Albert,
I have a bit more patience than Sirspeedy (since I no longer live in the N.Y / N. J. area) and can wait a bit longer for your comments.
Have fun !
.
Sirspeedy,
Do let us know when and if you take the finger lift off of your 2.2 and if you can perceive any sonic difference.
Rgds,
Larry
. |
Lapaix,
.
I have a Graham 2.2 currently, but was fortunate enough to hear the Model 2, DPS and Reference, and Tri-Planar 7 along with my 2.2 on my table during one long weekend a few months ago with a group of friends.
.
We did extensive comparisons using the same LPs.
.
The Model 2 was clearly better than my Graham 2.2;
.
The DPS was significantly better than the Model 2;
.
The Reference was clearly was superior to the Model 2.
.
I really liked the Tri-Planar 7 (which I understand from those that have heard both the older Tri-Planar's and Wheaton's, the model 7 is dramatically better than the older versions).
.
The Tri-Planar was fast, phenomenal in bringing out detail, soundstage and bass. The Tri-Planar 7 was close to the Schroder in certain areas such as dynamics and attack, but I clearly preferred the Schroder Reference to the Tri-Planar. In fact, I would even prefer the Schroder 2 Personally, I would prefer the Schroder 1 over Tri-Planar. It just was more musical and emotive. The whole Schroder line is just magical.
.
As an aside, I had the Basis Vector and preferred the Graham 2.2 over the Vector.
.
I know that the Reference was quite expensive, but I would think it terms of stretching for the Reference. My feeling is that one could be done with tonearms for life with the Reference and it might be cheaper in the long run. The DPS was not that far off the mark of the Reference and it would be a good second option. I believe that the Model 1 is available on special order.
.
Rgds,
Larry
. |
.
Sirspeedy,
.
I am a big fan of the Graham 2.2 and spent a good deal of time working on the damping fluid after reading your and 4yanx posts (and prior to hearing 3 Schroder Arms in my system) on the value and how to find the ideal damping fluid. Getting the damping fluid correct, made a huge improvement in the sonics (I completely agree with you).
.
I think Mr. Graham's designs are excellent and he is a good guy (and that is important to me). I love the phenomenal ease of adjustability of his arms. Adjusting the VTA on the fly is a dream. I was even more impressed with the design of his Phantom, but I did not have the benefit of hearing it in my own system and cant give any valid feedback of how it sounded.
.
I still have the Graham 2.2 in my system and get great sound/music out of it. The fact that I liked what any of the Schroder Arms did for my system considerably better as compared to the 2.2, does not lower my opinion of the 2.2.
.
There was a room full of 8 people that were 100 percent in accord with the fact that they preferred all 3 of the Schroder Arms : the Model 2, DPS and Reference over the Graham 2.2. It was not even a bit of a debate. Does that make the 2.2 a mediocre arm ? Hardly, I think it is a terrific arm and a good value. I just think the Schroder Reference is an amazing tonearm. Will I get a Schroder at some point ? Yes, as soon as I can and it will be a Reference.
.
When you have had a Schroder in your system (perhaps even with a UNIverse) and been able to compare them side by side at the same time, listening to the same LP's, I think you might stop being so cynical and will sing a different tune. At this point, you are just twisting at Windmills (but you seem to enjoy it so).
.
Warmest Regards,
Larry
. |
Sirspeedy,
.
First off, I enjoy your posts and don't take any offense. I think that they are well intended and keep me on my toes a bit. You do have a tendency to get a bit excited at times and maybe a bit too skeptical or perhaps cynical. I am happy with your demanding questions, but I think your cynicism (some of it is wise) gets the better of you.
.
A few things for you to ponder:
Your time line is off on my recommendations for the Schroder. I have heard the Schroder Reference in my system on two separate occasions. The first time was in June of 2004 and the second time was in March of 2005. I started talking about the Schroder in any real level of detail after the March 2005 get- together.
.
I got into the concept of adjusting the Damping fluid 9 months ago (October of 2004 to be exact) when I read a thread that you and David (4Yanx) participated in. In December of 2004, I along with Doug Deacon and Paul worked on my system for a long weekend (2 full days) playing with the damping fluid and the VTA in my system). So, I was already on board with the benefits of the damping fluid well before our March 2005 get together and before all of my fawning over the Schroder Reference. I also was able to listen extensively to the Schroder Reference in January 2005 in another system.
