Unipivots Hadcocks Vs Grahams

RE:Cmk:
"If given the choice, I would prefer unipivots too, just want to know what pushes you in that direction."
The K.I.S.S principle has drawn me to the unipivot. Reviewers seem to pick unipivot designs in their 'cream of the crop' selections. I think they are very musical, yet get 'out of the way' more than other designs. I've also had a modified Rega (the Rega/Origin Live is the easy-option as a replacement tonearm choice on the SL1200 series TT) and I was totally underwhelmed.

"This maybe crazy, but you could consider a Schroeder model 2, which has the same spindle to pivot distance as a Rega, ie 222mm."
Thanks for the tip. What a beautiful looking arm!! I had a quick look for a price- no joy. Are the Schroeders going for crazy money?

Re:Pops-
"The only advice I can give is I recently moved from a Rega 300 to a Hadcock 228 with an ortofon jubilee and am very happy. The Hadcock was a significant improvement!"
Thanks, Pops- I thought that would be the case and I'm counting on a similar result if I go unipivot.

RE: Rauliruegas
"You change from the wonderful Garrot cartridge ( I don't know why. )
IMHO the tonearm choice decision must be take it around the cartridge."
I wanted to get a MM cartridge and the Ortofon was the surprise candidate. It looks like a top cartridge and I can replace the stylus easy-peasy. Once I had decided to go unipivot, it narrowed the field to cartridges that can really take advantage of the design's attributes- albeit at a modest price! The Ortofon 2M Black fits the bill, and the dollar bill.

A few decades ago, the unipivot was cast aside as a dinosaur. Now unipivot designs are in the the Top 10 lists of suggested quality audio equipment.

Perhaps one day soon, the underrated and overlooked quality design of the Technics direct drive will be rediscovered big-time, like the unipivot. It's happening already- Kudos to Kevin at KAB and many others who are tweaking the Technics and smiling all the way!

What happened to the people who thought that wow and flutter figures were vitally important to consider? We know the Regas were fast (I owned a P3 and it drove me nuts). I'd like to stick a strobe gun on some of the high-flyer super turntables out there. I bet the wow/flutter and speed stability results of some of those decks would shock. On the Technics? Speed and wow/flutter issues? Please!

Thanks to Raul, Pops and SMK for helping me along with unusual audio quest.

Hello Raul,
Do you count tonearms to get to sleep? All of what said is true and some of it I even already know. To a degree, it's like russian roulette. However, the weight/compliance issue is at least a good starting point.

It's a little like front wheel drive versus rear wheel drive. Everyone has an opinion on it. For the record, front wheel drive only makes sense to me if I look at manufacturing costs and, perhaps petrol consumption. Beyond that, its plain dumb. However, like certain tonearm designs, if done well, it does work well.

In the end, due to money, time and availability, we go with design principles as a starting point (at least I do). The theory behind Unipivot arms makes real sense. Keep it simple, use good materials, and manufacture to tight tolerances.

With so many tonearms and cartridge combinations tested, what would you suggest I do? We have a few givens. (1) I own a direct drive Technics SL1210 (2) I will soon have an Ortofon 2M Black (3) I have a strong preference for a unipivot arm (4) this thread is about choosing between the Hadcock and a Graham (older 1.5 albeit) (5) It actually has to be able to fitted to the Technics (6) I don't want a Rega or a Moth or a Origin Live Silver.

You could also give me your take on the Graham 1.5. Too old? Too light in the bass?

Hello everyone: Great responses- thanks!
RE:0luuke1- That's interesting about the Grado "failing". Is the cantilever on the way out? Stylus worn? Regarding the Ortofon Black- perhaps it seems a little bright in comparison to the "failing" Grado. And, as you said, it will take time to settle in. Keep us posted on its performance. I'm sure there are others looking for a MM that has exceptional bang for the buck- I know I am and I'm looking forward to trying the 2M when it arrives!

RE: Raul- And it's with advise from experienced guys like you that we can make better better decisions when setting up a rig- thanks again.

RE:Br_ian- Good point. Although the Hadcock is a simpler design, it does have the downside of being a fiddle to set up. The Graham has that covered (like the 80's vintage arm on the Technics- that arm is SO easy to set-up). Interesting comments regarding the matching of cartridges- it looks like the Hadcock can be happy with most cartridges that are set into it's chrome wand.

So, anyone out there with an early Graham (1.5, 2.0, 2.2) who like to throw their hat into the ring and comment the arm's performance? I read in an old Stereophile review that the 1.5 is bass-shy (it doesn't resolve the bass- the lower octaves are free from colouration or so it seems??) Comments welcomed!

HI Countingbackwards: Great tips on the Graham tonearm- thanks. Do you know if the bearing was upgraded for your model (1.5tc/2.2) from the bearing on the original 1.5 (basic)?

One thing about the Hadcock (and most arms- unless you want to change VTA on every record...) is that once the set-up is done, it's done.

Hello 0luke1,
Contact me with some detail on the arm you are thinking of selling.

And when it's done, it's done- right Pops?

Pops: Thanks for the set-up info.

RE: Graham owners- looking at the custom mount 2.0, would you say that this would be too hard to get into a Technics? The DIN junction box looks like it would only be suitable for specific decks? Any thoughts?

A poster (Cmk) suggested a Schroeder Arm as an alternative to the Hadcock and the Graham. Since I am exploring unusual options, I thought it might make an interesting thread. So, I will start a thread on the Schroeder Model 2 arm, its compatibility with the Technics, and its compatibility with the Ortofon 2M Black.