I ordered a Sota Cosmos turntable and am going to get a ZYX Airy 3 cartridge. I am looking for a great arm that is not high maintenence or finiky. I don't want to have to adjust it with each playing, or to add oil every time I use it.
The arms I'm interested in right now are the TriPlaner, Graham 2.2, or the SME IV, but I'm open to suggestions. The new arm with replace a Rega RB 900.
Hey guys,why don't you read my post a little more carefully!I ALWAYS state that my impressions are "opinion".I also was clear that things are a matter of taste,and that is why I made the statement about the Phantom being massive,which it definitely IS TO ME!!!Also I have auditioned it on two occassions,and it sounded great.So?
I also believe I CLEARLY STATED that any potential doubts I may have had about the Phantom were "probably wrong",as I don't like to knock any product,unless I have owned it for a length of time.I don't take myself all that seriously,in this forum,and am only having fun corresponding with fellow hobbyists.
Splashkin,I know you are happy with the Phantom,as you have stated this to me in the past,and I TOTALLY believe you,when you praise it's performance.It has been obvious from previous correspondence that you are a well adjusted and decent guy,with a sense of humor.I hope all is well,and wish you the best!BTW-I still love your Basis!
Gmorris,I do take your comments as having a bit of a "goading and antagonistic edge".Believe me I don't want to create ill will with ANY hobbyist on this forum,but lighten up!Your "there you go again" statement does not seem to sway towards the friendly!I hope you are a bit more mature than some hobbyists,that I've seen in Audiogon who start a verbal assault because someone doesn't like (BTW-I do happen to like the Phantom,but my 2.2 is proven,by my own experience,which could very well migrate towards a Phantom at some future point)something the other guy owns.That is ABSURD,and I'm NOT accusing you of this.Just don't take my "opinions" so seriously.I,myself,don't!If you like stuff you own,then that's it.Nobody can dictate what someone should like.But we're free to make comments,which is what this forum is all about!Someone correct me if I'm wrong!I'm just a yutz,who likes the hobby,and has some experience with a couple of products,as well as some harmless opinions.Anyone who thinks differently is taking this forum WAY too seriously!!Best wishes!
Dear Gmorris: As all we know is not exist the " best tonearm " , like many things in audio all is " relative " and in the tonearm subject there are many issues around that can define the " best one ".
When we are comparing tonearm " names " like: Graham, Triplanar, SME, Breuer, Schroeder, Audiocraft, Brinckman, Pluto, Audio Note, Moerch, Wilson Benesch, Basis, Air Tangent, Kuzma, etc.., we have to compare " around the stage system " where that tonearm is working, here the most important ( maybe ) issue is with: which cartridge.
I own all my tonearms and cartridges not because I wnat to be a " collector " item, but because that give me the opportunity to " test " one cartridge with severals tonearms till I find which one is the " best match " combo for to have the greates sound reproduction with that particular cartridge. When I find it I never think that this " best match " tonearm is better than the others, it is only the best match with that cartridge, that's all. Till today I never find a tonearm that have the consistense that with that tonearm any cartridge sounds always better.
So, your statement that: +++++ " The Phantom exceeds the 2.2 in every musical category, " +++++, is a " relative " one not an absolute one. I can assure you that with the right combination the 2.2 can " beat " the Phantom and that don't means that the 2.2 is better than the Phantom.
Sir Speedy, there you go again. I disagree with your characterization of the Phantom as MASSIVE. The fact is my Helikon is 8 grams with reasonably high compliance and it sounds wonderful in the clutches of the Phantom. I hate to repeat myself, but as you have never auditioned the Phantom I would caution readers to take your comments with the proverbial grain of salt. In the final analysis, actual listening not conjecture will determine the compatibility of the Phantom with low mass/high compliance cartridges. Fact: The Phantom exceeds the 2.2 in every musical category, and not by a small margin.
Nrchy,I really don't have alot to add,that Justin has not stated.I think I initially chose the Triplanar because it looked more solid and massive in construction.Like a fine piece of medical equipment.I'm sure this plays a part in "ALL" products chosen,though performance should be the first criteria.Obviously it was,for me,but as the eventual owner of both arms,I can state that it really is the Graham 2.2 that is MUCH better designed,built,finished,and as stated(beautifully phrased)by Justin,it "executes" the adjustments(needed for accurate set-up)better than the Triplanar.
