It's been awhile since I last checked into these pages, and even longer since I wrote anything. I see the discussions still fly fast and furious, and sometimes, with some good ol' tongue in cheeck (better than foot in mouth, I say)...
I only respond briefly here because of the various questions about the "Graham" sound in this discussion. With the 2.x arms, all build on the same basic frame, there was, indeed, a similarity to the various models, albiet with improvements along the way as we went for more and more bass extension, weight, midrange solidity, etc.
But with the introduction of the Phantom, I think it's correct to say the deck has been completely reshuffled (for the better) and I hope you will have a chance to hear what we've managed to imrove over our earlier efforts.
Regards to all, and enjoy your analogue in these difficult days when lasting pleasure may seem elusive....
- Bob Graham
I only respond briefly here because of the various questions about the "Graham" sound in this discussion. With the 2.x arms, all build on the same basic frame, there was, indeed, a similarity to the various models, albiet with improvements along the way as we went for more and more bass extension, weight, midrange solidity, etc.
But with the introduction of the Phantom, I think it's correct to say the deck has been completely reshuffled (for the better) and I hope you will have a chance to hear what we've managed to imrove over our earlier efforts.
Regards to all, and enjoy your analogue in these difficult days when lasting pleasure may seem elusive....
- Bob Graham