Graham Phantom vs Triplaner


Wondering about the sonic traits of both these arms compared to each other.

- which one has deeper bass,
- which one has the warmer (relative) balance
- which one is compatible with more cartridges
- which one has the better more organic midrange
- which one has the greater treble detail.
- which one plays music better ( yes this is a more subjective question ).
- which one goes better with say the TW acoustic raven TT.
downunder

Showing 3 responses by jtimothya

Are you still looking for a new tonearm to replace the SME V??

Hey Shane - yes I still plan to replace the SME V. I almost pulled the trigger on that last fall, but have been dawdling.

You may recall I had a longish thread with many helpful responses on this exact topic (G vs T), but the Audiogon gods decided to toast it - or I can't find it. It went through a lot of the technical/ergonomic issues only hinted at here. The conclusion I drew from that was the Phantom had a higher build quality (almost equal to SME) and the Triplanar was a bit more fiddly on its adjustments, cueing, etc. I believe several of the latter have been addressed.

During the time that thread was running I heard offline from some folks whose ears and experience I trust. The word I got there was likewise that the Graham has the edge in construction quality and being more dynamic and up front, it might be able to rock n roll a bit more though could be a bit brash, whereas the Wheaton is a touch sweeter ("a bit colored, but nicely so...") and perhaps better suited for classical music. I received a comment that the Graham is balanced well in terms of trade-offs with "less than linear" carts such as koetsu and benz.

From the same sources I likewise heard good words about the Basis Vector - v. quiet in the groove, neutral, and super-dynamic. Perhaps some of its positives being masked on cantilevered armboards or unsuspended tables.

At the end of the day, without in system listening, I've come to believe every arm has its positives and some trade-offs and some of these are tied to the table its on and the cartridge in use. Not an earth shaking conclusion, but one that points to what Raul was suggesting in terms of system matching.

All three (Vector, Phantom, TriPlanar) are tempting. If I had to make a choice today without the benefit of a trial with my Orpheus on my deck in my room, etc., I'd probably roll the dice in favor of the latest Triplanar if for no other reason than its a known quantity, highly adjustable, and there are several people who can lend an assist with advice.

No easy choice - best of luck.

Tim
IMHO you can't compare the quality performance of two tonearms " per se " ( any ) because a tonearm is a " incomplete " product/item ...

I agree with Raul on this point, which "per se" can be extended to any component. You can't listen to an arm alone. You can maintain a stable system context and swap out a single component and compare those swaps, but there will always be other components within the system that *could* vary.

I agree, an analog front-end is a product of its pieces: turntable, turntable drive mechanism, cartridge, fastening hardware, headshell, tonearm, armboard, tonearm wires, phono stage, phono stage impedance resistors, tubes, etc. etc. If I'm off a half newton-meter of headshell bolt torque, from you, well ...

Not to mention the vagaries of semantic nuance even when we use the same vocabulary. "Tonearm X has superior top-end extension, asymptotically spinning heavenward with receding gossamer grace." (hmm... not bad, maybe i'll use that line.)

And then, we each have a different room. Not to mention humidity. Heh.

What does tonearm X sound like compared to tonearm Y? As the master says: "hard to predict all the variables are".

Yes, its a system. And yours will never be identical to mine. But lets never stop talking about it, the collective community of opinion is a joy.

And then, after all the headshell swapping, damping trough removing, and the four prelude passes ... after all the needle mr. cleaning, after the vta adjusting and antiskate donut twiddling, finally ... finally .... a record is played! Hooray!

Gawd, I love this hobby. Thanks to each of you for helping me enjoy it even more. honest! :-)

Tim

where we differ is in the superb improvements in sound that one can achieve with a better cartridge in a 'decent' arm?

Rather than casting the issue in terms about how much of a great cartridge's potential can be realized on a less than great arm, I think of it as an approach to the question about where do you put money on a limited budget, when you can purchase a great tonearm or a great cartridge but not both.

I would say at minimum the 'decent arm' needs to support accurate adjustment of the cartridge/cantilever/stylus in all three dimensions. A goodly chunk of the investment in an arm is learning how to use it.