Graham Phantom Elite vs. AS Aquilar

When selecting the SME IV arm, the V was also a TA demo'd as a comparison.

On this day of comparison (many many years passed) on the TT's used and System, in the environment it was carried out, there was not enough recognised between the two TA's to suggest there was a real benefit on offer from the V.

Hence, I have purchased the IV.

Many years later, I had formed the view the Audiomods Series Five Micrometer would be a back door route to getting a improved TT over the SME IV. 

This was not realised, they are much of a muchness, they both share designs that were born from mimicking another Tonearm Brands design and produce very similar sonic signatures.

I have come to describe the sonic signature today, as a comparison to the new in use TA, as being quite constrained, they are seemingly on a leash, and restrictive in how the music is allowed a freedom.

Only when the music being presented as totally free and uninhibited can a fair comparison be made, I have no desire to return to believing a expensive Cart' is being limited to what is able to offer.

It is the experiencing the new TA, that has encouraged me to assess all TA's I come across that are of a certain value. To try and understand what is going on under the hood, that enables the TA to present music with a perception there is a perfect mechanical interface allowing for a presentation that is seemingly without constraint caused by the design. 

Another friend has produced a TA which is soon to be put through a rigorous comparison trial, against a selection of TA's, including my New TA, IV and Series Five. Others are also to be loaned for the Comparisons.

A DD TT has had a Dual TA Plinth produced.

My owned LOMC Cart' and one other of the same model, are available both with similar hours of usage.

I have followed the development of this TA, and been demo'd it in use on its way to becoming a working Prototype.

At a certain stage, it showed all that I find desirable in a TA, and has these qualities honed further now it is a Batch Produced TA, almost ready to be offered as a sale item.

I am also suggesting that some of the Batch Produced Arms are swapped during the comparisons to determine if the sonic produced is being mimicked across the Batch.

It is myself who has been instrumental in encouraging the preparations and offering suggestions for the above comparisons, the TA's designer/builder appreciates the ideas, as learning exactly what you have goes a very long way.

Once these comparisons are over, there will be a period where Different Signal Wires are used on the New TA and used in a comparison to the TA that has made the best impression of the TA's made available for the comparison line up.

I have one last wish list, I am encouraging experiencing the New TA, used as a underhung Geometry. I have a itch that I would like to be scratched on this subject. Having a first hand experience, will for me be much more beneficial than letting the math and endless anti arguments decide, if there is merit in this configuration for setting a TA up. 

Dear @wrm57  : "  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. "

More resolving?, well normally the ideal tonearm must has not any " coloration "/sound by it self and are the cartridges mated with the ones with what we like it.

Certainly that your Graham tonearms and your cartridges mated very well to even your MUSIC reproduction targets and no one but you in your room/system can know if the other tonearm could be a good mates too.

Regards and enjoy the MUSIC NOT DISTORTIONS,

R.

By all means the Aquilar. The Graham is a poor value because it spends a lot of money correcting a defective bearing system. It works but at an unacceptable price. The Aquilar (10" only) is a good arm but again not the greatest value. The Reed 2G and Schroder CB are as good or better at much more acceptable pricing giving you more to spend on cartridges.   

@mijostyn , so do you find all unipivots categorically flawed or is it something in the Graham’s particular approach to unipivots that makes you say it has a defective bearing system?

@wrm57 First off, the Graham is an extremely well made arm and a good performer. It's singular problem is it's price. There are to many arms that are as good or better at 1/3rd the price. Having said that. Both Graham and Basis by virtue of their design changes admit that the basic unipivot concept is defective.

For a cartridge to perform at it's best the tonearm that it is mounted in can only have two degrees of freedom, vertical and horizontal. Unipivot arms have a third degree and that is rotationally around the tonearms long axis. Even if the arm/cartridge combination had the perfect geometry with the pivot point exactly at record level these arms are wobbly, difficult to manage and keep in adjustment. I would wager that cartridge accidents are higher with these arms. 

For the best performance the cartridge has to be held rigidly in the proper orientation over the record. The trend in modern arms as exemplified by the SAT arms, is very stiff, two axis bearing designs. Examples are the Schroder CB, Reed 2G, Kuzma 4 Point 9, the Tri planar, the Origin Live arms and the SME's. The Aquilar also is in this class but again the price is way too high for what you get. I personally do not like VTA towers. If you are jumping back and forth between cartridges that frequently you need two arms. If you are changing VTA all the time you need a tranquilizer. Set it at 93 degrees and forget it.