Graham Phantom vs Triplaner

OK, here is my 2 cents on this issue. I have a TW Raven Acustic AC Turntable on order. I made a trip to Jeff Catalano's Hi-Water Sound in NYC to hear my purchase and to listen to 3 arm/cartridge combinations. You can never seperate what you are hearing of course so trying to say that one arm is better than another is impossible. The arm/cartridge combos I heard were:

1. Phaentom/Myabi
2. Tri-Planar/Zyx 4D
3. Dynavector Arm/ Dynavector Mono Cart.

I can't tell you which individual cartridge or arm I liked best. But, in terms of overall sound I liked the Dynavector/Dynavector Mono the best. Until you have heard mono records reproduced properly with a mono cartridge you simply don't know what you are missing. After that, it was a toss up between the other two arm/cartidge pairings. The Myabi/Phaentom had beautiful transparency and focus but tended to shrink the soundstage left to right. The Triplanar/Zyx was more robust with somewhat better soundstaging but less transparent. In terms of user friendly issues, the Dynavector was probably the easiest of the 3 to set up and maintain while the Triplanar came in second, and the Phaentom third. I'm glad I'm getting a turntable that can accomodate more than one arm after hearing this demonstration.

Are you still looking for a new tonearm to replace the SME V??

Hey Shane - yes I still plan to replace the SME V. I almost pulled the trigger on that last fall, but have been dawdling.

You may recall I had a longish thread with many helpful responses on this exact topic (G vs T), but the Audiogon gods decided to toast it - or I can't find it. It went through a lot of the technical/ergonomic issues only hinted at here. The conclusion I drew from that was the Phantom had a higher build quality (almost equal to SME) and the Triplanar was a bit more fiddly on its adjustments, cueing, etc. I believe several of the latter have been addressed.

During the time that thread was running I heard offline from some folks whose ears and experience I trust. The word I got there was likewise that the Graham has the edge in construction quality and being more dynamic and up front, it might be able to rock n roll a bit more though could be a bit brash, whereas the Wheaton is a touch sweeter ("a bit colored, but nicely so...") and perhaps better suited for classical music. I received a comment that the Graham is balanced well in terms of trade-offs with "less than linear" carts such as koetsu and benz.

From the same sources I likewise heard good words about the Basis Vector - v. quiet in the groove, neutral, and super-dynamic. Perhaps some of its positives being masked on cantilevered armboards or unsuspended tables.

At the end of the day, without in system listening, I've come to believe every arm has its positives and some trade-offs and some of these are tied to the table its on and the cartridge in use. Not an earth shaking conclusion, but one that points to what Raul was suggesting in terms of system matching.

All three (Vector, Phantom, TriPlanar) are tempting. If I had to make a choice today without the benefit of a trial with my Orpheus on my deck in my room, etc., I'd probably roll the dice in favor of the latest Triplanar if for no other reason than its a known quantity, highly adjustable, and there are several people who can lend an assist with advice.

No easy choice - best of luck.

Tim

Dear Downunder: +++++" The VPI solution of replacable arm wands seems a lot cleaner and quicker as you only have to set up the arm once and then change the VTA each time a new arm is added to the table. " +++++

+++++ "Why is an Ikeda or any tonearm with removable headshell any better than a VPI, Graham, triplaner etc arm?? " +++++

It is obvious that you don't understand very well what I posted.
There is no single advantage ( speaking to achieve the best cartridge quality performance. ) on VPI tonearm when you change the arm wand because all those arm wands are build with the same material, are build in the same precise shape and with the same arm wand weight.
In the other hand what happen with all and any of the universal removable headshell tonearms?, that you can choose to mount and test the cartridge ( trying to achieve the best cartridge quality performance. ) in different headshells that are made each one of: different build materials ( aluminum, magnesium, wood, ceramic, etc, etc. ), different shape construction and different headshell weight, all these different universal headshells have a different frequency resonance and different resonance " path " and when you mate it with the cartridge that cartridge performs different with different headshells.
This fact give you the huge opportunity to obtain the best for your cartridges that you can't do it through non removable headshell tonearms.

