ZYX Universe - Unipivot or Dual Gimbal arm

"These are not characteristics that I would ascribe to the Graham 2.2. Was your arm/cartridge properly set up?"

It was set up as well as we know how of course.

Last December we spent three days fine-tuning the blue goop, with the help of SirSpeedy's excellent advice. Four listeners confirmed the optimal level for each cartridge.

We adjusted azimuth by visually eyeballing each stylus to make sure it was vertical. Cello and I are co-owners of a Wally Analog Shop, which allows electronic measurement of azimuth, but IME I get nearly as close visually as I can with the Wally.

We roughed in VTF using a .01g digital scale and VTA by starting the cartridge level (which ZYX's prefer). We fine-tuned from there by listening. My partner Paul took the lead there, since he's more sensitive to VTA/SRA than anyone else we know.

We followed the same procedures with every other arm. IOW, we took as much care setting up the Graham as we took with the Schroeders or the TriPlanar. Yet the sonic characteristics of Cello's Graham have been evident on all four occasions that I've visited.

Perhaps there's something about setting up a 2.2 that neither Cello, Chris Brady, Frank Schroeder nor I understand. But none of us has been able to get it to perform at the level of even a Schroeder Model Two, never mind any of the higher priced competitors.

CB recently sent Cello and me a new drive belt. It's an experimental one that provides better platter-motor coupling than the old belt and thus superior resistance to stylus drag.

On my 320/TriPlanar/UNIverse the new belt is a 100% success. I had to increase VTF slightly to allow the stylus to track the more forcefully driven grooves. I had to adjust VTA slightly to compensate for the slightly higher downforce. Once I learned those adjustments the increase in dynamics and bass response was unalloyed by any downside.

On Cello's 340/Graham 2.2/UNIverse the new belt has resulted in some excessive brightness that he's been unable to tune away. Perhaps he hasn't spent enough time fine tuning VTF and VTA. Perhaps he needs another drop of blue goop. Or perhaps the Graham just can't handle the extra energy.

Doug
An alternative explanation is that the 2.2 doesn't mate well with any of the ZYXs due to a cart/arm resonance mismatch(?), or that the ZYXs are too hot on top and that they match the Schroeder/Triplanar better.

When I heard the ZYX at Tom's room at RMAF, my first impression was that it was not very forgiving if not setup correctly, or of not very complimentary equipment.

Doug,thanks for the insight on your "2.2 vs the world" experiences.It tells me a heck of alot more about the choices made by the owner of such an expensive table/arm/cartridge,and the people involved in it's set up(it makes NO difference who they were),as opposed to the arm's real potential,knowing it as I do.Something you clearly have not heard,or the other hobbyists who were present at the listening session (a session I've been hearing about for a year,already).I do wish you and Larry(BTW-what happened to you?--a return call would have been polite)would give that session a break!It's tiresome,and seems like a marketing effort,though I know it is not conscious.BTW--I assume based on your observations,the 2.2 must be overrated,regardless of world renown.Alot of well known and well versed(not as much as you,obviously)hobbyists/industry types must be sort of dumb.Well at least not as smart as you,based on your plethora of insights on numerous threads,which are ALL absolutely RIGHT,of course.

Firstly there are maybe three reasons for your "eyebrow raising" comments.Asside from probably liking the 2.2 very little(enough with the "breaks in cable run",which is a laugh,in reality,though technically you can have that one).#1-There was a BIG TIME mismatch,somewhere,like table arm,for all I know.Or more likely arm/cart.(which would be a shame,as I just influenced a friend to by an AIRY for his Graham 2.0).

#2-a defect,in the 2.2(unlikely,but possible),or another component.

Lastly,and I'm really beginning to feel this IS credible,based on some absolutely rediculous comments,covering a wide variety of cartridges, and comments like MURKYNESS(PLEEEEASE!)INEPTITUDE on the part of whichever set-up person was on hand.Let me say it again,in case you may have missed it---Overwhelming ineptitude!!I will admit that possibly nobody tried that hard,though that's probably a stretch,on my part.It seems that there were at least you and Larry,as well as some others mentioned(you mentioned other names,and my response is the same).SORRY for this seeming harsh,I do like both of you,yet if I buy someting,like a 2.2,which does happen to be very tricky to properly voice,I make it my business to LEARN it's secrets.BTW- I intend to try my hand at a Schroeder REF in the not too distant future,as I simply "MUST" get my hands on it,sort of like a hidden signal,forcing me to do so.So this response,by me,is not to defend something I own,for the sake of ego.But you are SO WRONG by the general flavor of your grandiouse critical comments of the 2.2 that it is laughable to me,and I have come to the conclusion that whomever set-up the arm WAS CLUELESS!!Maybe the Graham works best in Jersey,and Brooklyn systems?Also,sorry to mention that when one applies the "GLOP",dampening fluid,it affects downforce as well as vta.The three are directly associated with oneanother.Also,from what I DO know about the tracking force used in Larry's set-up,being high,I am more than suspicious of this,alone.Even HP has recommended increasing downforce on the superb XV-1s,and sorry to say,it is a mistake, to go over a manufacturers recommendation,usually.My friend has gone to Sea Cliff,and tells me the part of "Porgy and Bess" where there is a dice rolling,to him,and HP,(on the famous Sea Cliff system)sounded like Boulders down a canyon.In his set-up(my pal's) it sounds like dice on a floor.He refuse to go back to Sea Cliff,even with the vaulted Emitter in system,unless the "dice" problem is solved.

