Schroeder vs. Triplanar VII Sonic Differences

Doug,

Maybe your question about my preference for Science or Art was rhetorical, but I'll answer it anyway. I'm actually an engineer/scientist so I do appreciate deliniating the individual sub-components of the music's fabric. I tend to favor highly engineered and scientifically worked out solutions. I've beem listening to CD for the last 20 years after abondoning analog. Then again, I was listening to a Technics player in those days. Through extensive modifications to my Wadia CD player by GNSC combined with the incredible capabilites of Virtual Dynamicss cables, I feel that I'm getting the best of both worlds in terms of detail/dynamics and timral/natural musical realisim. I'm attempting to achieve this same combo in an analog system but to an overall higher degree.

Now at night, I'm probably leaning towards art...howerver, the engineer in me is never fully surpressed. Therefore, sounds like I am looking for the best of both worlds.

Andrew

Thom, Doug and Thomashesig,

Thanks for your additonal feedback. I can see what you mean about ease of set up and its translation to the final result. I'll keep this in mind.

Thom,

Jackson should be nice...

Doug, & company,

Thanks for your replies. I have read the Dougdeacon and Cello threads extensively and what I have taken away is that these two arms/brands are considered probably #1 and #2. Thanks for further elucidating on the sonic differences.

I'm looking in the 2,500-3,900 range and, setup and VTA repeatability aside, if a properly set up Schroeder Model 2 comes close to the Triplanar VII then I might put the price difference towards a better cartridge.

I value timbral accuracy but I want to make sure that the Schroeder does not give up much in the areas of dynamics, energy, detail, bass response, etc.

I wasn't aware of some QC issues with Triplanar. Hopefully this gets worked out.

Thanks guys. Sonically, it seems one can not go wrong with either arm.

andrew

Raul, SirSpeedy,

Thanks for your feedback on the Kuzma linear tracking arm. This seems a little out of my budget anyway.

I thought your comment about sounding different, but not necessarily better, as well as pivot arms having more guts, interesting. Since the Schroeder is not a pivot in the sense of a Graham or Triplanar, but more of a "floating design" in the sense of an air bearing, does the Schroeder sound lean in the direction of an air bearing more than it does the traditional metal to metal contact pivot designs?

Raul,

By the way, my phono stage is the phono section of a CAT Ultimate MkII preamp (47dB of phono gain and 26 dB of line gain. The unit is pretty linear with good bass response).

Cello,

Can you add anymore to the sonic differences of htese brands? Especially the difference between the Triplanar and the Schroeder Model 2 or DPS.

thanks!

Andrew

Tbg,

Thanks for bringing us back on course.

Any other experiences with these tonearms. I'm very interested in how the Triplanar compared to the Schroeder-2 and DPS in the infamous shootout.

Doug,

I often drive from Long Island to Sturbridge Mass and probably pass through your area. I would like to take you up on your offer some time.

I'm a Lagavulin fan myself. I'll bring up a bottle.

Andrew

Guys,

Well I went with the Triplanar-7. I just set up my TT (Acoustic Signature Mambo) with the TP-7 and get this, a 40 doallr Grado!

I met my goal. It clearly beats my digital fromt end, which is pretty hot. Much better than I expected. Analog is where it's at.

I haven't even measured tracking force, anti-skate or optimized VTA! Imagine how much better it will get after I optimize the setup and put a real cartridge on it! I'm hooked! You guys will me seeing more threads from me.

I agree with Rwd. the commardarie in this section is incredible. I owe immense thanks and graditude to Doug, Thom Mackris, Raul, Thomasheissig and Cello. You have all been an immense help. Thank you all.

I will say that I didn't pass on the Schroeder because of actual perfromance or anything like that. It came down to budget and feedback on the arms based on my tastes. Also, since this is my first analog rig, I wanted to experience the importance and effect of changes of all of the key adjustments (SRA, VTF, anti-skate, azimuth, etc). Since the TP-7 makes it a little easier to evaluate this, it was the obvois choice. If VTA, forexample becomes less of a concern for me, I might choose amother arm.

Down the road I will try to sonically compare the Schroeder Ref with the TP-7 with Thom's help and see if I want to make a switch. At this point, I'm very happy with the overall result.

I will certainly try to make the show in New Jersey. I hope to meet some of you in person there. Aside from this opportunity, I would like to visit Doug and Thom who so gratiously extended invitations.

Andrew

One more thing, please let me know if some of you will do another tonearm comparison like the one Cell perfromed.

Tbg,

You mentioned that in your evaluations a Schroeder (likely the Dps model) was better and more dynamic than an earlier Triplanar. Do you remember which model Triplanar?

Dougdeacon,

To put Tbg's comments in perspective, can you shed any additional light as to how older Triplanars compare to the Mark VII version?

Sirspeedy,

With regard to your first point, Triplanar has now released a Version 2 of the Triplanar VII that has a vernier like gauge on the headsheel/VTA assembly that allows dialing in a specific setting much better.

I wish I could attach a picture but would be happy to send it to you.

With regard to your second point, it does take some fiddling back and forth to get VTF just right. However, I don't think the Schroeder is any better in this regard.

Doug,

You have made the opinions you received on earlier versions through your private e-mail. I asked for the benefit of the others who were did not get your input. It may be on a previous answer to one of the many threads on the subject. In summary, you have received lot's of input noting that the VII vedrsion is much nbetter than previous versions. Therefore, Tbg's comment may be a little outdated.

