My Phantom X has been with me for awhile. I await the arrival of my HR-X with armboard. |
Gmorris,Wow,you have a really great memory.I'm happy for you,in that you love the Phantom(actually,what's not to love?).I saw it at HE-2005,and it seems to be a fine product.Good luck!!Actually,my latest little project is tube rolling my phono section.With the price of some NOS tubes,you can almost buy a new Phantom.How sad is that??? |
Sirspeedy:
I finally took the plunge and purchased the Phantom. The Phantom works well with my 8 gram Helikon (I recall you have a 7 gram cartridge and had some compatibility concerns).
The Phantom was installed over the weekend. It has less than 10 hours of run-in time. However, preliminary indications are promising to say the least, since I have not yet optimized the azimuth, VTA, anti skating, damping fluid, etc. All musical parameters stepped up a notch with the Phantom. I am particularly impressed with the speed of transients and the clarity of instruments at the rear of the sound stage. So far, I would characterize the sound as detailed and coherent, bold yet suave.
Incidentally, I am using the Phantom on an Oracle Delphi MKV SE with a Helikon cartridge. |
Yagbol2, I have no clue, never owning the 2.2. I have never heard of using a 3.8 gram tracking force. Good luck. Wouldn't that high of a tracking force wear out your records prematurely? Maybe someone else can help. |
HiBigdog,
Please correct me if I am wrong as I am not too adept with how different arms work. My question is the anti-skating abilities of the Phantom vis-a-vis the 2.2. If you read my prior post to Mr. Graham in order to stop the 2.2 from swinging inward lead weights were added in the anti-skate which worked (cart tracking force 3.8gms) I was wondering if this situation was presented to the Phantom and how it will compensate. again we tried the same cart with a Wheaton Tri-Planar VII and it just didn't counter thus rendering the cart cannot be used with the Wheaton because it seemed a lot of lead had to be added and the arm kept swunging at a very fast pace inwards. We don't want our cantilevers crooked over time and thinking if playing records that the drag is uneven.
However, carts with much lesser tracking force, say 2.0-2.9 grams can take it with a breeze. What I can worried about are carts with much heavier tracking force like the one I have now |
Hello fellas...
You're right, Sirspeedy - I really WAS going to go off-line on the discussion after my initial postings. I have an awful lot to do, and as fun as these pages can be, they can also take a lot - too much! - time away from duties. But I wanted also to appear responsive to questions and so I wrote again. But now I really have to take a break (although I'll continue to watch from time to time) and get these Phantoms ready for those of you who want them! (Wouldn't you prefer it that way??) And it seems as if you're answering the questions among yourselves just fine.
One last technical detail to keep in mind: the Magneglide is a full-time stabilizer, for use whether the record is flat as a board or warped as a potato chip (well, let's be realisitic here - maybe not THAT warped). It's job is to hold the neutrally-balanced tonearm assembly in the correct, upright, position during all playback activity. And it also provides a decoupled anti-skate force, which allows for total mechanical separation of the anti-skate mechanism and the tonearm assembly itself.
If I spot something that's WAY off the mark, I'll interject..
I hope I will be at the HE2005, but probably not for the whole time; I suspect it will end up being just Saturday and Sunday... But if I do make it there, will look foward to saying hi on those days...
Thanks for the nice words, all of you... It's much appreciated!
- Bob |
Dr.Steve,please give it plenty of break in time.Also,you're a "Mensch"!! |
Dear Yagbol2, Anti-skate with my Phantom using the Nightingale cartridge seems about perfect after other parameters are dialed in. The VTA seemed sensitive to proper adjustment as a too low rear height seemed to produce effects you noted. I was also experiencing skipping near the inner portions of the record. After re-adjusting VTA (near level) using 1.9 gram tracking, Magneglide slightly above middle & anti-skate about a third from the innermost point, I was able to eliminate skipping, play a very warped record & balance perfectly on a blank groove using a test record. Of coarse your mileage may vary. |
"DDDRRR.Steve,I hope you let me pick the venue."
Absolutely!
I just received the Revelation Audio Labs phono cable. I'll report my findings to you shortly Sirspeedy.
Steve |
DDDRRR.Steve,I hope you let me pick the venue.
My point regarding the Magna-glide was in reference to the supposed warped record factor,which is not an issue with a vacuum table.As you know,everything is pancake flat on my table.I'm not questioning the effectiveness of the "Feature",but would like confirmation,as to how effective it is if the records are never warped,in the first place.Believe me,I'm fairly convinced the Phantom is a winner!As is the case,from what we all hear,with the Shroder arms.Sorry,Frank I don't know how to add the punctuation marks over the "O".
Also,Bob and Frank are CLASS ACTS in my book,in the professionalism afforded each one's opinions.I wish more "posters" were like this minority.I also wish I had a table that could support 2 arms.Thank God I lose one college tuition in May,when my daughter graduates!! |
Dear Sirspeedy,
I have a vacuum table. The Phantom is as the kids say "Way Better". In fact, if the arm does not sound a great deal better, I will take you and your wife out to dinner if you come to San Diego.
Best Wishes,
Steve |
Hi Mr. Graham,
What I am worrying about is the anti-skate because I was watching a friend adjust the anti-skate in a 2.2 using a cart with a heavy tracking force. The arm kept sliding inwards at a fast pace in a blank record. To correct this he added some lead weights along with the supplied side weight and it stabilized. My question is will the Phantom be able to tackle the situation? In the case of the 2.2 when extra lead weights were added, the problem was solved.