Btw, if you have time please read this link about:
http://forum.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/fr.pl?eanlg&1200430667&read&3&4&

You can find different hedashells through Ebay, Audio Cubes, LP gear, Agon, etc, etc.

Audio technica tonearm: the AT-1503II and Ortofon has four new tonearm models all with universal removable headshell and with three different headshells.
Dear Thomasheisig, thank you for the tip about new Kusma removable headshell I will be alert about.

Regards and enjoy the music.
Raul.

Back on topic(for me),and hopefully with some "opinions" relating to a little "intuitive reasoning".....Also I want to warn you,I am home sick,with not much to do,so this is going to be a "long" post........I am NOT a mega "technical" school person,but am very much in the "practicality" school.Hands on,is a good way to garnish an educated "opinion"!!Admittedly there is always much to learn.
From some(not all) questions asked,from the originator's post..."more organic midrange/greater treble detail/plays music better"....here are some of my personal thoughts,which are arrived at from my own agenda,and way of looking at "what gives" in a product's design,and ultimate performance.
Firstly,make sure the arm fits your table of choice!!!(I once made this mistake).

Secondlyly(and most easily found out),make sure the cartridge of choice(whether it is an existing possession,or one you "want to get")mates well with the arm/s you are looking at.This info is usually found on website,or one can call the mfgr.Most current arms work well with alot of new cartridges,but some cartridges "need" the best mating for that... "absolute audiogon obsessive hobbyist approval" (that was in jest). Call it the Sudafed talking -:)

Some really fine cartridges,like the superb(I owned two)Koetsu Stone body designs work best with heavier arms!You are NOT going to "max out" a heavy Koetsu,or some others on an arm like a Graham 2.2.It may "work",but not at it's peak,and if you have a great cartridge(which is really what we "want" to "try" to hear,that is....the actual cartridge personality,"itself",with ALL OTHER EQUIPMENT just getting out of the way........this is how I view it)you won't get the absolute maximum performance from it!OK fidelity...but not the "best"!That is why some arms,like the Fidelity Research still are desired,by many for Koetsus.They work best with heavier cartridges.I remember loving my old MDC-800,here.Nobody posting here wants anything less than ideal performance,especially when we consider just how expensive some stuff can be!

Considering that the "best" arms are very well designed(especially those having been around for a while)lets give the benefit of the doubt, on the subjest of correct geometry to these designer works.Set up an arm correctly,and you are OK, on this subjest.Unless you ascribe to the school of parallel tangency(which is a darn good arguement)the vast majority of the "now" pivoting arms are fine....IMO!

Now,here is where I look CLOSELY at "what makes the most sense to me"(other than experience,which should be invaluable,and NOT overlooked....but sometimes you have to rely on a dealer to aid you with the decision,and hope he knows what is really the better choice,for you).........
.....Assuming all other parameters are met,which should be NO problem really,I like to look HARD at the subject of what particular arm design characteristics offer the best,and "most logical" means of negating/negotiating,or eliminating the "resonant characteristic" which comes with the act of playing a record!!Assuming you have a quiet table!IOW,where are those areas,in a particular design, most susceptible to "resonance"?What arm designs address this the best?
To my way of thinking(only my opinion)and from the experience of hearing a "superb" air bearing/linear arm,for so many years,playing so many familiar lp's,it is in the "bearing area" where the MAGIC is "most likely" found!....Assuming all else previously mentioned is taken care of(which IS the easy part)!
Of course we are talking about bearing friction!!! WE DON'T WANT ANY!!!!

So,based on simple logic....the design that seems to deal with this issue the "best" should yield the "best" sound...as in "most organic"!...Provided the other "not too hard to meet" standards are met.....When I say not too hard to meet,I mean that many competing designs have these issues fairly well coverd(well damped arm tubes,good cabling,good geometry,good material choices,which are put together carefully etc).

