The least expensive model in Paradigm's Reference series, the Studio/20 loudspeaker is a rear-ported two-way dynamic bookshelf/satellite design, superficially identical to the powered Active/20 that <A HREF="http://www.stereophile.com//loudspeakerreviews/597/">JA reviewed last November</A>. It features Paradigm's 25mm PAL pure-aluminum dome tweeter in a die-cast heatsink chassis, and a 170mm MLP mica-polymer cone in an AVS die-cast heatsink chassis with a 38mm voice coil. The crossover is third-order, quasi-Butterworth, said to be "phase-coherent." It features high-power ceramic resistors, film capacitors in all signal paths, and both air-core and steel-core inductors.

When Bob Graham introduced his <A HREF="http://www.stereophile.com//analogsourcereviews/400/">1.5 tonearm</A> at the end of the 1980s, many thought he was dreaming: Vinyl was going the way of the console radio&mdash;who would invest two-grand-plus in a <I>tonearm</I>? But there was a method to Graham's madness&mdash;he'd designed his arm to be a drop-in replacement for more than 20 years' worth of SME arms, all of which shared the same mounting platform. Perhaps, in his wildest dreams, Graham had already envisioned the current "analog revival"&mdash;but even without it, he figured there'd be a robust replacement market, and he was poised to exploit it with what he thought was a superior product.

When Bob Graham introduced his <A HREF="http://www.stereophile.com//analogsourcereviews/400/">1.5 tonearm</A> at the end of the 1980s, many thought he was dreaming: Vinyl was going the way of the console radio&mdash;who would invest two-grand-plus in a <I>tonearm</I>? But there was a method to Graham's madness&mdash;he'd designed his arm to be a drop-in replacement for more than 20 years' worth of SME arms, all of which shared the same mounting platform. Perhaps, in his wildest dreams, Graham had already envisioned the current "analog revival"&mdash;but even without it, he figured there'd be a robust replacement market, and he was poised to exploit it with what he thought was a superior product.

When Bob Graham introduced his <A HREF="http://www.stereophile.com//analogsourcereviews/400/">1.5 tonearm</A> at the end of the 1980s, many thought he was dreaming: Vinyl was going the way of the console radio&mdash;who would invest two-grand-plus in a <I>tonearm</I>? But there was a method to Graham's madness&mdash;he'd designed his arm to be a drop-in replacement for more than 20 years' worth of SME arms, all of which shared the same mounting platform. Perhaps, in his wildest dreams, Graham had already envisioned the current "analog revival"&mdash;but even without it, he figured there'd be a robust replacement market, and he was poised to exploit it with what he thought was a superior product.

When Bob Graham introduced his <A HREF="http://www.stereophile.com//analogsourcereviews/400/">1.5 tonearm</A> at the end of the 1980s, many thought he was dreaming: Vinyl was going the way of the console radio&mdash;who would invest two-grand-plus in a <I>tonearm</I>? But there was a method to Graham's madness&mdash;he'd designed his arm to be a drop-in replacement for more than 20 years' worth of SME arms, all of which shared the same mounting platform. Perhaps, in his wildest dreams, Graham had already envisioned the current "analog revival"&mdash;but even without it, he figured there'd be a robust replacement market, and he was poised to exploit it with what he thought was a superior product.

When Bob Graham introduced his <A HREF="http://www.stereophile.com//analogsourcereviews/400/">1.5 tonearm</A> at the end of the 1980s, many thought he was dreaming: Vinyl was going the way of the console radio&mdash;who would invest two-grand-plus in a <I>tonearm</I>? But there was a method to Graham's madness&mdash;he'd designed his arm to be a drop-in replacement for more than 20 years' worth of SME arms, all of which shared the same mounting platform. Perhaps, in his wildest dreams, Graham had already envisioned the current "analog revival"&mdash;but even without it, he figured there'd be a robust replacement market, and he was poised to exploit it with what he thought was a superior product.

When Bob Graham introduced his <A HREF="http://www.stereophile.com//analogsourcereviews/400/">1.5 tonearm</A> at the end of the 1980s, many thought he was dreaming: Vinyl was going the way of the console radio&mdash;who would invest two-grand-plus in a <I>tonearm</I>? But there was a method to Graham's madness&mdash;he'd designed his arm to be a drop-in replacement for more than 20 years' worth of SME arms, all of which shared the same mounting platform. Perhaps, in his wildest dreams, Graham had already envisioned the current "analog revival"&mdash;but even without it, he figured there'd be a robust replacement market, and he was poised to exploit it with what he thought was a superior product.

When Bob Graham introduced his <A HREF="http://www.stereophile.com//analogsourcereviews/400/">1.5 tonearm</A> at the end of the 1980s, many thought he was dreaming: Vinyl was going the way of the console radio&mdash;who would invest two-grand-plus in a <I>tonearm</I>? But there was a method to Graham's madness&mdash;he'd designed his arm to be a drop-in replacement for more than 20 years' worth of SME arms, all of which shared the same mounting platform. Perhaps, in his wildest dreams, Graham had already envisioned the current "analog revival"&mdash;but even without it, he figured there'd be a robust replacement market, and he was poised to exploit it with what he thought was a superior product.

When Bob Graham introduced his <A HREF="http://www.stereophile.com//analogsourcereviews/400/">1.5 tonearm</A> at the end of the 1980s, many thought he was dreaming: Vinyl was going the way of the console radio&mdash;who would invest two-grand-plus in a <I>tonearm</I>? But there was a method to Graham's madness&mdash;he'd designed his arm to be a drop-in replacement for more than 20 years' worth of SME arms, all of which shared the same mounting platform. Perhaps, in his wildest dreams, Graham had already envisioned the current "analog revival"&mdash;but even without it, he figured there'd be a robust replacement market, and he was poised to exploit it with what he thought was a superior product.

When Bob Graham introduced his <A HREF="http://www.stereophile.com//analogsourcereviews/400/">1.5 tonearm</A> at the end of the 1980s, many thought he was dreaming: Vinyl was going the way of the console radio&mdash;who would invest two-grand-plus in a <I>tonearm</I>? But there was a method to Graham's madness&mdash;he'd designed his arm to be a drop-in replacement for more than 20 years' worth of SME arms, all of which shared the same mounting platform. Perhaps, in his wildest dreams, Graham had already envisioned the current "analog revival"&mdash;but even without it, he figured there'd be a robust replacement market, and he was poised to exploit it with what he thought was a superior product.