Teres, Galibier and Redpoint

It's my humble opinion that of the 4 permutations we wanted to listen to on Saturday, the one we didn't get to (Triplanar/ Universe) is the best combination for the Universe. Please see my comments below about mass matching caveats, and the fact that my Ebony Schröder Reference has an 18 gram effective mass.

Everything I've heard tells me that the attributes of the Triplanar and Universe is a match made in heaven. Given that no component is perfect, I'd say that both Triplanar and Dynavector are slightly stronger in "incisiveness factor", while Schröder and ZYX are slightly more about tone color.

Now, the ZYX is fast, and the Dynavectors have tone, so don't take the above comment to the extreme. Realize that this is a broad, sweeping generalization as all 4 products perform to a very high level.

Only when you listen side by side will you hear a difference and will you come to a preference.

I don't know what went on at Chris' house, but I suspect that his Edgarhorns played a significant role in the different results.

I speak from experience of both of the Edgarhorns as well as of my soon to depart Exemplar horns. Before switching to my new Azzolina Audio horns, I would have considered the Edgars/Exemplars to have a correct presentation. Every other cone driver based, front-loaded horn has had tubby colorations. Not so with the Azzolinas, but I digress. Again, we're talking about 3 speaker systems that perform to the level of the arms and cartridges in question, but having said that, this is all about small but significant differences.

Rather than take a side trip into this topic, I think that this worth a rant on my Rants Page - the perilous journey into low power triodes and horns. To quote someone I once used to correspond with: "it's a long and dangerous journey ... bring plenty of milk and cookies".

So ... once again, the poor audiophile is in system matching hell - given the inherent flaws in any transducer (be it a cartridge or a speaker). If it were only more simple, we could make global proclamations. Forums like this give us the opportunity to triangulate on combinations that make magic.

Now that I have what I consider to be speakers that lend a slightly more even hand to the music, I am beginning to ponder whether an 18 gram Ebony Schröder Reference is a bit too heavy for the Universe. My ZYX has the silver base plate, BTW.

After CES, and at Frank's suggestion, I tried to see if 18 grams was the upper limit for the Universe. I increased it by employing the optional brass cartridge carrier to add 5 more grams (total mass of 23 grams). This slowed things down.

Perhaps 12-15 is truly the magic spot for the Universe? Unfortunately, I don't have a Jacaranda or Bocote version to play with, but Dmailer's Jacaranda arm / Universe combination would point toward this (15 grams) being the true upper limit for optimum performance.

Cheers,
Thom @ Galibier

Hi Dan,

The photos on the bearing page are a bit confusing. Frank makes fine VTF adjustment available (via the thumbwheel on the counterweight) for both the DPS and the Reference.

It's a no-close option. The only reason it isn't standard is because some folks get the hee-be-jee-bees over the concept of the thumbwheel - either from an aesthetic perspective or a sonic one.

I recently learned that the Model-2 has a threaded end stub for this same purpose. I sometimes learn about these arms from other Schröder customers. It's only fair that I share the info ;-)

Cheers,
Thom @ Galibier

Thom,

You let poor audiophile Dan get away without hearing the best available arm/cartridge combo? We need to talk... ;-)

I haven't heard the Dyna, but I totally concur with Thom's differentiation of the Schroeder Ref and TriPlanar VII. With the same cartridge on each arm, the Schroeder is slightly better at tone and timbre, the TriPlanar is slightly better at leading edge transients and pace.

Even side-by-side these differences are subtle. No one could be unhappy with either arm. Thom's standing advice is very good IMO: chose the arm that suits your budget and style, and that seems most comfortable to set up and live with.

I once urged Tri Mai to drill and tap the TriPlanar's end stub for a fine VTF adjustment screw, as Frank now does on his Model 2. I was disappointed that his recent upgrades to the TP VII didn't include this. O-rings work fine, but they are a bit hokey and they add 59 cents to the cost!

Now back to your regularly scheduled turntable thread...