Doug,I was very surprised by the sort of nasty way some have responded to Raul,for making comments,wrong or right.It must be hard to use a differing language to relate thoughts,and I don't think any of us would do better in Raul's native language.At least he tries to be helpful.Anyone reading him for any time should realise he is well intentioned,and may make seemingly absurd comments,based on overentusiasm,only.I get the impression that Raul SO loves the hobby,and relating to other hobbyists he gets too entusiastic.So what!To be called something like a "knowledgeable incompetent" (not exact words,but close)is a surprising insult,and should require an appology(BTW-I know you,Doug,did not make these comments).

Basically,and though it will be taken in an unfavorable light my guess is that,based upon your comments of such unfavorable performance,by the 2.2,in Larry's system,or any other,for that matter,with the UNIVERSE(don't repeat,please,that you've heard so many other cartridges with it,too,I get the picture),and based on my own observations(as well as friends),in three local systems,all using a 2.2 with differing cartridges(My old Wheaton is still in a friend's set-up,and is heard regularly.I don't miss it!),I have to believe that Raul,though surprisingly candid,was DEAD RIGHT."Sell the Universe"!

Oh yeah,hasen't the room,in question,been mentioned as being problematic,and excessively bright?That cannot be too good.Ya think?

Sirspeedy,

I'm close to not posting any longer toward any of these types of threads becuase it just takes too much out of me. As one that is guilty of making nasty remarks to Raul I take offense to him getting a pass for exactly the same behavior. Whenever I confront him it is not because he has a different opinion on any particular product. I have no problem with that at all. What I take gross exception to is the fact that a lot of folks that aren't all that knowledgeable may take his words as gospel. His comments need to be challenged to provide balance to the readers. He is very quick to condemn any methodology used by those that disagree with him and asks questions, every one of which is meant to undermine the posters credibility. Whenever a question is asked of him about his methods he refuses to answer. If he insults a person wrongly (usually by taking a comment made by person A and attributing to person B) and is called on it he is too stubborn to simply say he made an error and will not back down. If you read his posts and his replys to those that disagree with him you will see that there is very little language barrier going on. Certainly he is crafty but stumbling with English? Hardly. Why would you give him a pass for a blatant insult? In your own case you can be pretty darn brutal but you follow up with a humorous (to me) explanation of just how passionate you are. You do not offend me in the least. Some very valid points are brought up in these threads questioning if a controvertial item was given a fair chance. The cartridge screw torque on the Graham is a good example. I love those types of insights because it furthers all of our knowledge. I've been accused of being a ZYX fan club member and saying that the ZYX line is the "Best". I've never come close to being a club member and further I wouldn't belong to a club that would have me as a member. While I've been guilty of typing the word best it's part of a statement that may read up there with the best, one of the best or some such. I've always disclosed that I don't know it all nor have I heard them all. I love tubes but in Raul's world he calls them tone controls as if transitors are just so totally neutral. He knows it's insulting because he's been told it is and will not stop using that phrase just for the sake of peace. His blanket statements about step up transformers degrading the signal are not based in fact, science or even listening. Such blanket statements are dangerous as viable options are cast aside unfairly. I don't own a Schroder, Teres, Triplanar or a UNIverse. I have no horse in this race except a desire to share what I heard and I trust my ears, not others, more than anyone else I know. I for one stopped referring to the cartridge/arm shootout that rubs you the wrong way a long time ago. No matter how hard we tried to be scientific with our comparrisons it didn't measure up to Raul's standards. But, consider that a negative comment about a ZYX at RMAF carries maximum weight in Raul's world. I know each of these so called club members pretty well and they are just nice people without any agenda. All any of have tried to do is share our experiences. If we're guilty of anything then it is enthusiasm for finding products that really have outstanding qualities for the price. I've owned a Yatra II and now have an Airy 3. They aren't in the same class as a UNIverse but they do enjoy a lot of the positive atrributes described of the UNIverse. Numerous folks with less money to spend on a cartridge than those in the thread have contacted me about the lesser ZYX products. What I've written them in private must have tipped them in favor or a ZYX. Each one has expressed how happy they are and thanked me for what I told them about my experience with the sound. I've been told that my observations were spot on and the positives I described were exactly what they were looking for. Again, I have enjoyed your banter with the "club members" and only take issue with your defense of Raul when he is so obviously trying to be rude.