As I look back at both arms,the 2.2 is an incredible design.SO GOOD,to me,that I really don't care about the Phantom(especially in lieu of the fact that I run a very light,high compliance cartridge).Also,and here is where the "human nature" of asthetic choice comes into play;the 2.2(to me)looks like it was made for the Cosmos.It just looks SO DARN GREAT on my Black Fountainhead table.The Phantom looks absolutely MASSIVE,and although I have NO DOUBT it is a fabulous design,it looks a bit like overkill,for a cartridge of 7 gms.I'm probably wrong,but we all have our own way of seeing things.If I had a much heavier cartridge with low compliance,I'd be looking at the Phantom,or Schroeder Ref.For sure!Actually,I like the Shroeder with my current Transfiguration,since I can select arm mass.
Which brings me back to the original advice I gave you and was so beautifully expressed by Justin.Just pick one,of these all fine arms,and be happy!!You will love any of them.Remember,though(like this year's Belmont and Preakness winner)the Schroeder should NOT be easily dismissed.It may be the "dark horse sleeper" in the field.Something tells me that I'm not wrong about that.The design is WAY too strong to be dismissed,and you have a designer/owner who seems to be unbelieveably passionate about his products.Like Elliot said,in Close Encounters Of The Third Kind;"This means something"!
Nrchy, most good arms require careful setup but none that I know of (including the unusual Souther linear arm) require any maintenance.
I have a SOTA Cosmos also. I have replaced the SME IV with the Graham 2.2 and I am delighted I did. Overall, the Graham sound more transparent--no heaviness in the bass--and livelier. It also offers more adjustments and execute them better than the SME.
I have had a long look at the Wheaton Triplanar. Great construction. It sounds excellent in my friend's system but in my limited exposure to it, it was not as ergonomic as the Graham. So I selected the latter. Though there are too many variables to make a valid comparison, I felt that my system with the Graham sounds better than his with the Triplanar. Finally, I like the fact that Graham has been consistently improving their arms over the years and offered reasonable upgrades to their customers.
If you are like me, no matter which arm you eventually buy, you are going to have the nagging feeling that the one you did not get might be better. These are great arms that will all do well on the SOTA. Any one of them will give you great sound. Just pick one and enjoy!
sirspeedy - I'm leaning toward the TriPlaner, but you mentioned that TriPlaner does not appear to have dealt with the issues that concerned you during your experience. How concerned do I need to be about that.
It's tough to make the choice since all the arms on my list are disliked by at least one person that I trust, except for the Schroeder. They just take a long time to order, and I just sold my Rega. I'd rather not sit around and wait a few months for a new arm. Does anyone know how long it takes to get the Schroeder?
My Cosmos should be done in the next couple of weeks. Ideally I'd like to have everything in place by then. What to do, what to do???
I hope I didn't go too overboard with my Triplanar "knock".Understand that due to my crappy dealer(of the time),I took a 1500.00 dollar loss,after spending two years trying to get it to perform, as it should have.I probably am still suffering a good deal of angst,from the experience.Not soon forgot;and the industry wonders why so many dealers are losing business to the internet!!
. S23chang, Logically the Tracking force plays a large role (as does the VTA) in determining the detail, focus and timbre of the sound. . I can not promise you that we nailed the set up each time, but a lot of care was given by some very able people when the tonearm/cartridge set ups were done and there was a good bit of tweaking before we settled in to listen. . So yes, it is absolutely possibility that we were misled by the set ups, but that would always be the case. In this case, I feel pretty comfortable that the character of the tonearms and associated cartridges were a result of good set ups. . Rgds, Larry .
Larry, Just out of curiousity, could that be the tracking force you put on the cartidge that makes the difference in terms of dynamics and detail? Every arm geometry and tracking force might be different based on the angle of force pushing downward.
Larry,really great to hear from ya!I didn't know you had a two arm table/set-up.Keeping the 2.2,and comparing it to your future(I do wish you'd do it already)Schroeder will,obviously interest me,greatly!
The Triplanar I had was a few years ago,so not the latest.I have seen the newer one,and my problems with it don't seem to be solved.These are ergonomic,and will still play a part in maximizing performance.I "HATE" the fact that there is not a counterweight screw in type setting(the 2.2 has extremely tightly toleranced counterweighted settings,as you know),and mine don't move over time!After all the hard work I've recently done,and getting a really good digital stylus force guage,I don't like the "hunt and seek", "push/twist and pull" way of moving the counterweight on the TRI.I have found a BIG difference in my cartridge performance,when experimenting with various settings ranging in 1/100 of a gram increments.Finding the exact spot is a breeze with the 2.2,as you know.The TRI took me forever.If anyone thinks that this level of accuracy is no big deal,they're deluding themselves,on a high performance system.