Frank,

Thank you for highlighting that feature. Forgot about that one. Sorry. Any chance of giving us a brief summary of the SQ version?

Kha,

Any comments on the TT/cartidge comparison Frank is referring to.

Sirspeedy,

Although I don't think this is an issue (see below), the one disadvantage in adjusting VTF on a Schroeder is that minor changes in azimuth may arise since they are controlled by the same mechanism. This isn't the case with the Triplanar since VTF and Azimuth are controlled by separate mechanical mechanisms.

I'm not sure how much of an issue this is. Ultimately the excellent sonic signature of the Schroeder arm will likely greatly outweigh a minor shortcoming like this. I have nothing but awe about the Schroeder. There are adjustment pro's and con's with any arm. Some are certainly better than others in this regard. The Graham just to name one seems like a great arm in terms of adjustment.

Everyone has a diffiernt level of patience to dial an arm in perfectly. Thoms' comments made earlier speak to this perfectly. I for one am willing to take the "trouble" to ultimately achieve top performance.

I suspect that an arm's basic sonic signature will shine through and overide the end result despite being slightly off optimum settings.

I should probably get to sleep already but I wanted to address an obvious question you all probably have based on my previous post since you may detect a contrdiction based on my final choice of the Triplanar. Especially after a comment like "I for one would go through the trouble ( of pain staking adjustment) to achieve optimum performance". The question being, why didn't I go with the Schroeder despite the more difficult adjustment process. Let me explain:

Firstly, since this was my first arm, I was a bit intimidated by the importance of adjustment difficulty prior to my selection . Therefore, the ease of adjustment the Triplanar offered was more appealing at the time.

Secondly, the Triplanar is highly regarded and seems to suit my musical tastes. Rock n Roll. I like speed, dynamics, detail and excellent bass.

Thirdly, my budget at the time of purchase combined with the long wait did not allow me to buy the Schroeder Reference which is supposed to offer these musical qualities in addition to my other priorities which are instrument and vocal timbre and soundstaging. The DPS and Model 2 supposedly do not offer this full combination to the extent of the Reference.

Now that I have played around with adjustments parameters, I've found that they do not make night and day differences. Minor deviations around an optimum are swamped by the arm's sonic signature. The only disclaimer is that I'm using a cheap cartrdge. A better cartridge may be more sensitive. As well, dialing in the adjustment is not rocket science. Not to belittle the point.

Therefore, I am now less intimidated and would be more comfortable with the adjustment dififuclties of a Schroeder. Ultimately, I plan to compare the Reference to the Triplanar, adjustment difficulty aside, and make a call based on sonic virtues. By that time, funds may be available to purchase the Reference if it suits my muscial tastes better.

I'm not trying to short change the Triplanar the least bit. It is an excellent sounding arm! For those that do not want to take a lot of time/trouble dialing in an arm and require easy VTF adjsutment, without messing with azimuth, and easy VTA adjustment with exclellent sound to boot then the Triplanar is a great choice.

Sonic qualities aside, I guess my point is that the Triplanar is probably more appealing to the folks that are not as comfortable with the time and level of expertise in maximizing an arm's performance. The Reference is probably more suited to folks with mechanical dexterity and patience.

Going to sleep now since it's 1AM! My new interest in Analog has been keeping me way past my beadtime. I haven't listened to a CD in three days.

By the way, my name is Andrew. It may be easier to address me as such than typing my first initial and last name.

Goodnight. Try not to dream about Schroeders and Triplanar's too much!

A further thought. I keep referring to the adjustment differences between these arms as difficult or easy. The more I think about it, the more this seems like the wrong terminology. Once again, I refer you to Thom's comments earlier in the thread. I was basically trying to decribe exactly this point just earlier. Never mind my rambling's, here is Thom's comment:

"I'd add only one thing to Doug's comments - something I make a point of emphasizing to everyone who asks me about these arms.

I've noticed that different people relate to or interact differently with each of the tonearms. Some find the Schröder to be easier to set up, while others relate better to the Triplanar. Both arms are straight-forward however.

Because Frank's arm is so innovative, the user will most definitely benefit from a guided tour, but this is not to say that it is difficult any more than the Triplanar is.

I think setup should factor strongly into the decision, because the arm that you interact with best is the arm you will set up best, and guess what? They are both so good, that the one you set up best will be ... you guessed it ... the best ... at least as far as you are concerned, which is all that matters"

Andrew

PS, when will Audiogon get a spell-checker?

Rick,

You're right, this is a great group of folks and hobby. I think the important thing is that in this leauge of equipment it all sounds pretty good. But then again, we're all a little fanatical and in pusuit of the "best" or "better".

I hope you make it to Colo. That should be real interesting and I'm looking forward to meet the guys and exchange views on things.

Can you tell us a little about the equipment you heard?

Thomas,

Bob Graham gets an A+ at recommending his new Phantom B-44 arm. From all reviews and accounts it is a top flight arm. Since you have direct experience with it, the Triplanar 7 and a Schroeder all on an incredible TT, can you give us a first hand account of how it compares sonically to those in question?

Thanks in advance.

Rick, SirSpeedy,

Thanks for your comments on the system. It sounds like a good one! It's good to stay away from the mainstream reviews. they can be decieving and plauged by specific owner system aspects and complications. The reason I like Audiogon is that you can better understand many perspectives on a particular component.