracts and patents are only needed to protect you from bad people. if the bad people have 10X+ the resources of you they can simply void the contract by litigating the small guy into the poor house. dave dave |
I absolutely heard the difference between a conventional pivoting arm and a tangential tracker. At my local high end dealer's annual open house, Mike Fremer showed up with a CD he'd made, re-recording the same LP track multiple times with different turntable/tonearm combinations. One of them had a tangential tracker (probably a Walker). All tracks were level-matched for listening tests. I identified the track made with the tangential arm easily. It doesn't take "bat ears" any more than Sherlock Holmes needed "eagle eyes." You just have to know what to listen (or look) for, especially to be sensitive to certain musical values. The problem with much critical listening is that people are listening for sound (higher highs, lower lows, louder louds and softer softs) when they need to be listening for musical values--tonal accuracy, timing, rhythm and pace, soundstage, transients, ambience, and just flat-out musical enjoyment. The recordings from the pivoting tonearms sounded pinched or constipated compared to the tangential tracker. The tangential tracker was more relaxed and open, and sounded more live and less like reproduced music. But the good tangential trackers are expensive and a big PITA for the support mechanism, especially the air pump. It was frustrating to realize I could easily hear it but not afford it. The Shroeder takes care of the hassle part, but is about as expensive as a perpendicular arm. Compared to the air bearing tonearms, the Shroeder pivot should be relatively easy to reproduce and even mass produce, bringing this higher level of sonic refinement to a larger audience. |
Dear Iso, It is interesting to learn of your and Schroeder's former occupations. I can add another tonearm inventor to the watchmaker list: Herb Papier, creator of the Triplanar. I was a friend of Herb's in his later years, right up to and beyond the point where he sold the Triplanar business. He built every Triplanar in his basement, on a workbench that resembled what you would see in the shop of a watchmaker. As Herb got older and somewhat disabled, he farmed out some of the mass production (ha-ha) of tonearm parts to various trusted shops, but there were certain things Herb would not entrust to anyone else, including the setting of the bearings. |
dave, Reverse engineering of protected intellectual property for commercial purposes is often actionable, though the legal complexities can be daunting. If the action is successful, the court may order injunctive relief (i.e., a "cease and desist" order against the unlicensed user) and/or civil damages. Samsung was recently found to have violated Apple's IP rights by reverse engineering elements of the i-Phone and implementing them for commercial gain in its own Galaxy phones. Appeals are pending, but at trial Samsung was ordered to pay Apple several billion dollars in damages and enjoined from selling certain models and features. Of course if the reverse engineering company has much deeper pockets they can exhaust the poor inventor, as you said. Blah, blah, blah... For the purposes of this discussion, I wasn't thinking primarily about enforcing (or stealing) IP rights. The immediate value of an IP attorney for Frank would be to help negotiate licensing agreements with honest manufacturers. This assumes Frank would actually be interested. That would be a departure of course. He's an audiophile, artist and craftsman first, a (very good) businessman second. *** Isochronism, Speaking of watchmakers, I just bought a house from a man who repairs, rebuilds and sells antique clocks. You'd have loved his basement machine shop... cool stuff. Hicks Antique Clocks |
Lewm: I wouldn't expect an automated manufacturing version of this arm to come in at $300, but Panasonic/Technics made *millions* of SL12x0 tonearms while maintaining a mere 7.5mg bearing friction. This was based on a 30+ year-old design and implementation. The Shroeder bearings demand half that level of resistance, and I think it could be as easily accomplished today as 7.5mg was in 1981. Japanese industry has a long track record of high precision mass production. I think it could bring the price from $9K down to $1000-1500. A $30K automobile, if made individually, would cost at least a million dollars. The quantities for a specialty tonearm wouldn't be nearly as high, but if the pivot were manufactured under tight control and licensed to many tonearm implementers, I think they could reach significant economy of scale, especially if it became the new pivot standard for Pro-Ject, Rega, and VPI. Maybe it would be enticing enough to get Denon or similar back into the quality TT business. If this works as expected, it should be a game-changer--a tangential tracker that for the most part behaves like a standard pivoting tonearm in all the good ways. |
Leicachamp, Ideally, neither the Schroeder nor the Thales have any tracking error, so the answer is "no". However, life is seldom ideal, so the real answer is "who knows?" Johnny, It seems that the trick of the Schroeder is to look simple enough so that anyone can build it, but if it works as I think it does, its internal workings are as intricate as a Patek Philipe watch and cannot be cheaply mimicked. (Of course, I chose a bad metaphor, because any $25 Swatch can perform as well as any PP watch, when it comes to keeping time. But the babes will treat you better if you are wearing a Patek Philipe.) Anyway, my real point is that it is likely not possible to make a cheap version of the Schroeder, because of the need for highest quality bearings and metallurgy. |
If there's any trickle-down technology I'd like to see happen fast, it's THIS! If Shroder were willing to license the design, it could be mass-produced, making the arm affordable to a wide range of customers. I'd love to see this become the new RB300! This is such an elegantly simple design that could be fitted to a wide range of turntables. I wonder how long the arm has to be for this dual-pivot to maintain tangential tracking? I'd love to see this show up on Pro-Ject, Music Hall, Rega, VPI ... |
Why would there be any damage to the cartridge? Frank's moving pivot necessarily offers LESS resistance to longitudinal forces seen by the stylus than any fixed pivot. Any arm with a fixed pivot (including traditional linear trackers) offers 100% resistance to longitudinal forces. On Frank's arm, these longitudinal forces are reduced by the extent they're used to move the pivot, leaving less force to be seen by the stylus. The tonearms we all own impose greater longitudinal forces on the stylus than Frank's new design. If anything, this should result in longer cartridge life, not shorter. As to how it sounds, I have no idea! |