But how about in the Phantom?
I thank you so much for answering my queries. |
Bob,in lieu of the fact that I have a Vacuum table,would the magna-glide feature help me that much.I have a 7.5 gm Transfiguration Temper-v coupled to a 2.2.
I was not going to post anymore,as you stated you didn't have time to respond seperately,but you broke your rule(ha,ha)with your last thread.Anyway,if you chose not to respond,I'll see either you or a rep,from Musical Surroundings,at HE-2005.Either way is fine with me.Thanks. |
To answer your question, the Magneglide(tm) system is totally independent of cartridge weight. It provides lateral stability (replacing the weights, as you suggested) but does not carry any real load; it's main function is to stabilize the tonearm assembly in such a way that the static downward tracking force is kept consistent regardless of arm height (here I'm referring to lifting the arm up and down, as over warps, not just the VTA position....) |
Hi Mr.Graham,
This is an ignorant question. I have yet to see my Phantom so I have no idea how the Magneglide works. Essentially, it replaced the sideweights. Did it? Is it adjustable say to take cartridges with a heavy (3.8gms) tracking force?
Please enlighten me. Thank you |
Dear Frank,
I appreciate your response and hope that my own response wasn't taken as too much of a slam. We all have different approaches to design, and hope that our respective efforts do the job admirably; it's up to us to do our homework, and up to the consumer to see if they agree! If you do take your note off, then ask them to remove my reply, as well - fair's fair, after all!
I thought long and hard about the best way to accomplish the desired goal of Neutral Balance in a way that would provide the tracking advantages it offers, and at the same time, not create additional problems of it's own. The components of the Magneglide system are all of low-mass design: small parts, lightweight materials, and a short distance to the pivot. Together, this combination does provide the required stability and allow the arm to pivot freely in both horizontal and vertical (with Neutral Balance) planes. We're very pleased with the results.
(For the hobbyists who may not be aware of the cumulative effects of this, in calculating Effective Mass, we are concerned about the static weight of an object -counterweight, headshell, cartridge, etc, - times the distance from the pivot SQUARED! That's why a larger counterweight, placed closer to the pivot, will have a lower effective mass than a small one - remember, looks are deceiving! - placed further away).
Anway, I paid close attention to this important consideration during the design, and rest assured that all's well in that area! Neutral Balance is a desirable condition in tonearms that goes back years, I agree. I remember Edgar Villchur discussing this in the 1960's, when the AR turntable came out. He was right then (as he was in so many things this genuius/audio pioneer created), and it's still true today.
And yes, I'd very much like to have a beer and pretzel with you sometime. Have never been to Munich, but hope to in the not too distant future...
So, all you audio adventurers out there, enjoy the dialogue and theories to consider, but most of all, sit back - forget those theories - and enjoy the music!
Now, I really MUST get off this thread and back to work! Happy Spring to all - Bob |
Dear Mr. Graham,
First of all, my apologies if my post created the impression I was trying to raise doubts or question the quality or superiority of the Phantom over your previous designs. The question about the Magnaglide tracker was a "real" question, a question about a design choice and the wheighing of its merits versus potential drawbacks. I am totally satisfied with your answer.
I addressed the issue of neutral balance not to belittle the value of the magneglide feature, but wanted to point out that neutral balance in unipivots had been discussed on a theoretical and practical level many years ago. Anyone who reads the articles I was refering to, will find that they make a strong point in favor of the Phantom.
Rest assured that I never publically comment on the sound of other tonearms, I totally agree with your point about the consumer doing the judging. But when it comes to design philosophies, choice of materials and sometimes even aesthetics, I enjoy the exchange, partially because it is the exchange with likeminded people that is part of the fun in this hobby/profession. My word isn´t gospel and I have taken a strong beating before, but I´d still rather write and sign my own posts instead of, say, telling somweone else to do it for me.
To put this to a hopefully happy end, I promise not to comment on a specific design feature in the future (except when asked about my own arms) and suggest to the moderator to remove my earlier post(03-19.05;"Dear Mr. Graham...") within the next few days.
No hard feelings, and I owe you a drink(Munich, Denver?)
Frank Schröder |
Did you know the bumble-bee CAN'T fly, according to one school of theory? This is the thought that first came into my mind when I read the posts of 3-19-05 from Frank Schroder. (And I REALLY won't have time to keep this thing going, but sometimes a question just must be answered, before the wrong impression is left untouched for too long..!)
The point is that I think that, while heated debate among the hobbyists and consumers themselves is fine, it is not in good taste for us manufacturers to try and "suggest" something may be amiss in someone else's design, thereby planting the seed of doubt in the readers and potential customers.
In this case, the comment such as "your new design is well founded but not exactly revolutionary" is something that I, no matter what I may know or think of another design, would never utter. It's just not appropriate. I have high regard to many other tonearm designs, including Frank's, but if any of us where to try an take the time to suggest a "weakness" of some kind, we'd only be opening the door to the shortcomings in our own efforts, which are always present.
I am not aware of the article that Frank refers to, but I am VERY sure there was nothing like the horizontal stablizer that's now in Patent Pending status; we checked carefully into the history of tonearm designs and found nothing remotely like this.
