Tonearm choices

Grubscrew
I have it on good authority from a audio enthusiasts acquaintance which owed a TW Raven AC which incidentally ordered it purley on testimonials of others.
After a solid year with it he kept the arms and quikly sold the Raven for top dollar thanks to all the internet support.


This notion among other Raven owners that paired a Graham Phantom arm to their Raven is a callous mistake.
In other words this arm is not a good match to the table at all.

Why oh why do raven owners continue to support and rave about this combination????

I have the Raven along other tables. I think the Raven supports the Graham arm at least as good as the other tables. I am just detailing my experience.

hey grubbie, you got lots of responses, do you read them all? i see all the choices you were presented with - are havy metal to metal, "robocap" like tonearms. did you say you got new merc and wife? do you listen to music with her (wife)? - some nice piano or baritone sax by fireplace?
-why not to consider artemis TA-1 tonearm? i removed my metalurgical JMW 10.5i from my Aries 2 and install TA-1 and got nothing but big smile ever since. my wife was agaist at first but when i got back from Artemis with TA-1 on table she loves it. i was thinking about new cartridge too, but you realy don't need to, anything you put on that arm will sound wonderfull. listen to vinyl and smile...

Thank you all for your responses and varied ones at that.
Well folks I've managed to listen to listen to 3 tonearms on my AC. The Phantom, TW Raven tonearm and a Jelco 10"

To answer a few questions first:

I'm not a fan of unipivots so the Basis was off the table. OK it is half a unipivot but it was still of the table.

Larryi -
I compared the Whest Audio MC REF V MK4 to the Boulder 2008, AR PH7 - not a contender, BAT P10SE - which was just OK, EAR 834 Reference - very good but not quite.
The MC REF V MK4 is building momentum out there. I was on another forum chatting to 2 MC REF V users in Asia. It seems that the MC REF V MK4 is big over there with their big Walkers and Continumm tables. One user also has the new Whest PS.30RDT Special Edition which he uses with his Raven AC/ Phantom / Ortofon A90. I can see why TW Raven users go for the Phantom - but read on.
I have been asked a few times about the MC REF V MK4 and all I can say is that it is a very very special phonostage and my last - no bullcrap, just solid design and resolution to die for, it makes the Boulder 2008 sound positively broken!

Blackburn – the TW AC/ Phantom combination really does work! Don’t take the word of someone else, listen for yourself!

JJmira – I don’t know the Artemis or where to even get one.

Now to the review:

I had to take my cartridge out everytime but that was Ok as the setup on all three, once you have spend the best part of 3 hours initially, was pretty straight forward.

I used my TW AC, Transfiguration Orpheus, Whest Audio MC REF V Mk4 phonostage, Ayre pre/power and Wilson Puppy 8.
I played the Jelco first as I was used to a Jelco based arm previously. This Jelco is a Jelco and quite unlike the Feickert 10.5 I had before. the 10" Jelco sounded brighter and less musical than I remember but then who remembers sound?

The TW Raven arm was next. I borrowed this from a friend of a friend. he was OK about it as he sat in on the dem. The arm is nice but has some no so good points. The arm lift I was told is not like any other. It's true. The arm clip is connected to the arm lift mechanism. So when you lift the arm, the clip raises also. It felt wrong and is wrong!
The TW arm is very good. A bit too tidy is some places but very nice to listen to. It is very quiet. Surface noise is not an issue with this arm and pops seem to be faster with it. With the Orpheus/ Whest MC REF V the combination sounded Germanic if you know what I mean.
I did like it bu really wanted to get to the Graham.
This took a bit more time to setup. The TW takes about 1/2 the time to setup.

The Phantom went on and again sounded very tidy and much like the TW arm. Not that they sound the same because they don't but I could easily live with any of the two arms.

So what differences did I hear. The Graham sounded bigger but definitely not as fast. The TW was quieter (geometry?) but not as deep in soundstage. The Graham if anything was a bit tiresome compared to the TW but I think that it was because the TW had the edge in the upper registers.

BOY was this hard.

Soundstage depth - TW
Soundstage width - Phantom
Bottom end - TW
Midband - Phantom
Treble - TW
Noise levels - TW

Well there the TW wins 4 - 2. But it's flippin' close. You can live with any of them. I would not say it's clearcut like listening to the Orpheus vs Cadenza Black or the Boulder 2008 vs MC REF V MK4.
It's more like driving the same car twice, swapping over the tyres made by 2 well known manufacturers inbetween drives.

I really like the TW geometry in that is allowed you to hear end-of-side much like a 12" but with the speed of a 9".

I think I will go the TW route as the waiting time is only a few weeks compared to the Phantom a couple of months.

NOTE: The VTA on-the-fly is a waste of time on the TW. You only ever use it once and lock it up. We all felt that a normal 'fixed' base would most likely sound better anyway.
If you are a dealer then I can see the purpose of the VTA adjuster, other than that...
The armlift on the TW was also weird. It needs redesigning. Having the arm clip move up-and-down is non-sense.

I hope that was an OK review or something like a helpful writeup. It was hard but I got there - I think.

grubbie

Grubscrew,

Thanks for your followup reporting. I did not quite understand your comment about unipivots and why the Basis arm was out of the running on that account. The Phantom is also a unipivot arm. Both arms do not shake side-to-side, as is the case with some unipivots, because they both have mechanisms to stabilize the arm (magnets with the Phantom, and the arm leaning against a precision ball bearing with the Basis Vector).

Did you get to try the Triplanar? That is another very popular pivoted arm.