Is there a Particular TT and Cart' that the Graham III is wanted to be used with?
I am not using the Graham III, but do have a history of owning a Tonearm that is a Modified Tonearm and in the present design is Bespoke and has been through a period of undergoing refinements. The Tonearm owned and the Graham III share similarities in how refinements were selected, but are not sharing the same in relation to the basics of the design and the materials selected to be used.
I am instrumental in being a contributor to some of the refinement ideas adopted on the Tonearm I use.
The Tonearm Designer / Producer built on the suggestions made for a further refinement, especially when it came to improvement on the Headshell Interface and the Signal Wire that is selected.
Another owner of the same Tonearm and also a designer producer of their own Tonearm, has taken their ownership of the Tonearm I use a little further.
The owner has used their own area of expertise with materials and has been investigative as the follow up.
Which resulted in exchanging metal structural parts belonging to the Tonearm, with replicated parts from a non-metal material, where the Tonearm user is absolutely certain more is eked from the Tonearm as a betterment.
It is interesting to experience another's interest in a particular design where one individual is a Machining and Materials Specialist, as well as the Designer / Producer of a particular Tonearm. Where their work is bought into and then reviewed by the Purchaser who is an individual who is a Materials and CNC Specialist, that also has their own Tonearm Design in Production. To learn where non-intrusive changes to one design for the Tonearm are able to bring a perception that a further refinement has also created, which is also a furthering of the betterment being added.
I am not a expert like the individuals I converse with regularly, but have looked at the Graham III.
The under the hood design for the mechanical interfaces is not able to be seen and will need a lot of Trust to accept using the written info only, if it is optimised and able to deliver something very special as an Interface with the selection of Parts.
Where tolerances between parts at an interface are extremely tight, the stability of selected materials is a major consideration, parts must be remaining unaffected in all ambient environments they are intended to be used in.
A Part Produced and tried in a Dry Condition of 18 Celsius can become a completely different part when sent to be used in a Humid condition of 27 Celsius, and this is vice - versa.
When Tolerances are selected as a dimension in the low Microns, a Part that reacts negatively for the design role in a particular environment will potentially become a failure point to the design. This negative effect on a Part used, does not necessarily mean the Tonearm is not able to function, the Tonearm is more likely to be prohibited to function as the optimised design, especially where maintaining an extremely low friction is a high consideration for a design.
The sales spiel for the Graham III does share info that suggests that the least friction is designed to be present at the bearing interfaces and interference from Wand Wire causing an impact on freedom of movement is considered and mitigated.
What is not known is which dimensions for the tolerances are selected between critical interfaces and if a particular material is selected that would enable this to be maintained in a broad range of ambient conditions.
I am very familiar with discussion had about the need for critical interfaces to be seriously considered. I have also been able to have first hand experiences of developments where refinements had been put in place, where a newly selected material has allowed for a tightening of tolerance dimensions to be worked with, resulting in a different bearing to be considered for its refinements of adjustment.
I can state without any concern, that when a Tonearm is becoming a design that has an extremely low Coefficient of Friction within its Bearing Assembly, has extremely Tight Dimensional Tolerances produced between parts within the Bearing Assembly that are maintainable in all ambient environments, has measures in place to Adequately Damp and has Signal Path Wires used within the Wand that are proven to be the best option as a Signal Path Wire, as a result from the Tonearm Designer /Builder trialling a range of wire types, selecting the one that is able to create the most attractive End Sound and is wire through thickness and softness that is capable of not interfering with the Design for the Bearings Function, such a Tonearm is absolutely Stand Out for its qualities.
When such measures as those listed above are in place as a method to create refinement and as a design is then compared to a model with a design not having undergone the further refining, these new additions of refinement are audible for the qualities they bring.
The End Sound, as a result of refinements made changes the Tonearm for the better, which are attractors and not any refinement made is able to be detected as being wanted to be removed.
The only real words that describe the realised changes from the refinements made, is that the Tonearm has got out of the way. The Cart' when mounted on such a design for a Tonearm, has a s Stylus, that when in contact with the LP Groove, is now sending the most unadulterated signal extracted from the Groove Modulation to the Cart's Coils, the Mechanical Energy converted to Electrical Energy is as purified a Signal that is able to be sent.
Another very very important point to be concerned about is the Voicing of the Tonearm that is created by the Assembler of the Tonearm. I strongly suspect there are Tonearms assembled where there is very little consideration being shown for the intricacies within the assembly that are the critical concerns for the Tonearm as an finished assembly.
Note: It is not known in general from a Tonearm Producer who assembles a Tonearm, whether this is role that is limited to one individual only or if this is a role undertaken by a selection of individuals.