OK, with the Philosphy and Ethics Class 101 dismissed, just a few points before I have to get back to work, REALLY, and off this thread, if I'm to get the necessary things done on time:
My reference to the jewel bearings in Rolex was only an off-the-cuff remark that superior bearing quality is not that much more costly to make the inferior materials. I'm aware of the properties of sapphire/ruby, as well as tungsten carbide and steel. Simply put, I went for the more exotic tungsten carbide as a high-quality, long-life bearing component, since the cost differential over the less-desirable steel wasn't so great. And I don't like to take the cheap way out, anyway, especially in something as central to performance as the main bearing.
The other technical detail that needs a little polishing is Frank's correct assertion that tracking force will be affected by interia as the arm moves up and down. Of course that's correct; however, I see no reason to let that fact be compounded in fact by having a balancing system which will CERTAINLY add it's own additional forces to the arm as it's negotiating warps. And this applies to ANY arm of any pivoting design that places the pivot point above the Center of Gravity.
And one last little jab that needs commenting on is the "question" that the magneglide has higher horizontal friction than vertical. Again, I'm sorry to keep reminding Frank of this, but it's painfully obvious that, like a good attorney, the answer is known BEFORE the question is asked; all the better to influence the jury. The answer is, of course, that yes, there is slightly more horizontal mass to deal with - but only slightly - and due to the combined quality of the bearings involved (tungsten carbide main pivot, and an ABEC-7 ceramic ball-bearing assembly for the Magneglide tracker) the additional friction is mostly theoritical, not practical. If it were otherwise, then I've really been barking up the wrong tree with this entire excercise! In measurements, I cannot find any appreciable (read: none that I could see at all!) difference between the horizontal drag of the 2.2 and the Phantom.
As I said before, I have high regard for all other designers that make good products, and this list would certainly include Frank Schroder, as well as Alistair Robertson-Aikman (SME), Harry Weisfeld, and others. We each have our strengths - and our weaknesses! - and it's up to the listener - not us - to decide which sounds best. And without vested interest input from competiting designers, even on a friendly basis. I just feel strongly that we, as designers, should place our designs and theories out there for the public (and reviewers) to analyize, and then step back and let the music be the guide, not our competitors.
Bumble-bees really DO fly, and to try and sugget they can't is plain wrong: just sit back and watch them go if you want to be convinced....
|
Frank,you forgot to take ROUND TRIP into consideration.Let alone the cost to me,or anyone else taking time off.In my case,from my business.Take that all into account and you'd be giving your arm away if you were so nice as to discount expenses.The offer,I'm sure, was meant in a good spirit,and appreciated,but the "little woman" at home would make me pay DEARLY.I guess I'll have to live with what I currently own,for a while longer.
Anyway,as you pointed out,and what any well heeled audiobuff already knows,something like a tonearm "SHOULD" be judged in one's own set-up,unless you are intimately familiar with the NEW system at hand.My complaint about the loss of good dealers,revisited.
I do want to thank you and Bob Graham for your fascinating(to me)responses.I'm impressed,and kind of surprised that in a HOBBY-RELATED site,the dialog could be such that they could garnish responses from proven designers like you two.Sort of humbles me,a bit,about keeping my mouth shut(although I have been at this 37 yrs)and am still free to express opinions "Learned" from owning said products.
At the very least,I'm really getting paranoid about my propensity for excessive word count!!Anyway,it is now SPRINGTIME here in New Jersey,and I'll be out practicing my first love,TENNIS,so I doubt if I'll be boring anyone in the near future,unless I decide to analyse new tennis racket technology should my backhand go astray!!Anyone know of any good tennis websites?Good luck to all!! |
It's nice to get feedback from two highly respected designer/manufacturers. Especially since a tonearm will be my next major analog purchase, one I don't want to have to do ever again.
Frank,
Well, if you are going to be cuting deals at the RMAF, I'm in! I'll see you there. I stopped looking at other arms aside from the Phantom after getting some feedback from Lugnut, Doug and Cello. I tried again to make it to listen, but since I could not, at least those are some ears I trust.
Bob,
The Phantom is still in the hunt, but a cocobolo wand should top off my cocobolo Teres very nicely. At least I should be able to listen to both @ RMAF.
This is going to prove to be a tough decision, as everything I've heard about both arms has been positive. I do know that it will be either the Phantom or a Schroder. I feel either one will fall into the final purchase category, since I have no patience for a butt-ugly linear arm. For me aesthetics is just as important as the sound. And both arms are very fine looking indeed.
Now if Raul would just say one of them sucks, I'd know which way to go. |
Hi John,
Lots of Thai, Vietnamese and excellent Chinese restaurants in my neighborhood(and no Starbucks nearby...)! Drop me a mail again when that next trip is in sight. I´ll be glad to further extend your appreciation of my hometown :-)
Cheerio,
Frank |
Hello Bob Graham: I hope you will be making your cartridge spacer available independently of your tonearms to vinylphiles everywhere! I know myself and several others are always seeking a source for these, especially Rega/variant users. Why not?
Hi Frank, maybe we'll get together for currywurst (or Thai curry) and beer next time I'm in Berlin (and maybe I can see one of those fabulous tonearms in the flesh). Lovely city, love the national library, but could you please arrange to remove the Starbucks from within sight of the Brandenburg Gate?! Saw the Berlin philharmonic, terrific experience. |
Dear sirspeedy,
Thanks for your response. From time to time it seems that, whatever one tries to accomodate the often well founded requests/demands of (potential) customers, one just can´t win. Actually it is quite healthy to accept early on in the game that you can´t turn every LP lover into a customer. But this pond is large enough to feed all the fish in it and I am certain that almost everyone in the business of turntable/arm/cartridge making is trying hard to give the audience a chance to listen to their babies. When purchasing a 10000$table, 5000$ arm and equally expensive cart, what is spending 200$ for a planeticket and an additional 100$ for a hotelroom? A good investment.
