New Schroeder linear tonearm, any thoughts?

Here's a link. http://www.xactaudio.com

A link to some more pics. http://parttimeaudiophile.com/2012/10/16/rmaf12-schroder-lt-the-beat-magdrive-tt-allnic-audio-labs-lyra-atlas-echole-cables/

Yes I heard it on The Beat TT in the Xact Audio room. It was great. Went back a couple of times to hear it again. Very smart design. I want one.

The mechanism is hidden in the base. The pics will not make it clear how it works. A video would be better. There are two horizontal pivots in the base that articulate. There is also a guide rail hidden in the base that guides the arm in a straight line across the record. From what I understand there is a magnet that helps with that process. The bearings are also very low friction and because of that there is no excessive horizontal mass unlike most linear tracking arms. They also claim no skating force is generated.

No string involved in this design.

Lewm,
That sounds logical. It's not quite the same as being a little off on overhang with a normal pivoted arm. On a LT arm if you are a little off it will be off the same amount all the way across the record unlike a normal pivoting arm.

The cartridge can be adjusted back and forth in the headshell on the Schroeder LT to make up for any error with pivot to spindle distance. As long as the P2S distance is not so far off that you run out of adjustability at the headshell you will be ok.

The Phantom is not a true unipivot. It has the Magnaglide stabilizer. I don't have much experience with a MM on a unipivot arm. So I can not confirm, nor deny whether that is a factor. Could be though.

Lewm, The spindle to the center of the mounting hole distance (1 inch hole for the post) is 277 mm. I have made a new arm board for my SP10 mk2a plinth to accommodate the Schroeder LT.

I am expecting the LT in a month or two. You should have no problem mounting one on the MK3 as long as you can accommodate a normal 10.5" arm. I did have to drill a hole all the way through the whole plinth as the tonearm cable exits the bottom of the post.

The difficulty will be mounting it to TT's that can only accommodate 9" arms. They may want to eventually design a shorter version for those TT's.

Sorry Frank. I did not see your post before I submitted mine. I should have enough slop in the hole of my arm board to make up 1 mm. If not it can be made up at the headshell I assume?

Sean

Brf, That was an early prototype. They had not yet designed an arm lift at that point.

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.

Halcro, are you saying you can't hear the difference between your tonearms using the same cartridge on them? Or are you saying that you do not think the differences you hear are related to tonearm wiring?

I think the only way to answer the question of whether tonearm wiring should have as few connections as possible, is to test it both ways on the same tonearm with the same type of wire. I have not done this personally, but I'm sure someone has. Is there anyone on this forum that has tested this themselves?

Halcro, it is interesting that the Phantom did not do well with MM cart's. I have read that before.

IMO, you can not make any solid conclusions about wiring, without testing it out on the same tonearm. Otherwise the differences you hear, or don't hear, could be caused by the arms themselves. Not the wiring.

Halcro. You are right, it's not necessarily a deal breaker. That said there is really no doubt in my mind that fewer connections are better, but often there are reasons it is not practical. It's usually not a night and day difference in most cases, and it can be swamped by other factors.

For the sake of argument, if integrated amps were built to the same standard as separates, and used outboard, separate power supplies for each section, then they could be better. There are a few reasons (at least) no one builds integrated's that way. First, they would have to charge an enormous amount of money for them. Second it is rare that any one manufacture is skilled enough to get the most out of every different section (phono stage, dac, line stage, amplifier). Therefore something in the design will be less than optimal. And third, allot of audiophiles like to have the flexibility to try different things without replacing the entire system.