Schroder sq and the new talea


I heard there was to be a fun time of learning and comparing of these two arms at the rmaf. Since the talea is relatively new, it still has to stand the test of time with comparisons on other tables, other systems and the selective and subjective tastes of discerning audiophiles! There is to be a comparison in one of the rooms at the rmaf this year, which i wasnt able to make. I would be curious to hear some judicial, diplomatic, friendly talk about how they compared to each other in the same system and room. I currently own the origin live silver mk3 with a jan allaerts mc1bmk2 and am enjoying this combo but have become curious about the more popular "superarms" Hats off to both frank and joel.

I hope this thread draws more light rather than heat. If someone preferred one arm over the other it would be OK. With all the variables it doesnt mean that much to me. What matters to me is what it sounds like to me and in my room. With that said...

What was your bias? was it for the schroder or the talea?

cheers!...
vertigo
Dear Dgarretson, apparently my words were a bit misleading. I meant that it is not just the structure of the groove, but the tracking process ( which is a synergy of several mechanic-dynamic processes taking place simultaneously ) which determines the demand profile of a tonearm.
I think that the diversity in tonarm designs is to equal parts a result of each designers individual ideas, preferences in aesthetics and materials as well as different "blue books".
I don't say that one doesn't have to make any trade-offs in a tonearm design, but that is not the problem. The problem - IMHO ...;-) .. - is, that some relevant issues of the above mentioned tracking process aren't realized nor addressed. Because there is no strictly following the topic and objective ( and thus of universal validity ) blue book for the tonearm.
And - I would neither name the tonearm Athena nor Bruenhild ( both smart daughters of pretty simple minded fathers... ) - but it isn't mine to name it anyway, as I sold the design.
Just from reading this description I can see that this book is a product of modern philosophy - it commits all the same errors. For one, the notion of something beyond reality (as perceived and understood by man's consciousness) with no evidence or argument supporting this notion, which implies that man's mind (reason) is impotent and we should blindly accept this "Being". And what does he mean when he states he wants to "transform consciousness"? Humans are entities of a specific nature - as with all entities the law of identity applies (Aristotle)to us - including our consciousness which operates by specific means (concepts) to understand reality. How is he going to "transform" that?

Canam, I recommend you try reading it before you assume that this is about philosophy. There seems to be an underlying assumption in a number of posts here that the ability to silence the mind's endless chatter ('inner dialogue' as it is often known- if it is a dialogue, to whom is the mind conversing?) is somehow the same as being unable to perceive.

Indeed, Dertonarm says:
Well, we have seen a good many politicians - each side of the Atlantic - the past years who proved themselves "true experts" in the described process to silence any thought ( in themselves...). However - if it lead to any positive results for them or us, then I missed it...... I sometimes stood frozen in absolute amazement, but that wasn't really going hand-in-hand with any positive feeling.
Which might have been an attempt at humor; its only my opinion of course but most politicians to me seem merely thoughtless, not at all what I am talking about :)

What I **am** talking about is the occasional moments when you might be driving, and come around a turn or the like, and are suddenly presented with a majestic vista of stunning beauty; or seeing for the first time a truly red tulip in spring; or hearing something of great beauty in a musical piece, wherein for an instant, the beauty of the experience is so stunning that the inner chatter of the mind shuts down, and you are allowed to be in the present, in the Now, without a worry of the future or the past. It might only be for an instant, a second or two, before the mind starts up again with something like 'wow- nice sunset!' or the like. But for a few seconds, the mind stopped its chatter (which is entirely different from the brain being somehow inactive BTW) and one is allowed to to experience the sublime.

Although not the only one to do so by any means (I used his example because it is easy to find), Eckhart Tolle presents a simple technique to allow you to experience being in the Now a little more often.

The science behind it is that if you can silence the inner dialogue (and after a while the mind seems to figure out that there is a benefit to this, so it gets easier to do), the brainwave frequency drops much like it does in meditation (hence your increased creative abilities, essential even with engineering), except that you can have your eyes open and be doing things, even be talking to a friend! This has nothing to do with philosophy or religion, BTW, nor is Mr. Tolle the only such proponent. The bottom line is though that it is simple to do and you might want to at least attempt it before dismissing it.
Derto: on the arm, you are right of course. But, my capitalist self just spent $500 on repair and $500 on NOS tubes and I'm fiscally groping like a fish out of water...so, of course, my addiction is looking for a nudge. On looking for opinion, I know, but I really do think that you guys have some great experience. Its always in context, but I think that I can see within that. On US/Eur: yes, well put. And, yes, I humbly apologize for the Confederate remnants of my American brethren. :0) Every empire that goes up must come down...

Nandric: on your "very interesting to know that sheeps are no objects." No that's funny!! I got a good laugh. Not at you, and I know you were being, uh, ironical (I'm here stealing material from the movie, "Good Will Hunting"), but it was funny nonetheless. But you gotts know, when someone can't tell that I'm not talking about Cartesianism when I'm talkng about trans-cognitive perception, I have to make sure on these things.

Audiofeil: oh yea, much worse than that! Newhart - perfect choice.

M-
Hey Ralph, did you see that nice example of your MP-1 that listed yesterday at $7500? Gone now, but I have to tell you if I wasn't hopelessly in love with my own pre I would have jumped at that. Matched witn that LAMM 1.1 hybrid monos that just listed and for @$15K combined you'd have one nice rig (I know, but OTLS have too many fire-bottles for me...this is no comment on tube reliability, just my trauma peering out from a Jadis Defy experience years ago).