Come to Denver and I deduct the above amount should you decide to buy an arm. Still there is no substitute for an in-home audition, with your system and no pressure to hear all the other rooms too before the show is over... I´m just a little bit too far from where you are to offer that service :-)
Keep up the passion and keep it fun too,
Frank
P.S.: I also believe there will be one or more Graham Phantoms demoed at the RMAF, an equally good reason to come. |
Dear Frank,please don't get so touchy regarding any of my posts.As you know I respect you,and your seemingly fine arms.I was the one to start a post asking about your arm,some time ago.I admit to being on a fence regarding my 2 choices.Yours and the Phantom.However I'm just one yutz,who happens to LOVE analog,owning thousands of fine LP's.I'm ONLY frustrated over the fact that so many products that interest me are SO difficult to audition.I'm not about to get on a plane to see and hear one.I come from a time when almost everything was an hour ride away,at most.The problem is MINE,not yours.
PS In the future I will keep my BIG MOUTH closed as regarding any product that could affect potential sales,which are SO deserved by all of YOU fine designers!!I mean it!! |
Dear Mr. Graham,
You wrote:
"(why else would Rolex and other fine watches use ruby if it weren't for better performance? The cost difference is insignificant).. "
The main advantage of the use of rubies, sapphires or even diamonds(endstones only) as watch bearings is that they are chemically inert and will not be affected by the oil turning acidic over time. While other bearing materials can be polished/burnished to a high surface quality, this smooth/flat surface will develop tiny "craters" as more and more material is "washed out" by the acid.
This happens with ruby equipped watches too. But it is the burnished steel pivot which suffers first, then, as more and more foreign particles find their way into the gap between pivot and bushing, the pivot acts as a file and destroys the finish of the ruby.
And when you are selling hundreds of thousands of watches, the price difference becomes significant.
For an interesting read on Unipivot arm design and as proof that the basis for your new design is well founded but not exactly revolutionary, I recommend:
"Une approche rationelle du bras de lecture
1. Considerations théoretiques"
by Gérard Chrétien
in a summary of articles from the french magazine "L'Audiophile", called "Selection de L'Audiophile", tome2: Les Transducteurs
published by editions frequences 1985(the article first appeared a few years earlier...)
As mentioned in an earlier post, the bearing in my arms can be(and has been) executed so that there is no variation
in tracking force when VTA is changed. The tracking force will ALWAYS vary when any arm/cart combo tracks a warped record. Inertia can´t be overcome...
A question: Am I correct in my assumption that the Phantom has higher friction in the horizontal plane than the 2.2 as it has to move the Magneglide assembly with it as it travels across the record?
Hoping to meet you in person at one of the upcoming shows, I remain with admiration,
Frank Schröder(Schröder tonearms) |
Dear Sirspeedy,
You wrote:
"don't be like some other designers who,though understandably limited in time, expect potential sales to occur by word of mouth as opposed to "in the flesh" exposure."
Though you didn´t refer to me personally, this is clearly in reference to our earlier exchange and I have to tell you that you seem to belong to those forum members who spend alot more time writing posts than reading responses. I DID appear "in the flesh" at shows countless times, CES 2005 being the last example. I told you that the Munich show, Europes largest high end show, is too close to allow for a trip to New York. And quite obviously, the list of hifi mag- and internet-reviews I posted escaped your attention. It should be obvious that I do not expect potential customers to rely on word of mouth recommendations. Fact is, no manufacturer can tell the potential customer on what to base his/her purchase decision. I´ll repeat myself and recommend to get in touch with Mr. Huschens(based in NJ) or come to Denver(RMAF 2005) for an in depth demo.
Until then,
all the best,
Frank Schröder |
Before I get to work on some things, I wanted to say that, with typos and all (that's what you get for rushing and not proof-reading carefully!), I hope the explanations helped a bit. As for Splaskin's problem, I already wrote him directly about this, and I think the upcoming damped headshell spacer will be useful in situations like his. As I also mentioned to him, the IC-70 cable can be rotated sideways as well as straight down, so there are options. But I do so wish there were more universal standards among all analog manufacturers regarding mounting spaces, etc, so that issues of height, mass, cartridge spacing, etc would not be a problem. I think this is possible to achieve, even with the various design concepts involved....
One detail I neglected to touch on yesterday is the business of pivot damping. Although a unipivot doesn't HAVE to have damping to work, it will make it behave better. This was particularly true with the 2.2 and similar "stable-balance" systems, where any motion of the finger lift could cause the arm to wobble for some time until friction finally slowed everything down. The Phantom, with the magnetic stablizer at work, has much less of this, but still benefits from fluid damping. But please note, this is NOT FOR PIVOT RESONANCES, which are practically non-exisent anyway; rather, this is to control the arm's own intertia as it moves over warps, etc. Just like the shock absorbers on your car...
For Sirspeedy and the New York show in April, I agree it's good to be there, and with a little luck, we will be and glad to talk to you individually. Musical Surroundings is handling the room arrangments, and of course will have a Phantom there as well...
Now, back to work for me!
