Looking for a great arm that is low maintenence

I hope I didn't go too overboard with my Triplanar "knock".Understand that due to my crappy dealer(of the time),I took a 1500.00 dollar loss,after spending two years trying to get it to perform, as it should have.I probably am still suffering a good deal of angst,from the experience.Not soon forgot;and the industry wonders why so many dealers are losing business to the internet!!

sirspeedy - I'm leaning toward the TriPlaner, but you mentioned that TriPlaner does not appear to have dealt with the issues that concerned you during your experience. How concerned do I need to be about that.

It's tough to make the choice since all the arms on my list are disliked by at least one person that I trust, except for the Schroeder. They just take a long time to order, and I just sold my Rega. I'd rather not sit around and wait a few months for a new arm. Does anyone know how long it takes to get the Schroeder?

My Cosmos should be done in the next couple of weeks. Ideally I'd like to have everything in place by then. What to do, what to do???

Nrchy, most good arms require careful setup but none that I know of (including the unusual Souther linear arm) require any maintenance.

I have a SOTA Cosmos also. I have replaced the SME IV with the Graham 2.2 and I am delighted I did. Overall, the Graham sound more transparent--no heaviness in the bass--and livelier. It also offers more adjustments and execute them better than the SME.

I have had a long look at the Wheaton Triplanar. Great construction. It sounds excellent in my friend's system but in my limited exposure to it, it was not as ergonomic as the Graham. So I selected the latter. Though there are too many variables to make a valid comparison, I felt that my system with the Graham sounds better than his with the Triplanar. Finally, I like the fact that Graham has been consistently improving their arms over the years and offered reasonable upgrades to their customers.

If you are like me, no matter which arm you eventually buy, you are going to have the nagging feeling that the one you did not get might be better. These are great arms that will all do well on the SOTA. Any one of them will give you great sound. Just pick one and enjoy!

Nrchy,I really don't have alot to add,that Justin has not stated.I think I initially chose the Triplanar because it looked more solid and massive in construction.Like a fine piece of medical equipment.I'm sure this plays a part in "ALL" products chosen,though performance should be the first criteria.Obviously it was,for me,but as the eventual owner of both arms,I can state that it really is the Graham 2.2 that is MUCH better designed,built,finished,and as stated(beautifully phrased)by Justin,it "executes" the adjustments(needed for accurate set-up)better than the Triplanar.

As I look back at both arms,the 2.2 is an incredible design.SO GOOD,to me,that I really don't care about the Phantom(especially in lieu of the fact that I run a very light,high compliance cartridge).Also,and here is where the "human nature" of asthetic choice comes into play;the 2.2(to me)looks like it was made for the Cosmos.It just looks SO DARN GREAT on my Black Fountainhead table.The Phantom looks absolutely MASSIVE,and although I have NO DOUBT it is a fabulous design,it looks a bit like overkill,for a cartridge of 7 gms.I'm probably wrong,but we all have our own way of seeing things.If I had a much heavier cartridge with low compliance,I'd be looking at the Phantom,or Schroeder Ref.For sure!Actually,I like the Shroeder with my current Transfiguration,since I can select arm mass.

Which brings me back to the original advice I gave you and was so beautifully expressed by Justin.Just pick one,of these all fine arms,and be happy!!You will love any of them.Remember,though(like this year's Belmont and Preakness winner)the Schroeder should NOT be easily dismissed.It may be the "dark horse sleeper" in the field.Something tells me that I'm not wrong about that.The design is WAY too strong to be dismissed,and you have a designer/owner who seems to be unbelieveably passionate about his products.Like Elliot said,in Close Encounters Of The Third Kind;"This means something"!

Sir Speedy, there you go again. I disagree with your characterization of the Phantom as MASSIVE. The fact is my Helikon is 8 grams with reasonably high compliance and it sounds wonderful in the clutches of the Phantom. I hate to repeat myself, but as you have never auditioned the Phantom I would caution readers to take your comments with the proverbial “grain of salt”. In the final analysis, actual listening not conjecture will determine the compatibility of the Phantom with low mass/high compliance cartridges.
Fact: The Phantom exceeds the 2.2 in every musical category, and not by a small margin.