SME 20/2 SME V or Triplanar VII?

Gladstone,sorry if I seemed a bit defensive.The Grand Prix does look "way cool",but c'mon,it's as itsy bitsy as the "Cello's window bikini babes' outfits",and they are asking twenty grand for it.It just looks a little pricey,but of course design developement can be used to diminish my comments(opinion,only).
Also,if you read about it,on the Pos Feedback site(I did),it REALLY could not have been TOO BIG a stretch for the reviewer(who admittedly has,and is thrilled with)to make an "itsy bitsy" comparison with his beloved Walker Proscenium table.Not a "peep" there.Where's Arthur Salvatore when you need him?We got stroked,there!!
What a "PUFF" piece,to state how wonderful the Grand Prix "seems",and not compare it to the Walker,sitting five feet away.
Can anyone say "marketing" shmooze?Condescending,to boot.We deserved a comparison.At least !!

Ed,To give a bit of insight as to your question,I have a nice Graham 2.2 that I love.A nice arm,like so many spoken of here!I am now familiar with the Phantom too,yet have not made any side by side comparisons.The Phantom is a superb arm,and is very well thought out.It will,most importantly, mate with a vast majority of cartridges we hear about.It is a better match to a wider variety of these cartridges,than the 2.2(which ain't chopped liver).
I don't believe it is as sensitive as the "fussy" 2.2 is,when it comes to the damping fluid,though I like to use this extra degree of fussiness to actually voice my front end,a bit.
The arm is very "substantial" and the bearing is really robust,and the bass is "apparently" on the "BOLD" side.YMMV!The magna-glide feature really works,especially if you have alot of non flat records(a good vacuum table kinda negates this).
Actually there's not much to "not like" about it.The finish,btw,is every bit as good as the SME(I had two SME V's).
Most importantly,taking a look at pricing,it was not overdone,at the 3900 dollar asking price.I think this may have gone up,though,so you make that call.A really good phono cable is a MUST,here!
Best of luck,with your decision!

BTW,Dougy...How can you assume I can appreciate and follow an analog waveform.Are you trying to make me jealous?I'll be lucky to hear a lousy CD,by the Holiday season,if I'm lucky!!
The only music I can play(these days),is on my "Walkman" at the gym!So if I do go my usual route of obnoxiousness,please cut me a small break.I'm hurting!
Also,STOP posting about your fabulous "super duper" new electronics,by "what's his name"!!
It only makes me envious! -:)
Best...."lucky dog"!!

I use the Zyx UNIverse with the Graham Phantom.When you would like to see a pic, see my System.
Cheers

Hi Ed,

If I had the time, I'd be evaluating the Phantom right now. Unfortunately, this is proving to be a busy Summer, and free time such as it were is booked for other projects. I'm hopeful that I can pick this up in the Fall.

Some on this list may think that because my tastes do not lean towards the 2.2, that I might not be interested in the Phantom.

There are two very potent reasons for me wanting to spend time with the Phantom.

1. The 2.2 is a joy to set up and tracks marvelously. I expect nothing less of the Phantom.

2. My experiences with the shift from my Teflon composite platter architecture to the TPI may very well parallel what Bob has learned about his tonearm designs.

With respect to item 2 above, the single minor criticism I had with my Teflon composite platters (and I do mean minor), is that in the wrong system, they could sound the slightest bit bright. To my ears however, their other virtues could not be ignored. The TPI top layer addresses this issue.

The general reports I've read about the Phantom would lead me to believe that there is some parallel progress being made in this area and I'm very interested in hearing the results.

Cheers,
Thom @ Galibier

OK, I've decided and ordered a Phantom.

My bottom line reasoning was (a) it has the adjustment flexibility of the Triplanar, but the adjustments are easier to make, (b) its craftsmanship, fit and finish are up to SME standards, (c) I called Bob Graham and he told me that his personal TT is an SME 30/2 and he developed the Phantom on the 30/2 and on an available 20/2, causing me to reason that the Phantom should be at least as synergistic with the 20/2 as the SME V and probably even more so since it was developed more recently on SME's current TTs and with the current best cartridges, (d) the guy I bought the 20/2 from is replacing it with the Grand Prix Audio Monaco TT, an unsuspended design I believe, and he evaluated it with the following arms: Dynavector, Phantom, Triplanar & SME V, which finished in that order top to bottom, with the Universe, XV1S, top of the line Lyra, causing me to reason that the Phantom should work very well with the Galibier tables, a theory I hope is born out when Thom does find the time to evaluate the Phantom with his tables (so it should work equally well for me with Galibier), (e) Bob Graham put a lot of time and resources into developing a current state of the art arm so it should have bettered most if not all of the current top arms out there, (f) being among the latest designs-redesigns among the top arms makers, it should be around a while.

In other words, I've listened to the many excellent points made by each of you on this thread, and I think the Phantom satisfies more of those points than either the Triplanar or the SME V, at least for my purposes.

BTW, Bob Graham is a really nice guy, very approachable and easy to talk with and he's using a new bearing (Swiss-made, I think) with the Phantoms he's making now which he says surprised him at how much better it was than his initial bearing.

Next up, which cartridge with the 20/2 and Phantom?

Thanks and best to you all. I will keep you posted.

Ed