Graham Phantom vs Triplaner

Dan, I agree, the P2 sould be better if it had a continuous run. I guess every design is a sum of strengths and weaknesses.

Syntax and i have tried each tonearm in the same system and pretty much share similar opinions of the sonic differences.

My goal was to offer some descriptions of the two by actual side by side comparisons in my system as opposed to speculation, extrapolation or second-hand opinions.

Maybe it is better to speculate, etc since it fosters debates with no clear winner or loser....

Oh well, in the end if you get a chance give both a listen and see what you like. You may even disagree with our read on these two.

Have fun!!

Andrew

Aoliviero and Syntax: Have you tried either of the Continuum arms?

Jfrech, it is not just TP owners. I also own a Basis Vector. I do appreciate that part of the reason for all of those connectors is to provide flexibility. However, what if (for people like me) the owner is going to be using the same cartridge on the same table for many years? That person is not going to be going through iterations with cartridges and other things. Why not offer a more permanent, more simplified solution?

There is absolutely no doubt in my mind that eliminating connectors would sound even better.

This is not a dig a Bob Graham. Bob is truly gifted and a really nice fellow who did me solid in the past so I have no interest in trying to put down him or his work. At the same time, I have absolutely no interest here in selling anything to anyone for personal or financial gain.

Dropping the tonearm cable connection down through the plinth or armboard also causes me trouble, but that is probably to the point of being a legacy issue now.

As to tweaking the TP. I think Doug Deacon has pretty much covered most everything in that great thread and others. There is definitely improvement over the stock form to be had by way of some resonance elimination. Remove the damping trough altogether, some remove the entire AS mechanism, etc.

!!!!!!! WARNING !!!!!!!!!!
I did not buy my TP at retail, it was a refurbished arm that I got a great deal on. You probably don't want to go down the path I have taken. Removing the arm rest has questionable benefit. I do not encourage doing this, and you had better find a way to provide this feature if you do remove it. It is probably much wiser to wedge something under the stock arm rest, or have someone hold it while you listen to determine if you can or cannot detect any improvement.

Jimjoyce25,

I have not tried the Continuum. Halcro has some experience with these.

I would like to try some other arms in the future with some other carts for experiment sake. But lately have been stingy with extra cash!

One thing i wonder about the graham is how much the sheer total mass of the arm contributes to the sound. Does a higher mass create some dampening or mechanical grounding effect?

I wonder if any of you have given any more thought to the influence of the total weight of the tonearm with respect to dampening. I wonder how much of the dampening occurs in the headshell and arm tube versus the rest of the arm assembly.

I suppose that if the armtube is properly damped, then the rest of the arm mass or dampening proerties is not as critical. However, I would think that if the arm tube is not effectively damped then the mass and material of the remaining assembly plays a greater role.

I have heard the Fidelity Research/Ikeda arms (effective mass aside) are considered as effective as they are due to the sheer mass of the arm.

Also, I have heard from the Triplanar tips that removing the damping trough has sonic benefits. If the damping trough is so far away from the headshell and if the arm tube is effectively damped, why would this make a sonic difference?

Any thoughts?