SME V, Tri-Planar or Phantom B-44

My dealer got a Phantom2 a couple of weeks back to put on his raven AC. He had previously had a Phantom and liked it very much.

Much to his horror when he removed the VPI 10.5 and put on the Phantom2 he indicated it was not a step forward. yes the Phantom2 was more detailed, yet at the same time analytical and hifi( not 3d) sounding similar to some of the complaints of Bob's older arm's.

He found the VPI 10.5 musically more satisfying.

He sold the entire unit 3 days after setting up the Phantom2, so maybe the new wiring needed for burn in time and/or he need to play with the fluid more.

Anyone else had an opportunity to compare both??

Firstly,very good point Halcro.Fuel for thought.

Secondly,Downunder "THAT" scares me!!!...

You of all people know (I assume) of the problems I had been having(if I was totaly honest,and actually named names, and was more specific as to the problems which developed from "amazing" lack of concern,many would be shocked,but I'm not going there.....even though the "ineptitude" and lack of caring still peeves me)...

I've been "guaranteed" that this weekend my "final piece" of my audio system will come from the West Coast.I need it to finish off my set-up,and "should" have a far superior "rig" than before(I've made quite a few improvements/mods while awaiting some things to work out)....BUT...I am absolutely paranoid that something will go wrong AGAIN!!

The industry has demonstrated to me,it is not close to where it was just a few years ago,with regards to competence,and customer support....At THESE prices,it is a shame!!!

SHEEESH!!!

So...I've got my new Phantom Series II completely set-up,but without actually hearing it!...I set up the original Phantom I,for a friend,and know it very well.It was superb,and he too is upgrading to the series II!Basically because he's competitive,and likes to keep abreast of the latest stuff.

In my case,it was circumstances that got me to the Series II.I've only got 12 hours on my Orpheus.All on my long since missed Graham 2.2 BUT....

I've had numerous conversations with Bob Graham,over the last few months.He knows what he is doing!!He has demonstrated to me that he is a concerned mfgr,and I'd be shocked if it worked out the way you describe.I'd have to down a case of Rock Bare Shiraz if so -:)

Originally HP of TAS was enthusiastic about the Titanium wand,but there are other changes to the arm which should/could put it over the series I.The wand is only one change.

I do find the newer arm to "appear" more finely made in some areas.Especially the better precision of the bearing screw cap teethe,which allow for much more precision when screwing in the bearing cap.I was not crazy about the older tolerences here.

Also,the cue lift bar seems to magnetically "lock" into place,in the downward position.This is "cute",and could very well allow for les "rattle"/noise(if any) during play.

The inner cabling has supposedly been improved,and I "think" the magna-glide feature is improved.

I'll definitely find out "very soon",but.... WHATEVER I POST IN THE NEXT FEW WEEKS....take with a healthy grain of salt,because I will be "SO HAPPY" to listen to all my fabulous(the "one" thing I am certain of)Lp's again,that virtually "anything" resembling music will be great...to my ears!!

Take my comments more seriously around December or January,when I start to realize I have issues again -:)

Get it? -:)

BTW, I have heard from several users who have compared the version I and II and say that the arms are more alike than they are different. In one case the arm was subjected to a cable cooker prior to use. He describes the "house sound" of the Phantom II is the same as Phantom I. Apparently, the Phantom II is a little quicker and more detailed without much change to the body and smoothness the Phantom I is known for.

Maybe the dealer referred to by Downunder did not give it enough time for burn-in and/or optimization.

Aoliviero

That would probably be the case, as I said he only had the Phantom II for a few days. That said I would not want any more detail with the Phantom, it is plenty detailed.

How does the Tri-planer gel with the Raven?. Nice review in Soundstage this mnth of the tri-planer, then comparing against the Phantom. Mark M made the tri-planer sound more to my musical liking than the Phantom.

Downunder,

The Raven and Triplanar sounds great. No complaints.however I can't really say if they gel together because I haven't tried any other arms. The triplanar has been my first and only. Guess I'm lucky in this regard. My interest in the Phantom is based on some feedback that it mates well with the Raven. But I suspect that the cartridge arm mating is probably much more important.

Andrew

Dear Andrew: Nice to hear from you again. Yes, I agree with you Raven/Triplanat works very good, last time I heard that combo was on SD in Mark's place ( :http://forum.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/fr.pl?eanlg&1219677256 ) really good and like you say it is critical with which cartridge you mate it or any other tonearm.

Regards and enjoy the music.
Raul.

I'm surprised that the Basis Vector hasn't been mentioned in this thread, a worthy comparator to the Phantom, and some say better.

I would also say that more "true" detail, IOW true transparency, as opposed to "edge", is not a bad thing. To the contrary, as long as it is presented naturally, it is an indication of superiority.

From experience, I know that even the tiniest change in a setup parameter (e.g., .3 mm change in height of the arm) will make a substantial difference in sound. I would bet that if one set up two "identical" arms on "identical" tables with "identical" cartridges, one would get a quite different results -- either the sound would be different or setup parameters would be quite different to get matching sound. Therefore, I have serious doubts that someone can make side-by-side comparisons that are reliable.

What then should one rely on in making a choice? At best, I think one has to go with personal experience (if one hears a good setup, it must be the case that the particular arm, and any other component in the setup, is capable of good sound in the right setup). Also, a rough consensus from people that have heard a wide range of systems is helpful.

I went with the Vector arm because an audio distribution representative personally recommended the Basis arm and table even though he does not represent the products (he has heard literally hundreds of systems and has very good ears). I have managed to work my combination of arm, table (Vector Basis Debut vacuum), Lyra Titan cartridge, and Viva Fono phonostage) into a very good sounding rig, but, I bet I could have great results with all the other arms under consideration.

A friend with a Basis 2500 table with two arms (Vector and Phantom) HATES the Phantom arm (to him it sounds lifeless and dark) and much prefers the 2.2 arm that the Phantom replaced. I would bet that this is a setup issue myself; I intend to help him work out the problems.

I have heard all three arms in question myself in systems that were well sorted and liked the sound. I would bet that any would be workable. Among people I've talked to personally there tends to be more polarized opinions about the Phantom and and the SME than the Triplanar. If the Triplanar is not someone's absolute favorite, it is still up near the top. The same can also be said of the Vector arm.

One thing for sure the damping fluid on the Phantom can make or break the tonearm / cartridge synergy. Using the recommended amount of damping fluid as per the manual is not the "right" way to go. I used much less. I would honestly suggest close to none for some cartridges.

Larryi,Larryi,Larryi -:)

Your first paragraph I absolutely agree,word for word with.Spot on!!....As usual.

Trust me,your Phantom "HATING" friend has a problem in his set-up......Period!!!Maybe fluid distribution,or another set-up parameter.I'm sure you'll help him here.Btw,make sure to get a nice bottle of wine as repay.-:)

The 2.2 I TOTALLY miss,because I "had" LP replay back then.I'll soon have LP replay again,but...

The Phantom beats the pants off the 2.2 in virtually any meaningful area!!It's not close,and I spent over a year rationalizing the "closeness" of the performance between the two....Not close!!I wish it were different,because I'd have more money,and LP replay if I still had my 2.2.

To be continued----

Best