Schroeder vs. Triplanar VII Sonic Differences

Not to try to create a bad vibe,but the Triplanar does have some important warts,that the mfgr has NOT,to my knowledge corrected.Since so many of us are so critical about the most minute detail of analog,I have to mention two of them,and would be a bit surprised if(unless they have been corrected)owner/defenders got uptight.
Firstly,the VTA "dial" on top,has too much play.It is useless in terms of "sighting" in a numerical setting,and being able to "for sure",go back to it by sight.Sure it can,and should be set by "ear",but after having an arm that is supremely accurate here,after owning the Triplanar,the accuracy and repeatability can easily be appreciated,and is more than easily dismissed!
Secondly,since it has become almost painfully obvious,how incredibly small amounts of downforce(1/100's of a gm)can affect sound quality,in a really good rig,the Triplanar's "hunt and seek" twisting/pushing of the counterweight is,let's say "not fun".Especially if you want to zero in on specific downforce weights.Once again,when you have had an arm that does this much more accurately,and easily,it becomes "more" of a big deal.There are arms of similar performance,and maybe a bit better,that offer these features.
None of this is of earth shattering importance if one doesn't mind fotzing around,in some cases for an afternoon!Obviously,the Triplanar is a wonderful arm,or it would not be so popular.I DID like mine.ALOT!!
Also,my Graham 2.2 is FAR from perfect,though it dispenses with the problems I just mentioned (the criticality of that darn fluid is not a "fun thing",if you want to go all the way,with performance)and the cartridge choices can be somewhat limited,which I'm not wild about.Yet,it is a HECK of alot better than many 'scribing here can/will know.I have no axe to grind,regarding any of the great arms,we all love to talk about,and am not going to "go off" about anything,like the past,but fair is fair!
Truthfully,I believe any of our favorite arms,discussed in these threads,will have their own specific idiosyncracy(hope I spelled that OK),but we DO lean,a bit too much to the "chosen few".That's perfectly OK with me,btw.I love to ponder them all!!

Best!

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.

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!

Hello Aoliviero,
.
All Schroeder arms can be ordered with a VTF fine tuning "screw" that allows making minute changes without altering any other parameter.
.
Once you're in the ballpark of the recommended/desired VTF, turning a knurled wheel that is situated in the end stub(No.2) or the counterweight (DPS & Reference) will shift enough mass to account for a VTF change of 0.02 grams per revolution.
.
As for Thomas Heisig’s comment on the SQ version of the Reference, I'd like to know from where he gets his information. Suffice it to say that neither the quoted price difference nor the differentiating features have been represented accurately.
.
Kha(hello!) had the opportunity to hear the SQ version at the AAA Frankfurt show in early March. The Ref. SQ (with Dynavector XV-1s) was mounted on a TW Acoustic Raven AC aside a Tri-Planar MkVII (+Eminent, My Sonic Lab) , a Da Vinci Grandezza (+Dyna TeKaitora) and a Jelco arm (+Denon 103R).
.
As the combinations (that includes the choice of phono stages: Pass XONO, Klyne, Tron Seven, Whest) were chosen by the designer of the turntable(Thomas Woschnik) for the best mechanical, electrical and sonic match(your choices might be different :-), it should be interesting for the participants of this thread to hear Kha’s impressions of the comparisons that were done.
.
Those who have any questions regarding the SQ version can contact me privately after April the 6th(I'm currently abroad with infrequent access to the net, sorry).

Best Regards,
Frank