Graham Phantom Elite vs. AS Aquilar


Who has spent time with either--or preferably both--of these two 10-inch arms? They check in around the same price-point and offer many similar features. I'd greatly appreciate feedback on sonics and overall user impressions.

I've been running Grahams for years, so I'm very familiar with their ergonomics. How does the Aquilar stack up? On paper it looks similar in adjustability, but what about in actual use? I'd love to hear from folks with experience.

Thanks in advance.

 

wrm57

I hear what you’re saying, and all else being equal, an unbroken run from clips to jacks might well be better. It is theoretically, at least. But all else is seldom equal. And the clean run alone does not make the difference. Case in point: for years I owned a Triplanar MkVII uii. It was wired as you prefer, and I could compare it to the Phantom Supreme on the same same ’table--actually the same two ’tables--over the course of several years. I found the Phantom Supreme to be better--more resolving, more energetic, less colored--so I sold the Triplanar and bought a second Graham, a Phantom III.

Obviously, I’m a fan of Grahams (had a 2.2 before the Phantoms, stretching back nearly two decades). My ears, blah, blah, but you can see my point: the wiring scheme did not make the Tri superior.

A lot of people hold the unbroken run as gospel because, well, it makes sense and gets purist points. But an audible difference? Thom Mackris of Galibier Design says on his site that he has compared a Kuzma 4Point with DIN to one with captive cable and could not discern a meaningful difference in sound. Not saying that’s the last word, but it’s from someone who did the semi-controlled experiment as a service to his customers, and who is just as happy to sell a 4Point wired either way.

This is not to say a top OL arm would not be better. I’ve looked into them a bit and the 9.5-in Agile, around the same price as the Elite and Aquilar, has caught my eye. It offers repeatable VTA and easy azimuth changes, which are necessary for me. I bet it sounds wonderful. I do have a nattering worry that my 25mm armboards are too thick. Specs say 27mm max, so it *should* work, but I’d hate to buy an arm I couldn’t mount on its intended deck. Thinking about it, though.

Did not say continuous unbroken wire is enough to make every arm always better. Said nothing about Gospel. Merely said all those extra connections eliminate Graham for me. FWIW I’ve never even considered triplanars. Or Kuzma. I would say anyone unable to hear degradation from adding connections, either their ears or system (or integrity) is suspect. Sorry. Appeals to authority, sounds like "Gospel" to me. Only one of those in all history, and it weren’t Thom Makris.

Anyway, Grahams add a lot more connections than just one DIN. From cartridge clips they add 1) arm wand terminals, 2) tone arm base terminals, 3) internal to DIN, 4) DIN to interconnect. Each of these also has wire soldered or crimped to the connector. Altogether that’s EIGHT extra connections. This is a LOT of eddy currents and interfaces. Not Gospel, just physics and basic electronics.

Not to mention, all those "aerospace" connectors adds unnecessary cost and complexity- that COULD have gone into developing better vibration and harmonics management. But didn't. Which - again- is nice if you have a lot of carts and enjoy changing arm wands. 

OL Agile, haven’t heard, but the OL I have heard outperformed Graham by such a wide margin it is hard to believe. Not a little better here and there, more like on another level everywhere. Bear in mind they are hard to compare, since OL is a known fixed commodity while the Graham is heavily influenced by your choice of phono lead. Apples to apples will include the cost of the IC with the cost of the Graham. This tends to favor OL. Mark Baker can answer any fitment questions. He is like Keith Herron- under spoken, over delivers.

 

 

OK, fine, whatever, man. Your opinions are noted. I have no interest in arguing with you.

 

I guess my OP was unclear. I'd like to hear from forum members who have experience with the Phantom Elite, preferable the 10-in version, and/or the Acoustical Systems Aquilar. I'd like to know how they compare--in practice. I'm not so interested in random tonearm preferences. Thanks.

I've been demo'd a TT with OL TA's used in its resident system and used in other systems as well.

My last demo' was the Illustrious>Sumiko Pearwood.

This is no long er the in use TA by this owner, as they have purchased a OL 12" Conqueror.

This is their third tonearm now, with moving on from two of the lower models.

I am yet to encounter the Conqueror in use. 

I certainly gained the impression the Illustrious > Pearwood , was a improved presentation as a supersede TA to the Encounter >Pearwood. 

The OL TA your expressing an interest in is carrying and additional £14K as a purchase.

This an area of purchasing that home demo's are the safest way to learn what is on offer for such a substantial sum.

The Tonearm I have chose that Superseded my SME IV was quite a bit less to purchase than a IV, so I was fortunate to have to up the pricing ladder to find the experience I was thoroughly impressed with.

A longer investigation might present a outcome that has shared similarities for yourself.