Lyra Titan i on Basis Vector 4 experience?

I can't help with any experience with that combination. However, the Vector will handle that cartridge with no problem at all. The compliance and mass of the Titan i is very close to my Dyna XV-1s and I have used the Dyna on my Vector 3. They would both sound much better on a TriPlanar, IMHO and IME. ;-)

You think (or heard) that the Triplanar (VII) is a better sounding Arm than a Vector?

Nope, I own both arms. Just my opinion based on being mounted on my table in my system.

Well, I didn't want to turn Dre's thread into a debate about tonearms and I probably exaggerated a bit by saying that the cartridge would sound much better on the Triplanar. Look, these are both very good tonearms. That's why I own them.

I've owned a Vector for about 5 years now. First a Model 1 and now a Model 3. The Vector is an outstanding tracker and can tame even the most difficult cartridges with its rock-like stability. If you have a Basis table there is no better arm to have mounted on it than the Vector. At one point I had both a Graham 2.2 and the Vector with the right armboards so I could change the arms out. On the Basis 2500 table that I owned at the time the Vector was superior to the 2.2 in just about every way. Probably because the Vector is much more stable.

I've owned the Triplanar for about 2 years now. Also a very good tracking arm when setup properly. The triplanar is probably not as consistent as the Vector with a wide range of cartridges. However, there are those, like the XV-1s, that combine very well with this arm.

Ok, so why do I like the Triplanar more than the Vector with the XV-1s? Well, maybe it is because I find the Triplanar much easier to get setup correctly and repeatably. I have not been able to get the same nuance and micro-detail from the Vector that I can with the Triplanar. Maybe there just isn't the same synergy between the Vector and my Gavia. Maybe it is because of the silicon damping that must be used with the Vector. It is true that you cannot get the same Galibier Stelvio armboard that I use with the Triplanar because of the way the Vector mounts. This would also be the case with, say, a Graham tonearm. In talking with Thom, we decided that I could get very near the same results as his regular armboard by fashioning one from cocobolo. So I fashioned an armboard using opposing grain layers. Maybe someday I'll be able to get as good results with the Vector as I do with the Triplanar.

Well, there it is. My experience and opinion. Others will have a different opinion and experience and that's ok. YMMV, and all that.

Dre, good luck with the Titan i. I only know this cartridge by reputation but I'm sure you'll be very happy with one mounted on your Vector.

Sirspeedy,

The amount of damping fluid in the Vector is very important. I leave the term "critical" for the 2.2 and to give an idea of how I think the difference between the two arms is in regard to this. The idea with the Vector is to add enough fluid to the trough to tighten the base. Too little and the bass becomes muddy. Too much and you start to squash HF and dynamics. This is no different than the 2.2. But I think the 2.2 is much more sensitive. As you posted a while back, even an amount the size of the head of a pin can adversely effect the performance on the 2.2. With the Vector I find that I can stay to about 1/2 cc of silicon and get the level right. In short I don't find the fluid level to be as touchy as with the Vector, but it is certainly very important.

I would say that the micrometer option for VTA measuring does make minute VTA changes easier than not having it. As A.J. says, it is not a VTA adjuster, it is just a way to measure. It should not be touching the plinth while the stylus is playing.

Larryi,

that is exactly what I and others have found about the Vector. It can handle those cartridges that transmit a lot of energy into the arm. I think this is another reason why the 2.2 did not perform as well for me as the Vector. I have not calculated it, but the PSI value at the pivot bearing must be enormous. Another point that the Vector has over the 2.2 is the horizontal stabilization of that little bearing controlling azimuth.

Yes, I know A.J. doesn't like cantilevered armboards, on the fly VTA, and non-suspended tables. Just to name a few things. However, there are examples of such implementations that address his concerns and work extremely well.

Yes, I would be most interested to get my hands on a Davinci 12" arm. But unless I hit the lottery or something it will probably not happen.

JMW, which ZYX?