A great linear air bearing arm,like the current Kuzma should have this covered,though I have not heard one.I'd take one in an instant though!!
I DID read that Kuzma is about to release a pivoting arm,that uses "magnetics" in the bearing/antiskate area(this is just from memory,of what I read,last week).Very interesting!!

I really think my time listening to the Air Tangent was SO FABULOUS(and understatement)due to the "no bearing noise" issue,aside from the fact that all other areas were very well addressed(the pump had high pressure,and much more-so than the standard unit,and I know what I,and others heard,so don't even go there).
From what I have been able to digest...one of the gorgeous Schroder arms' biggest strength seems to come from the unique approach to the "almost non existant bearing".A REALLY GOOD THING!I have always loved the "thought"(since I did not think I had the patience to wait for it's back order,or extra cash needed for the model I wanted)of this arm,and have NO doubt as to how fabulous it must allow an lp to "sound".Even though it was reviewed in Hi-Fi Plus,and was not given the kind of enthusiastic review I had expected( I know,from good sources that "it" was not really maximized in "that" review,and I will be beaten up if some friends of mine read this,but "tough").The Schroder is too unique,and has been around too long,with refinements to NOT be fabulous,IMO!Way too much good word of mouth!Once again,I'd take one in a minute.

BTW....don't take my lomg winded posts too seriously!!!I don't want the same guilt that I had a long time ago!!

So,here is where the "rubber meets the road" for ME,and the "why" of my personal choice of a Graham Phantom as compared to the "gimballed ball-race bearing" types,like the Triplanar(an arm I am sure is everything "good" stated about it).....BUT the Graham Phantom has the "unique" feature of only ONE ULTRA QUIET/STABILIZED "to the max" contact point as it's bearing(so do the other unipivots,almost,but there is more)....The Phantom,with it's massive, almost completely non resonant material assembly(not to mention the absolute BEST/EASIEST means to "dial in all meaningful cartridge parameters")has that friggin' "Magna-glide" feature,which TOTALLY stabilizes,and damps the single point bearing(one reason why so little bearing fluid is needed,with some cartridges)!We are talking "REALLY,REALLY LOW FRICTION"!!This,SURELY is a BIG reason for it's non existant "resonant signature"(the MAJOR strength of the greatest arms,and those previously mentioned)!

I spent a year in denial about buying one,as my friend has the Phantom,which I re-set up,at his request....yet it was SO "audibly obvious",as to it's complete sonic superiority,AND uniqueness in playing "believeable" music,along with a staggering build quality/finish/attention to detail.Having been SO happy(and completely secure)with my Graham 2.2,once I had heard the "amazing" potential of the Transfiguration Orpheus,I could hold out no longer!!"IT"(the Orpheus) had to be maximized,to tha absolute MAX!With as little a "resonant signature" as could be had!In my own set-up,and with regards to what I could afford financially.The Phantom just made the most sense to me,with regards to least resonant signature,from "that" area most likely to have it....the "BEARING"!!Not to mention it's actual performance in my friend's rig,which was amazing(he has an Orpheus too,so it was not a big stretch,for me).

I know,as usual,I am getting long winded(I'm still home sick....how much TV can I actually watch?),but remember I had stated that ..."what makes the most sense"...(provided we understand some major attributes of the best sound attributes of the "best" arm designs)is how I decide on the BEST arm,for me!I don't think it is too big a stretch,but I have no question there will be doubters -:) Fine!
It seems "just logical" that, though the best "gimbal/ball race" arm designs,like the SME's and Tri Planars are wonderful(of that I have NO doubt)....if your cartridge/table parameters fall into the acceptable area of arms like the finest Air-linear,Schroder magnetic,Graham Phantom-stabilized and damped unipivot designs,then the "BEST" most life like music "should happen",in your listening space,with these designs!

Makes the MOST sense to me.

Best.

From Fjn04:
What is the max grams ideal for the Vector. FWIW, I use a Jade
and Vector3 and already have the heavier Vector counterweight.

I have had cartridge/headshell weight type combinations of up to 20 grams in the Vector Model 4 with great results. IMO, the Basis Vector is a very stable arm and an excellent tracker.

Dre