Well, it sounds to me like Thom did get pretty close based on your last comments, Doug. And Thom also makes a valid point about the differences in systems and speakers. So I see no reason why someone could not be happy with either tonearm and either cartridge.

BTW, someone did post some pictures of the two new Teres tables over on AA. I guess the DD is a model 400.

Hi everyone,
Sounds like you all had lots of fun and gained some insight regarding the importance of proper turntable drive systems. Be it rim, tape or direct drive, it's about the right amount of torque vs platter mass with both the compliance of the link: belt, tape, idler( and consider the flux lines in a direct drive arrangement as a compliant link too!) and the frictional losses(bearing surface area, oil) being additional factors in this "equation".
I heard Chris' 380 prototype in march and realized right away that with some additional work, his effort would yield spectacular results. Can't wait for the finished version. RMAF, Chris?....

The Ref.arm that Thom uses has slightly too high an eff. mass to be ideal for the Universe, at least when the cart features the silver base plate. Tonally it will complement the Airy 3 better, since ebony has about the highest high frequency resonance damping properties of all woods suitable for making armwands. You may consider this somewhat of a sonic fingerprint. So pick the right cart(ZYX Airy 3, Lyra Helikon, even an Audio Technica AT OC9 - you get the idea...) and the combination will work like a charm, as long as the fres doesn't end up being too low(it would be difficult to build an ebony arm with an eff. mass below 15gr. without sacrificing stiffness).

Some time ago I tried to post a looong treatise on the correlation between arm design and the perceived differences in bass "authority" and dynamic "attack" between Unipivot, gimballed and "no"-friction-bearing arms. It never got out(moderator, did I do something wrong?). In part I was trying to explain how high frequency structural resonances can lead to the impression of a "faster" attack, just as a heavy bearing structure(often found in more "modern" unipivot arms) store and re-release energy to give that extra(exaggerated) punch on the bottom.
The Triplanar is an excellent gimballed design(if I may say so). Since the energy path is broken up("split" armwand) and the actual moving part has low mass(meaning actual mass, not inertia), it's bass reproduction leaves little to be desired.
The top end of the Triplanar is not entirely free of resonances which manifests itself not in a grainy or ill defined character, but in a slight tendency towards accentuating the leading edge of the note while foreshortening the trailing edge/decay of a signal, slightly diminishing "bloom" or the so-called harmonic envelope of an instrument.
The ZYX Universe is a great, marvelously coherent, musical performer, but also not entirely neutral. It slightly rolls off the top end and it is not as fast as some other contenders, namely the Lyra Olympos SL. It's presentation(particularly the midrange) is nevertheless very lifelike, seductive without being Koetsu-"juicy".It is this trait which make it an excellent match with the Triplanar, so I agree with Thom completely.
Now, a harder wood, with less high frequency damping, like the Jacaranda armwand(also lighter than ebony) featured in Chris' Ref. arm will give you just what is required to work perfectly for the Universe. I had less time than usual to finish the arm for the open house event. So the armwand has only about 15 coatings of oil instead of the usual 50-60. The result: a great match with Chris' Universe.
I've said before that the choice of wood is not one of sound and I'll stick to that. As a designer I'd rather hear what the cart does instead of building it's sonic mirror image. A user usually has a different goal.
But the treatment/damping difference shows how profound the influence of resonance control(armwand and elsewhere, quantitatively and qualitatively) can be. And how critical component matching even at this level is to get the most in terms of musical satisfaction out of it.
Both Thom's and Chris' tables will provide just that: utter musical satisfaction when partnered with the right arm/cart combinations. And if I had to decide, I'd do as my wife does:
"Honey, I bought both handbags".....(her only weakness ;-)

Right, if I had the money and space :-(

I'm well aware that this post might draw all sorts of criticisms/flames or "yeah, he had to defend his product again" replies. Please take it as no more than a personal rambling, a string of thoughts written down to make an excuse for myself for taking a break from work.

And for Dan ed:
Before I forget, the VTF finetuning feature can be added/ordered for all my arms, not just the DPS.

All the best,

Frank Schröder