Graham Phantom Supreme?

Thanks for the post, Aoliviero. My Supreme-upgraded Phantom II should be here in a week--after a four month absence. I'm really looking forward to it. I have that Triplanar, too, and thought the Phantom II was already a wee bit better.

Wrm57,

I agree I felt the Phantom II was better than the triplanar. You will be shocked by the Supreme. The new version has a very live attack without sounding threadbare or strident. The triplanar is a little fuller but is missing a lot in comparison. The Supreme can also sound full but there is now a larger gap between recordings. The triplanar tends to have a house sound where the Supreme is mores neutral.

I still like the tripalanr and plan to keep it.

Andrew

Hi Andrew,

Your description of the Tri-planar is right on, IME. That fullness is quite attractive, especially when paired with a cartridge that compliments it well. I have a Soundsmith-retipped Shelter 901 on mine now and works surprisingly well--better than my A90, actually. Ordinarily, I find the 901 a bit exaggerated at both ends but the Tri-planar fills it in nicely. It's a delightful arm and I'll keep mine, too, but I'm really looking forward to the Supreme!

Bill

I felt the Phantom II was better than the triplanar..

It is fact.
The Phantom has another huge advantage: It works on a top sonic level with nearly all cartridges, the Triplanar doesn't. You see it pretty often in pics with Koetsu (mismatch, not good), Lyra Titan (disaster), super with Zyx or any other cartridges which move no energy into the Arm...Bob Graham simply has a better knowledge about energy transfer, and what is important generally for a good Arm Design.
The Triplanar had its good time against Graham 2.0 series but when the Phantom became available it wasn't in the same class and the gap got wider...

comparison Phantom / Triplanar VII

You're preaching to the choir, although I do think the newest Tri-planar bests the Graham 2.2 I owned for years before the Phantom II.