Here is Davids (4yanx) thread where I first started getting involved in playing with the damping fluid in my Graham 2.2. Ironically, you also posted on the same post after I did.
http://forum.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/fr.pl?eanlg&1096560646&read&keyw&zzdamping=fluid
I also was out championing the value of finding the correct damping fluid in February of 2005 which you might recall since you and I interacted on the same thread on this subject
http://forum.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/fr.pl?eanlg&1108179762&read&keyw&zzdamping=fluid
On the UNIverse comment about me being ubiquitous with offering my opinions about how great the UNIverse is: I have limited my comparison comments only about cartridges which I have heard and specifically in my own system. I am over the moon about the UNIverse in that it has made the biggest difference in my system of any change that I have made in the last couple of years. I also have a friend who had the same experience with having his system transformed by the addition of the UNIverse.
I have been passionate about a few components and tweaks that I think are wonderful in the hopes that I am able to help fellow audiogon members take the shortest route in getting to audio heaven. If you poke through my postings you will find that I also am a big advocate of cryoing, Teres Turntables, Symposium Rollerblocks and Supratek Pre-amps. You could make the same assertion that I carry the torch for those products in addition to the UNIverse and Schroder Reference.
Thank you for the apology but it was not necessary. The only reason you are obnoxious at times is that you live in the New Jersey / New York area. Now that I don't live in New York, I am not obnoxious and can help you mend your ways. I agree with you that Frank was way too nice to you and really should take you over the coals a few times (just for my own enjoyment).
Regards,
Larry
|
.
Nrchy,
.
Have you considered taking up drinking ? It will help pass the time until your table arrives.
.
Rgds,
Larry
. |
.
Nrchy,
.
It was just a thought.....
.
Rgds,
Larry
. |
Sirspeedy,
.
While I think that it would be interesting to have Michael Fremer's opinion/review on the Schroder Reference, I can not see why it to be a positive move for Frank Schroder to get a review done.
.
He has been continually overwhelmed with orders and has had a 4-6 month backlog of orders on his plate at all times for the last couple of years. He cannot increase production since all of the tonearms are hand made by him personally and he is already working overtime just to try to keep up with the orders he gets.
.
Having a review done that was favorable would only put more pressure on him personally and create frustration for the new potential customers who would have to wait even longer than the 4 - 6 months.
.
Having a review that was negative (not likely) would also not be beneficial.
.
While I understand your desire to have a professional review since there is no place to hear a demo, I don't know how it makes sense when one looks at the big picture.
.
I am fortunate to have heard the Schroder Reference 3 times (twice in my system) and it puts me at ease in making my decision. But if I had not been that fortunate to have heard A/B comparisons of the Schroder vs the Graham 2.2 and Tri-Planar (which are both great tonearms from my point of view), I would still be comfortable in making the decision to order a Schroder Reference based on the positive commentary of so many Audiogon members.
.
In many ways I am much more comfortable with the opinions of Audiogon members who I have come to respect over the last few years.
.
I do hope that Teres is able to do an A/B comparison of between the Phantom and the Schroder Reference while using the same top end cartridge.
.
Rgds,
Larry
.
|
.
Sirspeedy,
.
The only thing that Teres might be guilty of is having fallen in love with the Schroder Reference Arm.
.
I have known him long enough to know that he would only offer a non-biased honest opinion. He is truly one of the good guys who is truly passionate about our great sport.
.
I would assure you that Teres is far above being so calculating as to time a posting on Audiogon to coincide with Fremer's review. I will let him speak for himself, but I am assuming that it is merely coincidental.
.
Rgds,
Larry
. |
. Sirspeedy, . I tried to email you and it bounced back to me (as it always has when I try to email you) with a message saying: . " --- The message cannot be delivered to the following address. --- [email protected] Mailbox unknown or not accepting mail. 550 [email protected] unknown ". . Email me and I will respond to your email. . Rgds, Larry . |
.
Sirspeedy,
.
Just click on my name ("Cello") in my post and then click on send email. You can then compose an email to me and send it. Please send me a phone number to contact you if you wish.
.
Rgds,
Larry
. |
.
Nrchy,
.
Got back from traveling on Sunday and was back at the office today.....
.
What's up with the schedule on getting your new table ?
.
Rgds,
Larry
. |
