SME V, Tri-Planar or Phantom B-44 ?

Dear Benson139: It could help to give you some advise if you can tell us which cartridges do you own or with which one do you want to match that tonearm.

Regards and enjoy the music.
Raul.

The Phantom and the Triplanar seem to operate at a level above the SME V. The reason for that seems to be arm tube resonance- all three arms have some sort of damping system to control that, but the SME seems to be the least effective, and has a slight signature relative to the other two arms. Its construction otherwise is superb.

The Phantom and and the Triplanar are nearly neck and neck. The Phantom solves a lot of the issues that the earlier 2.0 and 2.2 struggled with- you can use a wider range of cartridges and not get in trouble. The Triplanar features on the fly adjustment of VTA on a repeatable basis, and is very consistent with adjustments- very easy to set up.

There have been many comments about the differences between these two arms elsewhere. If you read through them, I think the only rational conclusion is that the two arms are very similar in sound, and that setup likely has more to do with the differences heard than anything else.

I myself have a Triplanar, and I find that with the right cartridges, such as the Transfiguration Orpheus or ZYX Universe, that the overall tracking effect is so good, so stable, that it actually compares to tape. If you have heard a good tape setup, the image stability is what I am talking about- something that most tonearms simply cannot do.

Ralph, It is always gratifying to hear someone else echo your own thoughts. The incredible image stability of the Triplanar is why I bought one so many years ago and have never looked back. I agree, like a good master tape, when all else is copacetic.

Graham Phantom is the best

Dear Atmasphere: +++++ " I think the only rational conclusion is that the two arms are very similar in sound, and that setup likely has more to do with the differences heard than anything else. " +++++

I really would like to agree with your statement but it is almost impossible to do that, let me explain about:
first the Triplanar and Phantom are two totally different designs, one an unipivot one and the other a gimbal bearing one, both use totally different build materials and shape construction, different internal wiring, etc, etc, etc
Every single of those build/design factors ( and many others ) makes a difference and its combination in each design too.
This is not something that I just " talk " by " talk ", Guillermo and I already have two years on our self tonearm build/design and ( like you ) we have many years of different experiences through different tonearms designs ( today or vintage ) with different cartridges ( almost any. ) and we know ( for sure ) that two different tonearms have a different " signature " when you match with a cartridge ( even the same cartridge ).
I can't tell you ( for now. ) all the whole different tests ( scientific/measures and by ear. ) that we already make ( some ones are incredible like incredible its results. ) where we are learning some of the complexity interaction between a tonearm and the cartridge where " minute/insignificant " changes can/could make a difference when we can't wait/predict about, our target on our tonearm design is to be dead " neutral " ( almost no signature ) to take out of the " equation " ( the tonearm ) and leave any cartridge to show its best.

I have experiences on those three tonearms and I can't say that it sound alike: specially ( in reference ) the Triplanar/Graham like you say.

Obviously that like always the result is system dependent and ears dependent too along each one person priorities.

That's why I ask Benson139 to share with us which cartridge he own.

Regards and enjoy the music.
Raul.