New Schroeder linear tonearm, any thoughts?


I noticed Frank Schroeder has a new linear arm without servo motors, pumps, etc. seems like a promising direction. Did anyone hear it at RMAF?
crubio
Henry, It's a perfectionist trade-off. With a removable headshell, you cannot have an uninterrupted connection between the cartridge and the phono stage. My experience suggests that the audible difference is far greater with LOMC cartridges than with higher output MM and MI cartridges. Makes sense. Mr. Schroeder made a fair assumption that 99% of those who purchase his tonearm will be using an LOMC cartridge. There's no accounting for nut cases like us, who use MMs and MIs just as much, if not more. On the other hand, I tend to fall in love with one cartridge (regardless of type) and use it for long periods of time, so the slight disadvantage of not having interchangeable headshells is no big deal to me.
Interchangeable head shells only save you a couple of minutes unless you don't care about perfect setup of each cartridge. You still have to readjust everything, including overhang. As soon as you change the SRA and VTF for the new cart/headshell combo you will have to revisit overhang.
Of course in the case of the Schröder LT there will be no overhang or underhang, unless the setup is off.
Hello Royaloak,
Skating force varies between 4 and 18% of the VTF, depending upon all sorts of factors. Any compensation will result in a compromise. My suggestion is such a compromise, reducing the sidethrust/lateral preload on the cantilever and, at the same time, retaining an amount of skating compensation that will be sufficient to keep uneven stylus/groove wear at a VERY low level.
The often described method of using the tracking ability("torture") track on a test record will lead to overcompensation due to the fact that there is no 70µ, 80µ or higher constant modulation to be found on any record. Peaks: yes! Permanent signal: not supposed to exceed 50µ, typically around 20µ.
Since modulation causes drag, it will also "modulate" skating, so why compensate for a maximum that rarely, if ever, occurs.
Overcompensation will often cause cartridge dampers to assume an asymmetrical position after a while(cantilever no longer parallel with the cartridge body/generator axis). Once you notice that, you ought to send it back to the manufacturer to have it re-aligned. The stylus(when kept clean) usually outlasts the damper/its proper orientation.

Try a dynamic Mono(i.e. Sonny Rollins - Saxophone Colossus) record and play the right channel only, then the left channel only. With the antiskating set as high as you mentioned (moving slowly towards the outer edge of the record), you are likely to notice one channel to sound more dynamic than the other. Reduce skating and listen again...

All the best,

Frank
Lew,
With a removable headshell, you cannot have an uninterrupted connection between the cartridge and the phono stage. My experience suggests that the audible difference is far greater with LOMC cartridges than with higher output MM and MI cartridges.
You can't argue with 'theory'...that's for sure.
I've had many tonearms with uninterrupted connection between cartridge and phonostage....and still have one with the Copperhead running uninterupted balanced XLRs.
With MMs, MIs and LOMCs........no listeners to my system have ever been able to tell if they were hearing the Copperhead, the DaVinci, the Phantom II (with many connections)......or all my other 5 tonearms with interchangeable headshells?
Theory only gets you so far......look at valves and SS, sealed and ported speakers, belt-drive and DD turntables...?
I trust my ears...