Kuzma 4Point Tri-Planar

One should watch out not to ascribe sonic signatures of other (cartridge, misalignment, cable and rest of audio chain) components to the tonearm.
I have had the 4Point and sold it early 2010 to the USA.
It is a good, but not outstanding tonearm.
While it does feature some interesting design points, it is not the last word in resolution nor in transient speed.
In general it does indeed a good job of dampening resonances and thus sounding a bit more forgiving - resulting in soften edges and lack of ultra low resolution/detail.
The Triplanar is similar in his behavior - but not as forgiving.
The 4Point won't tell anything new versus the Triplanar.

The Graham Phantom does a better job regarding transparency and low level resolution. It's transient transfer is much faster and thus the Phantom sounds more live-like and gives superior detail and "air".
It is a very good match for any ZYX.

Agree with Rockitman - Robert Graham managed to incorporate significant improvements into his design. Each new version builds upon the former and shows small if noticeable improvements.
Syntax already has the Graham Phantom II Supreme - I would name it the best uni-pivot so far.

Dear Mikelavigne, since your just delivered Telos already outperforms your Talea 2 on your just delivered NVS, you may give the Graham Phantom II Supreme a vis-a-vis chance versus the Telos on the rear left arm board.

Dear Lewm, as I am very familiar with the "phenomenon" you describe - in fact I could never do without that 3-dimensional soundstage presentation and have never since the early 1980s - I can assure you that it has nothing to do with wood of any kind as arm wand material.
Your were rather listening to a well aligned cartridge with very equal output in both coils and a speaker with less than average problems regarding phase response.
Most designers who use wood of any kind and shape as arm wand material do so because of certain aspects of dampening, weight/stiffness ratio and "certain sonic signature" inherent to wood in conjunction with fairly easy handling of the given material.
I for one prefer certain metals - due to the very same points just mentioned and some more aspects hardly mentioned at all in tonearm design so far.

But we will soon see in complete physical "Gestalt" ( if photos only ....) what I mean.

Dear Amater, wonder if that review really did the Kuzma any good .....

Dear Mgerhardt, Syntax has had the Phantom II in all 3 length - 9", 10" and 12". Guess there are very few out there with as wide experience regarding the Phantom.

Dear Hiho, I will give the Spiral Groove a good look.
On the other hand I will join the ever growing group of tonearm designers very soon.
Thus I will not comment on any other tonearm design - especially not current/new models introduced only recently.
My statement regarding pivot tonearm will be introduced here on Audiogon later this winter.
I will rather let facts speak for me - same as I did regarding tonearm alignment.

The Cat is legendary for slaughter in the most un-halal way ....

Maybe they have and that's the reason why the sacked the Space Shuttle program ....

Certainly because of the proofed knowledge and long history in high-tech and precision tooling.

Dear Dover, I would second your observations and conclusions. They go hand in hand with mine.
Which may result that there will be always listeners who prefer fast energy transfer and listeners who go rather for a damped armtube - with sometimes gives a more pleasing, forgiving sound.
I am definitely in the camp of as fast as possible energy transfer.
Each his own.
Wood is certainly not superior as tonearm wand material versus metal ( to be determined what metallurgy ...) - it is a different approach, with a different concept and leads most likely to different results.
Good that there are different ways and different ideas of the "ideal" - isn't it?