the perfect tonearm

Jcarr, yes the FR 64fx does sound and look interesting. I haven't decided on a cart yet, but I'm interested in the Soundsmith Aida which is low compliance. Would it work well with low compliance carts? Is the IT245 comparable to the 64fx in terms of quality and price?

The Micro 505 is also interesting, as it has VTA on the fly I believe.

To clarify, I would buy it used, I realize that $2K for a new tonearm offers very limited choices.

Perfection on a budget? Hmmm...

The alignment jig provided with a Graham does let inexperienced users set things up easily and quickly, but it hardly approaches "perfection". I wouldn't call it "precise" either. Anyone who's aligned a Graham using a mirrored arc protractor will testify to improvements vs. the jig. If cost-effective "perfection" is the goal, the $110 Mint protractor will get you audibly closer with any (pivoting) tonearm, including a Graham.

As to sonics, friends and I A/B'd a 2.2 with a TriPlanar VII, Basis Vector I and all three Schroeders. This was on a two-arm table with Shelter, ZYX and Koetsu cartridges (same cart on each arm).

The 2.2 is among the very best for convenience, repeatability of setup and BQ, but with the above carts its sonic performance was lackluster when compared to those other arms.

***

Jcarr mentioned headshells with drop down sides. I don't believe any TriPlanar has had those since at least 1983. The Mk III did not, nor did the Mk IV, VI or any version of the current Mk VII.

***

A used TriPlanar Mk VII would be above the OP's $2K budget, but a Mk VI (if he can find one) might go for that or a bit less. It can even be upgraded to Mk VII by that friend of Ralph's when funds permit. Of course by the time a VI shows up, he may have saved enough for a used VII! :-)

A used Basis Vector should fit the budget. VTA on the fly is a challenge and VTF/azimuth adjustment interact, making fine tuning a chore. Solid, good sounding arm though.

Depending on the turntable, Chris Brady's add-on VTA adjuster is very well built, easy to use if you have access beneath the armboard and provides precise, on-the-fly height adjustment and repeatability. It could make many tonearms lacking this feature eligible for consideration under the OP's criteria.

Friendship disclaimers (so Dertonarm won't yell at me):
Dung Tri Mai
Frank Schroeder
Not Bob Graham or A. J. Conti, but only because we've never met except online. Otherwise I'd disclose them too!

Hi Lew:

>What model of Triplanar have you used that has such a headshell?

For sure mine is not the latest version. My memory is that I started using it around 2000~2001, and had it paired with the Allearts around 2002.

>I have owned mine for more than 15 years, and, altho it is not sitting in front of me at the moment, I could swear that the under-surface of the headshell is a flat plane with no "sides" to it. Moreover, to my knowledge there has been no change to the headshell design in the entire long history of the product.

I'd have to search for where my Triplanar is right now to check the construction details. You may be right that the headshell has no sides. But there was something in my particular Triplanar's headshell structure that impaired its compatibility with the Allearts - that was one of the very, very few times where I was forced to design and machine a part specifically to allow a cartridge to work properly in a tonearm.

>Anyway, the Allaerts cartridges are unusually wide-bodied.

Agreed. But the question is not only how wide, also where the width is located. On some tonearms, towards the rear of the headshell, the connection between the headshell top and rear is reinforced with triangular or curved pieces. A cartridge that is wide-bodied in this area could cause problems, while the same width farther forward may not cause any difficulties.

cheers!

Hi Mikeyc8: Ikeda's tonearms, like the FR's and IT's mostly veer in the direction of high mass, and should work far better with low-compliance cartridges than high-compliance. I'd say that the IT-245 is at least comparable the 64fx, and probably somewhat better. But you do lose the convenience of universal-type headshells. In a universal headshell tonearm, the IT-345 is a more sophisticated design than the 64fx and sounds better, but I don't think you will have much luck finding a second-hand one for sale (which is why I didn't mention it earlier).

>The Micro 505 is also interesting, as it has VTA on the fly I believe.

Note that the 505 was made in straight-tube as well as S-tube variants. I've owned the 505, and I'd say that it has a midrange-oriented, forgiving personality that is quite likeable. But in terms of frequency extension, dynamic range and resolution, it isn't as capable as the 64fx or IT-245. FWIW, FR made an on-the-fly VTA adjustment piece for the 64 and 66 family, which was called the "Arm Elevation Base".

Good luck with your search!

Dertonarm, the G2.2 and the Grado cartridges are well-known for something that is sometimes called the 'Grado dance', although it is certainly not the fault of the cartridge! It is merely that the effective mass of the system is incorrect for the compliance of that cartridge. I have seen the combination oscillate mechanically from groove modulation (and not anything else) to the point that it would skip out of the groove. The combination of the two is also unable to track complex passages.

Tri Mai of Triplanar has nothing but complements for the Phantom, and there have been quite a few threads here on the 'gon regarding its qualities. IME it is a transformation over the 2.2!

Its no secret that I show with Triplanar at shows. I am grateful because the Triplanar has consistently been one of the top tonearms ever made; the best I have heard in comparison to master tapes. One would be quite lucky to be able to pick up a used Triplanar Mk7 or Phantom for only $2K! I hope you do not fault me for making friends with people in the industry...