- Bob |
Bob,thanks for your post.Actually my typing is REALLY SLOW.However I will run REALLY FAST to HE 2005 in hopes that you have a PHANTOM on display,in a working set-up.
Please,please consider this.Too many designers are missing potential customers,when relying on dealers who either don't care to assist in "proper" analog systems,in favor of digital(easy)sales.The alternative is that there are almost NO dealers who can,or want to "Accurately" set up a table/arm/cartridge anymore.You must know this.As you probably know,it took me forever to learn proper damping techniques.A good "OLDEN DAY" dealer could have shortened this path.I don't claim to be anything other than a hobbyist, with some of my own opinions.I guess a good support network,as in some years back,would quell any concerns I may,and still do,have.You must understand that this stuff is getting expensive,and with a college tuition,as well as a medical student to support,I reserve the right to "Rationalize" a bit, it's human!
Please,in the case of HE 2005,don't be like some other designers who,though understandably limited in time, expect potential sales to occur by word of mouth as opposed to "in the flesh" exposure.Sorry for the excessive verbage.Can't help myself.Sort of like my unchecked upgrade "BUG"!! |
Dear Mr. Graham,
IÂ’m sure everyone here appreciates your informative comments on the design of the Phantom. Having owned your previous designs; 1.5t and 2.0/2.2, I can honestly say that the PhantomÂ’s performance is truly amazing.
I have had only one small problem using the Phantom with your IC-70 cable. My Koetsu Jade/Basis Debut V Vacuum combination does not work well with the IC-70. The downward projection of the cableÂ’s wires interferes with the free movement of the BasisÂ’ suspension.
IÂ’m sure that this is something that can be corrected in the future.
Best Wishes,
Dr. Steven Plaskin |
I just tuned in to see what was happening on these pages regarding our newest "baby", and no surprises - there's a lot of opinion out there! Some of it is slow and considered (my preference) while some other ideas, while sincere I'm sure, go askew from the technical mark. Without appearing rude, I will say I just won't have time for on-going discussions about these things, and I also don't think this is the place for "advertising", as such; however, I do think it's important to set a few mis-conceptions to rest, or at least give our rationale behind what we've done.
The first item that needs a little attention is this business if tonearm mass. A few (for example, SirSpeedy, who seems to have a high rate of typing speed capability)have suggested that the Phantom appears to be an enlarged 2.2/SME combo. Looks can be deceiving, and in this case, is entirely wrong. While it's true the Phantom is larger than the 2.2, it's also true that the Effective Mass (not the same as the static weight of the parts) is very nearly the same as the 2.2, but with even better damping control.
In tonearms, it is a mistake to confuse the sheer size of something and equate that with performance. It's Effective Mass (the mass as seen by the stylus tip) that's really important here, not the physical appearance. In truth, the difference in static weight between the 2.2's armwand and that of the Phantom is a mere 5 grams; yet, the Effective Mass remains low, as evidenced by measurements of resonant frequency and Q.
We did want to accommodate heavy cartidges, it's true, but not at the expense of lighter-weight ones. In good cartridge design, the static weight of the body (tare) will indicate the compliance; thus, a heavier moving-coil cartridge should have a somewhat lower compliance than a lightweight moving-magnet, for example. This is necessary so that the all-important resonant frequency can be preserved at the right place and with the lowest amplitude, Q.
The 2.2 was a good performer in this regard, but the Phantom will handle a somewhat wider range of cartridges, and, from the tests I've made with all available cartridges I can get my hands on, with the correct LF performance in the resonance region of 8-12hz. There has been some concern the Phantom won't handle the lighter weight cartridges (Tranfiguration, etc), but in fact it will work just fine. I even have an old copy of the ADC-XLM, a fly-weight moving-magnet from the 70's. This is easily balanced at 1.25 grams, and the resonant frequency is at the correct 9hz point, and with an extremely low Q. (The ADC cartriges were, and are, remarkable performers. It's only too bad they're not still in business today - who knows what they might offer).... Anyway, hope that sheds some light on the Mass issue.
Next is the issue of pivot design. Again, SirSpeedy wishes we could have made a bearing-less design using magnets. Not a bad idea, but I'm not sure how it could be pulled off successfully. As Jameswei said in 03-09-05, there would be resonance challenges to deal with. Also, it depends on the bearings and quality. In truth - and this can be demonstrated - a properly designed bearing can have vanishingly low friction, and in the case of a unipivot, this can be almost non-existant. But the bearing material is just as important as the design itself, and cheaper materials just won't do the job. Tungsten carbide and sapphire/ruby jewels come to mind as the supreme choices for a bearing (why else would Rolex and other fine watches use ruby if it weren't for better performance? The cost difference is insignificant).. In our experiements, steel and stainless steel components had unacceptably high friction.
So why not use magnets for both horizontal and vertical? Maybe some day, but at the moment, I can't think how this would be done without a LOT of compromise and unnecessary complexity. If someone is concerned about friction in a unipivot bearing designed as I'm suggeting, then they're barking up the wrong tree and are worried needlessly about a vanishingly low friction to begin with.
Nautral Balance that is achieved with the stabilizatin system Magneglide(tm) is not "arketspeak" either, as was suggested in one of the posting. The term "Neutral Balance" is a real, physics-based concept that simply states a system in neutral balance will not have a favored rest position. For the Phantom, this means that the tracking force is much less dependent on the arm's pivoting position (over warps, etc) than with the 2.2 and all other unipivots I know about which MUST have a restoring force (stable balance) in order to stand upright. This isn't a gimmick: it's a true concept that works. In addition, the Magneglide(tm) system allows the arm to pivot in the correct plane of the stylus tip (also achieved with SME and other well-designed gimble-bearing arms), rather than the undesirable plane of motion of the armtube itself, which includes the 2.2.
