Has anyone had experience with the Schroeder Arm

Ebm,

Like Thom I find your statement of questionable value. Along with lacking in useful detail it also goes against the informed opinions of many others on this list. I have owned and spent considerable time with both the 2.2 and the Schroder Reference in my own system. In addition have heard the 2.2 and the Reference in well controlled comparisons. The universal response by myself and every person present at either comparison strongly favored the Reference. So sweeping statements like "BLEW IT AWAY" without any supporting details do not have a lot of credibility.

I acknowledge that given your tastes and system context that the Graham may be preferred. But given the experience of myself and many others it seems more likely that the conditions surrounding your comparison were flawed. Please favor us with some details.

At the expense of some EGG on EBM's face,and the person who originally started this thread,I'd like to chime in once again.EBM is a personal friend of mine who IS playing(an unappreciated)practical jokes.Ebm is wasting the time of all well meaning responders to this thread.I know this because he has been harping at me for the last month or two to sell my 2.2 and buy a Phantom.Why?I'm not kidding here:because "It must be great since it replaces the 2.2".I am the person who set up EBM's 2.2(which he loved until he saw the new AD copy for the Phantom).He as well as so many non thinking PHILES(although not the ones who seem to have responded to this thread)is totally ad and review driven.The mainstream press love guys like this.The Phantom looks like a superb arm.I already know the 2.2 IS.I own a transfiguration temper v as does EBM (I installed his).This cart has an effective mass of 7.5 gr.A great match for the 2.2When I look at Graham's own NIGhtingale Cartridge I see a mass of14.5 grahams.When I look at the new Phantom I see a design that looks to have more armtube mass than my 2.2 which will undoubtedly mate better with a wider range of heavier cartridges.This new halfway (compared to the Shroeder)magnaglide feature seems to be beneficial for those cartridges with a higher mass than mine.Obviously if the cartridge weighs more you don't want any twisting or you can stress the cantilever.This feature gives up the sideweight feature(that I happen to like with my particular cartridge).I'm kind of thinking that you can equate the sideweight slight movement to the suspension of a car shifting to adjust to bumps in the road>The 2.2 weight system shifting to imperfections in the groove.If you stabilize the arm and increase the tube mass it's like a plow through a road.I just have my own way of looking at this.I'm not necessarily right,but the 2.2 is So tuneable and reallyTRACES a groove that I can't get excited about the Phantom(at present).I have explained this to EBM but he is SO advertising driven that he decided to waste Your time (I appologize for him)by trying to goad me into randomly getting a new product just to justify his lust to spend spend spend.Don't get me started on the endless procession of pucks,cones,and power cords that have made their way into his rig.I like the Shroeder because of the uniqueness of the bearing design.To my way of thinking it will come closest to an air bearing,which is probably the most effective,but, a pain in the tush to deal with which is why I rule it out for myself.I'd love to see a review of the Shroeder in either TAS or Stereophile,but I'm not holding my breath since both of those mags are now almost always accomodating of their best advertisors.The best days are behind both of them anyway.I did own a Wheaton but was not happy with it.The vta adjustment was not precise(too much play in the scale)and the cuing fluid leaked out in a few months.SLOPPY!The GRaham 2.2 is a FABULOUS arm.It may be bettered by the new Phantom,but,If I'm going to go through the PAIN of dialing in a new arm I'd currently get more excited about the frictionless design of a Shroeder REF.AS for EBM please don'twaste the time of people who take these discussions seriously.Enjoy your retirement(you lucky dog)and go rent some new"B" movies to be enjoyed with your favorite fried Chinese foods you force on me every time I'm on a diet.Who cares?It's all a big joke to you!!

Sirspeedy,
Thanks for having the nerve to fess up for your pal's attitude. I've been in your shoes, usually at the poker table. Sometimes we truly deserve the "I'm With Stupid" T-shirt.
I'm a little surprised at your comments re: the Wheaton. Which version was it. Do you think the current model suffers from the issues you describe? Cheers,
Spencer

I have owned many tonearms including the Wheaton when the Mod Squad sold it as well as six straightline trackers. The Schroeder Reference on my Garrard 501 gives the greatest dynamics and plausible sense of being at the recording even that I have ever heard. I use the Decca Jubilee cartridge which responds well to the magnetic dampening control.

On my Tri-Planar there IS play in the threads of the VTA tower. This is easy to overcome however. Once you've decided where on the scale you want to be, always approach that setting by moving the arm UP to it. This way gravity and the resistance of the grease in the threads are both working to ensure precision. If you move the arm DOWN to some setting then the grease in the threads can prevent it from being truely as low as the scale indicates.

It also requires a simple mod to cue straight. Takes only a minute so no big deal, though why Tri-Mai hasn't fixed this is a mystery.

Paul recently said he wouldn't trade our TriPlanar for a Schroeder Ref even in a straight swap. That's a pretty strong statement, since the Ref is the best sounding arm we've heard. It had a lot to do with our new ZYX UNIverse, which seems to be a perfect companion for the TriPlanar.