A Friend of mine, who had overhauled a large volume of Tonearms, become an individual who was approached by a UK Company that sells a lot of Analogue Devices with a Customer Base throughout the Globe. The outcome being my friend assembled solely this Companies Tonearms for a few years, prior to their taking on other ventures, there is a period within this Company that all Tonearms were assembled by an Individual and voiced the assembly to meet their own sonic preferences. What was the practice prior to and post my friends involvement is an unknown to myself, but what is sure, is that Tonearms produced prior to and Post my friends involvement will have a different End Sound as a result of the methods used for the assembly.
This same issue about variations to an End Sound is also present within the Production of Cartridges.
Those who know Cart's will say without reservation, " no Two Cart's are the same ", hence, some Cart's come with a hefty mark up, because they are assembled by the Lead Designer of the Cartridge, one pays a fair mark up, to have their unique selection for the voicing of the Cart'.
The Tonearm is subject to the assembly consistency being replicated as well. Tolerances at interfaces are adjustable in microns, the assembler can easily create an interface that impacts discernably on how the End Sound able to be perceived.
I have been demonstrated on one Tonearm Design, how easy it is to have all the critical concerns for the Tonearms function addressed, and how a difference in the dimensional tolerance at an interface, is able to create an End Sound that is with substantial discernible differences.
A change to a dimensional tolerance is able to produce a End Sound perceived as being quite clinical and far removed from being the pinnacle of being musically engaging, through to being very very musically engaging, having Groove and creating Frisson, encouraging the listener to move to the music.
My Poison is Groove and Frisson being the experience had on any day. Which is what I am supplied through the hand of the Tonearm Assembler, fortunately for myself this trait being present in the Tonearm is the Designer / Assemblers Signature Model.
To genuinely have the understanding of what is able to be created as an End Sound and how the End Sound can take on Form, i.e, the discernible presence of, Attack, Dynamics, Envelope, Micro Dynamics, Timbre, Tone, is only going to be discovered through the experiencing of the Tonearm, not the written description given up.
I strongly suggest the Tonearm is sat in front of and demonstrated, it is through hearing the End Sound and the impression this it is able to create, that will become the stimulus to want more of the Sonic being produced, written description is carefully selected to win over attraction in the Marketing, aligning the performance of the Tonearm to the Sales Spiel requires foot work.
I am not going to say anything about the Graham III, in relation to how it performs, I only know that as a written description. The description is using words I totally understand, but as I do not have experience of the Tonearm in use, I can't comment further on overall performance.
I can comment on what I see as the user interface and how this might not be ideal for individuals who have an interest in using more that one Cart' and not wanting to exchange their other owned Cart's on a Single Headshell.
The Tonearm I am using has an option for removing the Headshell, which enables a broad selection of Headshells to be considered for use.
In my case, I have a collection of Magnesium Headshells that are 9gr and 10gr.
Through buying in Japan, my Headshell collection has been a cost of approx' £250.
A selection of the Magnesium Headshells have Cart's mounted, ready to be exchanged on the fly.
I also have a Bespoke Headshell produced by a friend using Panzerholz.
I would not like the any other version for changing Cart's on the fly, it seems quite limiting.
In relation to Arm Wand exchanges being the option to extend the usage of Cart's as an exchange on the fly. This can present itself as being limiting for a few reasons:
1, The Signal Wire is not as continuous as a path used on a conventional Tonearm design, there are additional connections when using a removable arm wand, hence a less purified path for the Signal to Transfer through.
2, The idea that often shows as being the most attractive, where having a continuous Signal Wire running from the Cart' Lead Out Pin's through to the Phonostage is not an option when using a removable arm wand.
3, In the case of the Graham Mk III, the additional Arm Wand is £1000, which is a substantial cost associated with creating an option to swap out a Cart' on the fly.
My Interest in a Tonearm has to be where I have a control over selecting different Cart's that is very cost effective and uncomplicated as a method to complete an exchange. I also need to be knowing the option to exchange a Signal Path Wire is easily achieved as a continuous wire design.
Note: Wire Design for Structure within the Wire and Softness of a Wire is a evolving process.
Mitsubishi are about to release a New Wire, and it is expected to be softer than the already produced D.U.C.C wire they offer, which is known for its suppleness.
SAEC uses a PC Triple C Wire which is very supple in their $13K Tonearm and this same wire is used as the wire in the refinements made on the Tonearm Design that I use.
Making changes to the electrical interface on the design for the used Tonearm really allowed for the work done on the mechanical interfaces to show through as being substantial as a betterment.
These changes made to the electrical interface extended to other downstream Cables and Connectors used on Cables, as well as connectors used on the Chassis of Amplifiers?? As exchanges, these really assisted with forming the sound structure that was detectable within the produced End Sound!!