And the last area I'll have time to comment on in this posting is again, our friend SirSpeedy (not picking on him, really, but he has the most comments and so has had more opportunities to perhaps be misunderstood ..). In 03-06-05, he says that "A true uni-pivot should NOT be restricted in movement, IMO!" Well, in the area he may be thinkin of, normal lateral and vertical movement, that's correct; however, we do NOT EVER, under ANY circumstances, want a tonearm - any tonearm - to rotate about it's longitudinal axis! Period! In other words, we don't want an arm which will wobble,changing azimuth, as it so desires. A fixed-bearing arm takes care of this automatically, and unipivots require the use of a low center of gravity (lowered counterweight or side weights) to achieve this. But a unipivot with this approach cannot, so far as any theory I can see allows, ever hope to achieve the desirable state of Neutral Balance during play. That's where the Magneglide(tm) system comes in: it allows the arm to be designed independently of any rotational restoring force (lowered counterweights or side weights) and then uses the magnetic stabilizer to "lock-in" the rotational position of the arm to the desired setting. As a by-product, the Magneglide(tm) system allows easy, repeatable azimuth adjust (but NOT on the fly, please...) and forces the arm to pivot in the correct plane of the stylus tip.
Glad there's so much interest in our new arm. I worked very hard on this for two years, and it was designed from the beginning to be an improvement over the 2.2, not just another version of the same thing. Forums such as this are good to compare notes, and I'll always pay attention to issues and problems (which we hope don't occur) when they're brought up. Already I have noticed, for example, the difficulties in mounting the Phantom (or the 2.2, for that matter) to the excellent HR-X turntable. So, Harry Weisfeld and I are collabering on this, and with his removable armboard version of that turntable, I'm designing a drop-in mounting board and a 1/2" longer interchangeable armtube that is designed for use with larger diameter platters like this. And we'll also be offering a damped cartridge headshell spacer to use when a particularly short cartridge and/or turntable platter requires the arm to be lowered more than the combination will allow. (I was not sure people would like a spacer, but I must report that the night I first listened to this, the system never sounded better! Maybe it was just one of those "good hi-fi" nights, but in any case I can honestly report that the damped spacer, (in medical termss) "First, does no harm!" In fact, there's good reason to presume that the addition of a suitable - but rigid - damping material between any headshell and a cartridge will provide constrained layer damping for improved resonance control.
So, as I look back at this, the comments I've offered may, in spite of my efforts not to advertise, may sound like more ad copy. Tried not to, but it's hard not to write convincingly without doing so, I guess. Also, the posting is a LOT longer than I anticipated, and my wife is calling me on the phone, asking when I'm coming home for dinner!
So, I enjoy the letters, folks - even the ones with technical concepts that are slightly to the left of center. Mostly, it's about the listening, as a few sage contributors have already said. I hope you'll agree that's what it's all about!
Happy Spring to all,
Bob Graham |
I'd love to try the Kuzma Airline. Only 8K!
Someday.
Steve |
I can't argue AT ALL with your rather well thought out points Thomasheisig. |
That's indeed a huge advantage to all other designs.
("I have tended to end up in the Graham camp as his setup is so easy and permanent").Trying a few arms and listening to some others, there is one fact for sure:
It's worse out there.
And Mr. Graham really tries to do something good for a fair price.
It works always.
In my opinion, the only real interesting way, is to go to a Kuzma Airline. All this hair splitting discussions about a half a hair more or less in VTA, or hyping some overpriced arms made from wood, aluminium or whatever, that's pretty uninteresting ( for me ).
It's expensive, but you get something for your money and it is superior to a Air Tangent from it's construction.
When I would have sleepless night's ( not from nightmares ), I would go for that one. |
Steve,if you fail to post these results I WILL come looking for you!! |
My new friend Sirspeedy has mentioned how important the tone arm cable is in our systems. I agree!
I have ordered a Revelation Audio Labs tone arm cable. The price is $399.00. I am interested in seeing if this cable outperforms my IC-70. I have discovered that there are many small companies-hobbyists making great cables at very reasonable prices.
From revelation Audio Labs:
Hi Steven,
Our tone arm version of the 'Paradise' analog interconnect cable utilizes the excellent Van Den Hull TAC (Tone Arm Connector), seen here:
http://www.vandenhul.com/other/tac.jpg
Its 5 contacts are 24 karat gold over silver over copper plated. The connector contacts with their standard 270° pin configuration are based in a Teflon disc. The disc can be adjusted in any angle related to the connector housing. This to set the optimal position related to the tone arm. The connector housing incorporates a 90° bend to combine vertical mounting and horizontal cable exit.
The RCA connectors are of course the exquisite WBT Nextgen AG (Silver) Signature.
Like all our cables, we offer a 30-day home audition...it may be returned for a full refund of your purchase price if you are not satisfied.
Our 1-meter tone arm cable is $399.
As always, we appreciate your business.
God bless,
Brad Vojtech
Founder/Owner
Revelation Audio Labs, Inc.
http://www.revelationaudiolabs.com/
Brad's power cables had the most natural midrange I have ever heard with a tight defined bass and detailed high end. They also had an enormous soundstage. They were $799.00 and outperformed more expensive competitors. Since he has a 30 day refund policy, what have I got to loose? His web site explains his cable design.
