SME V, Tri-Planar or Phantom B-44


To be mounted on a Raven AC (only one arm) what is your system or choice. No way will I get a chance to listen to any of these where I live (France). So would like any of you here to feed opinions.

My system is :

Raven AC
Nagra VPS
Nagra PL-L
Nat Audio SE1 (SET 211 tube)
Wilson Audio WP 5.1

I would be using a Lyra Argo i

Thanks
Tim
timnaim
Tim,

I own the Raven AC - 1 motor table. I have heard the Tri-Planar, Phantom, and Dynavector arms mounted on the TW - AC 3 motor version at Hi-Water Sound in NYC, all in one listening session. All had different cartridges mounted. There is no telling how much my impression was influenced by arm/cartridge set-up. Jeff Catalano and I did not adjust VTA settings for different records. All arm/cart combos worked beautifully. The Dynavector was stunning using a Dynavector 1 Mono cart. playing mono records. A true mono presentation which I have never heard before. The Phantom/Myabi was very transparent but perhaps a bit uninvolving with a somewhat distant front/back soundtage and a somewhat narrow left/right field. The Tri-Planar/Zyx was excellent, more dynamic than the Phantom with a wider L/R presentation and a somewhat flatter F/B soundstage and a bit less transparnet than the Phantom. All were more than acceptable. I chose the Tr-Planar and I am currently using my old Benz-Micro Ruby-2 Cart. I am very happy with the choice which I made partly on sound demo and partly on ease of set-up and easily calibrated VTA settings which you can make on the fly. I find this feature paramount for optimum vinyl playback. The Dynavector, while in mono mode for this demo, was impressive. Erector Set ugly to be sure, but I was impressed by the performance. I would not discount this arm in making your selection. Jeff C. said it is probably the easiest of the three to set up and maintain. Again, I cannot account for impressions made by the cartridges used and cartridge mountings. These were impressions based upon 2.5 hours of listening to a variety of recordings, none of audiophile quality purposely for real world listening. Whichever you chose, don't forget that you will not be making a comparison in your home unless you outfit the Raven for multiple arms. Best of luck and enjoy this marvelous table!
Sure the set-up skills of the hobbyist or arm cartridge mating is obviously important,but the actual design of the arm to be used is still paramount....They're not all equal!

Also,I still haven't heard from a hobbyist who previously owned a Walker or Rockport or Forsell or a Kuzma Airline,and felt a pivot was superior...

You can talk until blue in the face,but the fact is that there is less friction in "those" arms' bearings!...

One good reason why they sound SO good!!
BTW,sorry as I should have added this all on my previous post,but the Phantom is very fussy(in a good way)regarding it's fluid damping in the bearing.This can be very helpful in voicing the arm,once one gets familiar with it.

It is nowhere as critical as the 2.2,but this parameter is most likely a viable reason for those hearing it,and being unimpressed.The Phantom is "fabulous",by any standard and has just gone through a new update(actually a series of improvements.

I may be awaiting my new arm,but I have close friends who own it,and it "IS" special!

Best.
OOPS!!...I kinda screwed up!...My comment made about the "linear" arm,and impression of it's sound,should have been placed on another thread!!

Can anyone buy the excuse of two glasses of nice Shiraz,being the culprit?
The SME, the Graham and the Triplanar all have some sort of arm tube damping (we're not talking about the damping trough BTW). The problem is the the Graham and Triplanar's methods, as far as I can tell, are a lot more effective- adding the arm wrap to them really didn't make much of a difference (other than mass). With the SME it was mandatory.

Sirspeedy, enjoy the Shiraz :)