Has anyone had experience with the Schroeder Arm

Hello Nghiep,
First of all, Mr. Well Tempered's name is Bill Firebaugh.
Secondly, you're off on a number of your assessments. The eff. mass of ,say, gimballed vs. suspended arms doesn't differ as implied in your post. It is the application of damping that alters Q and Fres. In the case of the Well Tempered Arm A LOT of damping is applied to allow for proper operation(=minimal displacement of the arm assembly as a result of groove drag). Since the Well Tempered Arm employs such a large amount of damping it has to be taken into account when calculating the expected Fres.
The string has NOTHING to do with a more "musical" sound of suspended arms. It allows for the construction of a chatter free bearing and next bto zero friction(+ zero stiction). It doesn't resonate in either of the arms.
It didn't take me 20 years to get a patent on my arm. In fact it only took the usual 2 years. And while I've been making string suspended tomearms since 1978, only when I turned it into a full time occupation I decided to protect my intellectual property(a very costly affair, I might add)
Besides that, anyone with an understanding of physics will realize that there are distict differences in the design of the two arms: application of antiskating force, distribution of mass, bearing rigidity vs. damping, versatilty. The last point brings me to another misconception. It is the eff. mass, not the bearing principle that determines the suitability of any arm for use with high compliance carts. I have customers running VERY high compl. carts(35cu+) and neither they nor I experienced any phenomenae that would indicate a mismatch.
"Electrons flow like water"? That's a nice school book analogy but doesn't reflect reality.

All the best,

Frank

Frank: Sure you are the expert.
Regards and enjoy the music.
raul.

Frank, Did you make tonearms with magnetic damping since 1978? If your current tonearm was in the market 20 years ago, there would not be any gimbal nor unipivot tonearm designs. I also found that the gap between the magnets can be changed to compensate for the magnetic field strength in order to obtain the desired damping effects. The skating torque can also be independently adjustable regardless of the magnetic field strength. I guessed you already know those. I also noted that tonearm builders like music instrument makers. They both bring music to live.

Thomas, I really hate to have to call you on this but you know you haven't had a Schroeder arm in your system. If you recall what you heard was a Schroeder No.1 (not Reference) with a Miyabi on my Debut in a totally unknown system at a show in a hotel. But even then you commented you thought it was much better than the Graham 2.0.

I also feel it was vastly better than my Graham 2.0 which I used for years on that TT. On my current TT I have used the No.2 and Reference but not a Graham so you didn't hear any direct comparison in my system either.

In all fairness to Frank Schroeder I don't think you should report on a direct comparison I don't think you have made.

Sorry, but fair is fair.

No problem.
I listened to various set ups with Schroeder. Some months ago there was a visit here from another Basis owner, he had a Schroeder with the armboard from a Basis. He wanted to listen to a Miyabi ( and the Pass amps ), so we made it.