I will let you guys know how this cable stacks up to the IC-70. ItÂ’s about time we start looking for great performance at affordable prices.
And yes Sirspeedy, I have lusted as well for an air bearing tangent tracking arm. I have tended to end up in the Graham camp as his setup is so easy and permanent.
Steve |
Not having been able to procure a Lift2, I am nevertheless pleased to report success using the original Expressimo Lift as an arm raiser for the Phantom, installed behind the pivot and oriented to push down on the VTF knob. (Perhaps the Lift2 I ordered will arrive in a future month or year.) I had to mount the Lift on a thick washer to give it greater height, but I didn't need to get a heavier falling weight, as I had originally feared. |
Regardless of any doubts that I may have regarding the Phantom(and let's face it,I don't delude myself into thinking I'm anymore than "just an audio geek",my daughter's description,not mine,though true),Bob Graham,STILL has a KILLER(as in great)reputation of introducing fabulous products.He,also,has a real knack for tweaking the hell out of them in reasonably priced updates.That is one reason why I "Love" the superb and proven 2.2.
In all honesty,and realizing that my fascination(fantasy)about owning a linear tracker will never happen,due to the "PAIN IN THE ASS" factor of set up, and maintaining the BEAST,I would say that the PHANTOM and SHRODER REFERENCE,with an outside shot of the new 12.6 inch VPI(no damping fluid in this design)look,to me only,to be the REAL DEAL for any potential contenders to either championship belts.I haven't heard a big deal made over the Basis design,and don't know if IMMEDIA is in the game anymore!Oh,yeah!There is always the SME stuff.Been around forever.Hard to kill.
What ever happened to that fascinating DYNAVECTOR arm of years ago.I had a friend who had one running,with a custom Japanes table,on Beveridge Speakers.KOetsu Onyx Platinum Cart.What a COOL set-up he had,and what a nice guy.We'd stay at his penthouse pad,audioing out until 3 or 4 am.Those were the days.He was a retired antique dealer,and while we listened to his rig he would dimly light up his original(real) tiger rug,with full size head intact!.Scared the crap out of us, if too imbibed.No non-stop criticism,of differing audio philosophies.No criticising other people's equipment choices.Just great fun,and sound!!
Is it too late for me to add a new "NEW YEAR'S RESOLUTION? |
Bob Graham is making a heavier counterweight for the Phantom specifically for heavier cartridges. Have not seen a Phantom so I don't know if it is compatible with the older Graham arms. |
Gmorris,please report back when you actually "DO" the listening,to determine what compatibility issues are brought out by varied weights in cartridge design.Your 30 years in the hobby should weigh heavily in knowing this,already!BTW,please take any jabs,from me,as just typical debate,as though we were having a GOOD TUSSLE at a commonly shared listening session.I just had one this past weekend,and am still leaving my "Curad's" in place for a few more days.Seems some of my best audio-pals "LOVE" to give the criticism,BUT GOOD,but don't like to receive it.
Recent cause of latest club debate==="The ground loop hum you are hearing is having no impact on the music perceived".==followed by fisticuffs.OUCH!! |
Sirspeedy: baiting you was not my intent; I do respect your contributions to these threads. I feel strongly, however, that ultimately the actual compatibility of the Phantom, with various weight cartridges, will be determined by actual listening.
I also have been at this hobby for over 30 years. |
Recommended,and preferred are TWO different varients.I'm sure my 2.2 would work with a Koetsu "ONIX"(as in stone)body design.Never in my wildest dreams would I be tempted to put that match together!
Gmorris,it is perfectly "Legal" for you to rationalize your decisions,any way you care to.Please don't try to "Bait me" though.I've been at this hobby too long. |
According to some of the information that I have read, the Phantom is recommended for cartridges from 5-18 gms.
Sirspeedy, its time to move on. |
If I were to run a cartridge this heavy,I would not use the 2.2.You would most likely get excellent results with the new(more massive) PHANTOM.There are many relatively heavy cartridges now in favor,in this hobby,which IMO only,seems to have partially influenced the arrival of the "SUPERB"(happy guys?)and heavier PHANTOM! |
Has anyone ever tried a heavy cartridge (18gms) with a heavy tracking force (4gms) with a Graham? |
Thank you gentlemen, Sirspeedy I agree with your observations. Most of my gear is 10 years old or more & I only change when I can hear something better(different). I waited a few years to decide on this analog gear as I wanted a turntable that had a certain look & a suspension that wasn't sprung. I really don't like tweaking, however some things really work (for no apparent reason). The Graham Phantom was coming out so I waited instead of getting the 2.2. The engineering & adjustment capability seemed like the natural choice for me. As well I figured an integrated cartridge & phono cable made sense. I believe the arm is everything expected as the slightest changes can be heard. The Boulder was not even an idea, I was considering the EAR (324 I believe). It was just one of those sweaty palm things when you say OK let's do it. Obviously it is spectacular, but the price is ridiculous.I was using the Boulder for a few months with a Technics 1200 & 12 year old Dynavector XX-I high output cartridge & it made the Technics sould as good as any of my friends high end rigs. Maybe better in some ways although you knew the weaknesses of the turntable. I have never been a big fan of expensive cables as they are all over priced. I have made my own silver cables & still use some today. Believe me the real costs are at least 10 times lower. Butt, as they stick it to me, some of the expensive cables are really better for whatever reason. Some also really suck. It's the same with wine, there are many great values for every taste, however some of the expensive wines are fabulous & with some you wished you opened 2 Buck Chuck. The few of us who love this hobby know price alone does not guarantee musicality. I am greatful to the few manufacturers who strive for greatness & as such I am happy (& lucky enough) to help support them. |
" I am using the IC-70 phono cable. This cable uses extremely fine (read thin gauge)silver wire. I would be interested to hear comments on other cables..."
