Graham Phantom Supreme?


Has anyone done a comparison between the Supreme and the mkII? Is it worth changing and expending the extra outlay?

The main revisions appear to be the bearing housing and an improved magneglide stabiliser (I think the internal wiring was up to a good standard already on the mkII)

There is a company called AudioMax Ltd (approved contractor?) which can perform upgrades from both Phantom I and Phantom II to the Supreme build.
Any experience of this conversion out there ?
Many thanks... :)
moonglum
Egrady, it may not be SRA that's causing the sound to be harsh, there's a very strong possibility of incorrect azimuth. In all of the alignments I've done, rarely is the optimum azimuth setting at the dead level position, regardless of the cost of the cartridge. The effect can be mind blowing in some cases.
I must have been lucky....
In contrast to your experience (Egrady) everything happened strictly "by the numbers" for me.
I found that once the arm was levelled for VTF, the ideal mid-range setting of force for the Lyra Delos was perfect.
Whenever I change the VTA to suit a given weight of disc, I optimise for the best sound then find that, coincidentally, the bubble ends up bang in the centre. Nice when that happens.
My previous cart was the Music Maker III whose instructions specified that the cart face should be strictly perpendicular to the disc surface for best VTA. The arm I was using at the time, a Linn Ittok LVII, was not helpful for precision tuning of VTA (if you unlocked the arm pillar to make a super-fine adjustment there was no guarantee that you'd actually achieved it!) so in common with a lot of folk I made up for it as best I could with VTF adjustment. The cartridge actually sounded fine and tracked well at both 1.53g and 1.58g. (Range 1.5-1.6)
Hi All,

I had my Phantom II upgraded to the Supreme status a while back and finally had a chance to install it. Some comments:

1) this arm has incredible macro and micro dynamics. It's is one of the first things that stands out. Dynamics start continue and die out in the sharpest way that I have ever experienced. This is real, natural dynamics without any glare or break-up.

2) the amount of detail is significantly increased. Inner details are easily rendered.

3) this arm has perfect timing. It is not slow or fast....just right

4) all of the above create a timbarally, detailed and dynamic presentation which is much much better than the original II.

I have compared it side by side with the triplanar-7 uII and is unquestionably the superior arm in my system.

It's is a highly recommended upgrade.

Andrew
Thanks for the post, Aoliviero. My Supreme-upgraded Phantom II should be here in a week--after a four month absence. I'm really looking forward to it. I have that Triplanar, too, and thought the Phantom II was already a wee bit better.
Wrm57,

I agree I felt the Phantom II was better than the triplanar. You will be shocked by the Supreme. The new version has a very live attack without sounding threadbare or strident. The triplanar is a little fuller but is missing a lot in comparison. The Supreme can also sound full but there is now a larger gap between recordings. The triplanar tends to have a house sound where the Supreme is mores neutral.

I still like the tripalanr and plan to keep it.

Andrew