SME 20/3 or Oracle Delphi VI or Garrard 301


I am just about to buy a new table. I have happily owned an original oracle Delphi for 30 years! Choices are the new 20/3, Oracle Delphi VI or possibly a rebuilt Garrard 301. They all run about the same money.
The reviews and comments out there lead me to believe I will be better off using a non SME arm on the 20/3...I will probably go with a Graham Phantom. (I like the removable arm tube concept too) For now I will use my SME IV.
keep reading the SME detractors claim that the tables are lifeless. Not something you can accuse a Delphi of for sure. The HiFi News reviews of both tables are nothing short of glowing. As far as I can tell the Oracle is possibly more nimble and musical(?) while the SME is more "solid".
Your thoughts are welcom
mauidj

Showing 2 responses by cipherjuris

Both excellent tables, to be sure. I owned a heavily modified Oracle Delphi MK IV and still own an SME 20/2 with a Graham Phantom I.

The Oracle was great for its day when everything was right, but it had trouble holding the perfect setup for very long.

The SME with Graham is truly a set it and forget it system and is very easy to set up. I have never found it lifeless. It is very stable and has minimal resonances to add to what is on the record. I think most of the "lifeless" comments come from folks who have tables that "contribute" to the sound. Such contribution usually gives the table a euphonic sound that is quite pleasant. But it is not what is on the LP.

I suspect that the new 20/3 will be noticeably better than the 20/2. The new mat material is probably a signicant improvement and I think SME improved the power supply as well. Have not seen the HiFi News reviews.

Not to detract from the SME 20/2 with Graham Phantom, but I have one of Albert Porter's Technics SP 10 MK IIIs with completely restored and upgraded electronics and his plinth with an SME 312S arm. Best vinyl I have ever heard by a huge margin, it is actually close to true master tape sound on well-recorded, well mastered and well-pressed LPs. The 20/2 sound is similar but quite a bit less, which leads me to believe that it is not adding much if anything that is not on the LP.

Hope this helps.

Ed
Wow! This thread really took on a life of its own. I re-read my 5/24 post, and it accurately reflects my experience with modded Oracle Delphi MK IV which I enjoyed for 15 years, as well as my 5-year experience with the SME 20/2 with a Graham Phantom I, and my recent experience with Albert Porter's Technics SP 10 MK IIIs with completely restored and upgraded electronics and his plinth, a Micro Seiki CU-180 mat, TTSuperClamp and an SME 312S arm for the past month.

I have not heard the new Oracle MK VI, but like most new models from high end manufacturers, I would be surprised if it was not noticeably better than my modded MK IV.

My experience has been that the Oracle with ET-2 arm was way better than anything I had before, especially after power supply, Goldmund mat, isolation feet mods, and the SME 20/2 with Graham Phantom I is noticeably better than my MK IV with ET-2. And my Technics-Porter SP 10 MK3 is way better in every way than any TT or other source component I have ever heard before. I have found that everything Albert said about it is right on, except it was still better than I imagined it would be. It is the quietest TT I have heard (contributes to great imaging, soundstage and low level detail) and has the best PRAT (likely due to its speed accuracy when playing an LP), dynamics and bass I have ever heard.

The great thing about the SME tables is they are truly setup and forget tables (a drop or 2 of oil once a year and a new belt every 4 or 5 years is about all the maintenance it needs), especially with a Graham Phantom, which is also setup and forget.

Hope this helps.