I use the XLO Signature Phono Cable. My dealer had both ( IC-70 ).
I think, in the analog World, where the "secret" of the right sound is the Holy Grail which has to be found, it is not simple to do that without a rating. Ratings help.
When I remember all the discussions about the Schroeder Arm, The TriPlanar and the Grahams, I think, good as they are, the results will vary, because the following electronic will have it's own signature added ( more or less ). And let's be honest, when someone spends a few thousand, he wants to hear an improvement. And of course, he "can" hear it. Specially, when the bought unit is rare, hyped, expensive or whatever in that direction.
But is it better ? Or just different ?
Well, I own a 2.2 and from my experience, even that one has so much settings to do, you will have the full box of experience with " normal sounding to excellent sounding ".
Sometimes I remember, when owners from a .... told me, NOW they listen to music. Super.
What have they done before ?
I think, it will depend what you want to have from the System. |
Bigdog,unfortunately the wine is probably not really all that good,knowing my friend.However there will be alot of it.Good for me.Bad for tweaking.
As for the cable issue.One friend I am going over to,tomorrow,has a fantastic set-up.Truly world class sound,regardless of price.His system has been developed through years of careful attention to detail.He is a HUGE record collector,and could probably buy an Island in the Bahamas if he ever sold his stuff.Literally "Everything" of note ever discussed in any of the Mags.He actually wrote the Mercury column for TAS.So,he knows his shit.My point being,he has absolutely "CHEAP" crapola(actually,only in price,not performance)cables.I'm talking 10 bucks per eight ft. run.No longer manufactured.The sound in his rig is "INCREDIBLE",and on 22year old speakers(Heavily modded).
I have heard these cables elsewhere and they stunk.Obviously,all systems are cable dependant.All components interact differently.I feel that the "laws of the universe" don't apply to his room.The sound is that good.Probably has something to do with "String Theory",and "Worm Holes".Who knows?Everyone who has gone over to him,manufacturers as well,are bowled over by his sound.Including me.Oh yeah,I hate him too!
However,one can learn alot about their own set-up,by listening,with an open mind,to systems like this one!!We all,too often rationalize the money we just spent on our own stuff,and don't really like to admit something is really better.A defense mechanism,probably.
Friend #2 will be auditioned later in the eve.He has MEGABUCK cables.MEGABUCK power cords(actually he's obsessed with PC's).Newer stuff(Kharma based equip.- good stuff).This set-up,although really good,is just not in the same league as the older set-up,with the cheapo cables.This is universally felt by our audio group.Nothing wrong with the equip,just that the synergy isn't as good.My system falls into this latter category as well.
Moral:We NEVER know how something will sound unless it is auditioned.Forget reviewers.They are just HOBBYISTS,like us.We have to do the legwork for ourselves.Personally,I'm getting tired of this tweaking cycle,but my system has improved in leaps and bounds.I try to have an open mind,and like to think things through.
I have read that Purist Audio offers loaner cables as a test of effectiveness,for some customers.NOW THAT is how one can have the questions of comparisons answered!! |
Sirspeedy, Thank you for the kind words. I am indeed very fortunate to be able to own this wonderful gear. I am using the IC-70 phono cable. This cable uses extremely fine (read thin gauge)silver wire. I would be interested to hear comments on other cables, as the interconnect situation I encountered made me a bit neurotic. In the past silver wire has usually sounded a bit thin (body)& a bit bright. The JPS claims an aluminum alloy, which is less conductive. Maybe it stores energy which makes it very dynamic. (I didn't like the lower priced JPS at all, it had a signature on everything it passed although a pleasant one.) Some professional cables I have used & recommended used West Penn wire which were also aluminum (however with Neutrik Gold XLR's they cost only about $35.00 per meter pair. Hard to go wrong in non critical situations. (I like West Penn 293 which is about 24ga.) Anyway I am going to let this gear break-in a bit before any more changes. Enjoy the Merlot. Good wine is like good audio. Lots of subtlety for different tastes. |
Splaskin,took a look at your system on Audio Asylum."I Hate You Too"!!
Just kidding.Great stuff!!
Actually there are some "Concept" similarities between yours,and mine.I'll save that for another time.Good luck.
Tomorrow I take the day off,WHEW,to go over to 2 friend's homes.Both audio/fanatics.Doing some arm tweaking/tube rolling etc.Oh yeah,forgot to mention some serious MERLOT will be on hand.I'll probably be too blitzed to apply correct fluid damping!!This is our little secret Splaskin.My friend won't know.I'm his set-up man.HEH,HEH,HEH!! |
Sirspeedy,
I am presently using the IC-70. I am having Brad Vojtech at Revelation Audio build me a phono cable. I tried his power cables, specifically the Precepet, and fell in love with them. I wrote a review of the Revelation Audio Labs Precept AC cable in Audio Asylum "Cables" under Mercman.
Sirspeedy, you can see pictures of my system at Audio Asylum under Mercman.
Steve |