I mean I'm sure I could have dialed it in as precisely with my TRI,but I could have flown down to you,had a listening session,and come back already,with the time that would have been spent fotzing around with that.The NEW ownership really does not care,as I've(very respectfully) asked him about this.
While I'm at it,the "Side Screw" that tightens vta may be acceptable(you tighten it by your finger),but there is no way it can have the solid integrity of the "Ring Clamp" full base circumference tightness of the 2.2.Aside from the fact that my my finger lift fluid leaked out,in a few months,and the antiskate "fishing line" thread has a "spring" action,that will change as it dries out, it was fine.Oh,I forgot,and there is NO excuse for this,especially as the new ownership told me it was no big deal(ha!),the VTA dial at the top of the arm,the one with the "cute" little numerical markings,has a good deal of play,and cannot be repeatable,if you want to use the numbers.Why bother having the numbers.This is ok,if you want to dial by memory,but the 2.2 "smokes" it,in every way.I sure hope the new one is better,but I doubt it.So, how could I ever have gotten that ("Tin Man" rattle trap)to perform like a fully maxed out,and worth every cent of it's "Bently Build and Finish",beautifully designed 2.2? As the new guy(replacing the wonderful Herb Papier)could care less.He's selling quite a few of them,and does not seem to care about actual feedback,from customers. Could you imagine Bob Graham,or Frank Schroeder not addressing such concerns.I don't think so!
Also,Larry--In all honesty, when any of us,especially me,talks to previous experience with any product,really it is NOT accurate.The reason for this is that I myself,having been so demanding,has learned some finer details of set up that may have colored my decisions regarding my newer,later preferences.If we go back to previous observations,of earlier products(even your arm shoot out),they may very well not be accurate.Just some fuel for thought,though this does let me off the hook,re: the TRIPLANAR!NA!
Well,now that I've had my little rant,have a great weekend!!
Get any Schroder and mount any cartridge to it. Get the Triplanar VII and use a silver wire ZYX and there will be no edge. Either option is killer, IMO. Geez, I know that others will disagree. If we could somehow get together soon you could hear what I'm talking about. Honestly though, we are talking about very subtle differences and without another arm to A/B directly in your system you'll never be aware that you may have made a slightly lesser choice. You're not going to be unhappy with any of the ones you are considering.
. Sirspeedy, Thanks for the Excellent post and very level headed advice for Nrchy. Was your Tri-Planar a model 7 or a previous version? My understanding from those (whose ears I trust) that have heard both, is that the current model 7 is dramatically better than the older Tri-Planar's . I currently own (love) the Graham 2.2 with Ceramic armwands (3) and heard the Tri-Planar 7 in my system for during a long weekend. I have never had the SME IV or V in my system (so I am useless there). When I did my research while making the Graham 2.2 buying decision, the SME's were taken off my short list towards the end based on friends comments that had owned or heard them extensively. . In my system, the Tri-Planar 7 was clearly more dynamic with more detail and better attacks than the Graham 2.2 along with stronger and more focused bass. I still prefer the Graham to the Tri-Planar 7. The Tri-Planar was a little bit too edgy for my taste, but other people clearly preferred the Tri-Planar (my room is still a bit on the bright side and that might account for my preference for the Graham 2.2). . Having said all of the above, I would easily prefer a Schroder Reference to either the Graham 2.2 or the Tri-Planar. If my rooms handling of sound was better (and will be someday) , I could easily see myself preferring the Tri-Planar to the Graham 2.2. I do think that the Schroder Reference might be the arm that ends ones lifelong chase for tonearm Heaven. . I have a two-armed table and I imagine that I will keep my Graham 2.2 after I get a Schroder Reference. . There are lots of options for you here Nate, but your short list is looking pretty good. . Rgds, Larry .
Chang,everyone is entitled to their opinion,and I'm not going to come off as the Arm Police(re the 1.5t vs 2.2).If they like it ,fine with me.My friend went from the 1.5t to the 2.2 and we felt the 2.2 was significantly more revealing.Just our opinions.Best luck!
Great post Sirspeedy. I feel exactly the same way about Graham. It is way easier and more precise than the SME IV+ and V my friends own. The Ceramic wan is a must. I have both and ceramic is quieter and smoother sounding ( in high freq espeically .)
Some folks told me that they feel the 1.5T is better than the 2.2. What's your opinion?
