Unipivots Hadcocks Vs Grahams


I have settled on a unipivot arm as a replacement option for the tonearm on my Technics SL1210 direct drive turntable. I have an Ortofon M2 Black cartridge.
I've narrowed the field to either a Hadcock (probably the shorter one) or a Graham 1.5 (or higher) unipivot.
Both tonearms can be fitted to a Technics... in theory! Your thoughts please. Which one? Can they be fitted successfully to the Technics patient?
dsa
Dear Dsa: Like I told you : maybe you are right.

Regards and enjoy the music.
Raul.
I've been using a Hadcock 228 for many years. Despite its light weight it has matched well with every cartridge I've put on it irrespective of weight, compliance, MM or MC; however, in principle it should match the Ortofon perfectly. The only problem is setup. Unless Hadcock has changed its design, set screws hold everything in place requiring a lot of patience whereas I believe the Graham allows you to dial in many of the adjustments but perhaps at a performance cost.
Hello everyone: Great responses- thanks!
RE:0luuke1- That's interesting about the Grado "failing". Is the cantilever on the way out? Stylus worn? Regarding the Ortofon Black- perhaps it seems a little bright in comparison to the "failing" Grado. And, as you said, it will take time to settle in. Keep us posted on its performance. I'm sure there are others looking for a MM that has exceptional bang for the buck- I know I am and I'm looking forward to trying the 2M when it arrives!

RE: Raul- And it's with advise from experienced guys like you that we can make better better decisions when setting up a rig- thanks again.

RE:Br_ian- Good point. Although the Hadcock is a simpler design, it does have the downside of being a fiddle to set up. The Graham has that covered (like the 80's vintage arm on the Technics- that arm is SO easy to set-up). Interesting comments regarding the matching of cartridges- it looks like the Hadcock can be happy with most cartridges that are set into it's chrome wand.

So, anyone out there with an early Graham (1.5, 2.0, 2.2) who like to throw their hat into the ring and comment the arm's performance? I read in an old Stereophile review that the 1.5 is bass-shy (it doesn't resolve the bass- the lower octaves are free from colouration or so it seems??) Comments welcomed!
I was having problems with bass response and overall dynamic range seemed very compressed. I fiddled with set up AND rolled tubes. AJ at Basis suggested to change the cart. He was right.

The Grado was at the end of it's lifespan. The Ortofon is a much different sound - one which I think will compliment the MX110/MC275 as well as the resolution of the Basis Vector.

We'll see.
I am using a Graham 1.5tc that was upgraded to a 2.2 (but still with the SME base). I'm running it on my Gyro SE, which I have heard in my system with a Michell Tecnoarm before (which is a highly modified variant of the Rega RB-250).

In my opinion, it's a fabulous arm. Definitely not bass-shy, it is very consistent from top to bottom. The top end is absolutely fantastic, just so smooth, natural and musical. The arm doesn't add warmth though, so if your system is lean and you're hoping to add some extra warmth, you'll need to do it with the cartridge. It is a marked improvement over the Tecnoarm and is a breeze to set up and adjust.

Everything I've read about the Hadcock indicates that it's pretty tough to deal with, which is why I never seriously considered it for my table. I guess it all depends how comfortable you are dealing with a more tricky arm - but I've never heard (or even seen) a Hadcock.

One thing with the Graham - look for something that comes with their fantastic cartridge-mounting tool. It makes it a breeze to change cartridges and have them set up perfectly in a few minutes. Also, all models can be ordered with an SME base if you prefer, so even a new Phantom can be ordered (but that's not a cheap arm!!!). On the used market, not many 2.0's or later will be found with an SME mount, since it was a custom-order option from that model on.