Nrchy,I have a COSMOS Series III,that I have run a Triplanar,SME-V,and Graham 2.2 on.I have also used,on the Sotas,numerous Koetsus and the Transfiguration Temper and Transfig-V on.
I know you are an experienced hobbyist,so my first response,in keeping with your sensibilities,is for you to use the "FORCE",in helping you make a decision.You're own intuition will help,as you are no beginner,and nobody can "really" fill that educated void!
Now,down to business.I LOVE the Graham,as you may already know.Very versatile arm.I like it ALOT better than my Triplanar,or my SME-V,but that is only my taste.Others will have their own set of emotions,and voice a differing,and valid opinion,as well.Don't listen to them,just listen to ME.JUST KIDDING!!!Hey,you said you liked humor!
The Triplanar,that I had was not a good match for me at the time.Not the problem of the arm,but my fercrucchena(ATTN moderators-a yiddish expression,not slang) dealer!Even that being the case the 2.2 is a highly evolved cartridge carrier.To me,and my sensibilities,it is MUCH MORE "dial in" friendly,and precise than the Triplanar.Not close,really,and I know I'll get bombed for that one!Remember it's just my opinion!!!The fluid etc,is really no big deal.
The SME was a nice arm,but too many hobbyists feel it is a bit bass heavy,and besides,SME is a HUGE company,so give you're money to someone who can probably appreciate it.Just kidding,again!Also,the SME unlike the Triplanar,and especially the 2.2 cannot have it's VTA adjusted during play,in a repeated fashion.The SME,can be lowered in VTA,once before bringing the arm back up.I don't feel that offers the "precise" fine tuning(which is really important,BTW)of having it available,"on the fly"!
Now for the FLY in the ointment!!Believe me if I were you,and had not made a buying decision yet(and although I prefer the 2.2 over the other 2 arms),remember this is just my opinion,I would HAVE TO look at the Schroeder line of arms.
I'll tell you why,and think about this!The Schroeder's have NO bearing,other than magnetic repulsion.This obliviates any potential resonance characteristic,and would have to create a very open and relaxed sound.Not as relaxed as you look like on your motorcycle(in the picture,shown)but close.Add to that a one piece cable network,choice of armwand material,to match cartridge characteristics,and,on paper,looks like a no brainer,for careful consideration.
My weakness here,is the fact that I have never heard a Schroeder,but it has a very loyal fan base(sort of like Harly,get it?).
In all seriousness,you will be happy with any of these great arms.I love my 2.2,and can argue it's superiority over the Triplanar,or SME,but it is still my opinion only!
As for the Schroeder,well it is here that you need to look to the "Light Side of the Force",you're own common sense.It has the potential to match the incredible relaxed and open sound of a great Air Bearing design(of which I'm intimately familiar,on a friend's set-up),but without the pumps and hoses,due to it's unique design.
You are in a great position,and will love your sound,ultimately!!Make the choice that best serves you,and do some homework.Forget all us experts.We really cannot tell you a thing about what "YOU" should like.Best of luck!!
Marty - I always grin when I see your looser,er I mean user name come up. You always have something funny to say. I appreciate that! So many people are such stiffs!
I have talked to Donna and Kirk on several occasions. I know they use SME quite a bit, but you hit one something I had not considered, that being the sympathetic synergy between the Sota and the SME. I don't really have much interest inthe SME V, but the IV is a good match for my system, I think...
Thanks Marty, come out here and turn the amp off yourself. I can put you up for a while!?!
The Wheaton is more accurate top to bottom. The SME is a little bloated in the bass which makes it an ideal match for the Oracle which is where I use it. The Graham is superior to the SME. All are good as is the Rega.
Narrod how would you characterize the differences between the SME IV and the TriPlaner? After a little more research I have decided to drop the Graham from the list of choices.
Agree with Narrod. In my experience, the Graham 2.2, and before that, the 1.5, that I own and have owned are essentially no maintenance. Once set up properly, and it's not that hard to do (though I had my dealer do it), you can leave it alone. Beautifully made, and very well-engineered arms.
None of the arms you mentioned are high maintenance. The simplest is the Rega. I currently own the Triplanar and SME IV. The Wheaton is the best arm I've ever owned. It has lots of adjustments but you don't need to touch them after setup. I've owned the Graham 1.5 and, again, once set it is set up you don't to change anything.
You must have a verified phone number and physical address in order to post in the Audiogon Forums. Please return to Audiogon.com and complete this step. If you have any questions please contact Support.
