SME 20/3 or Oracle Delphi VI or Garrard 301


I am just about to buy a new table. I have happily owned an original oracle Delphi for 30 years! Choices are the new 20/3, Oracle Delphi VI or possibly a rebuilt Garrard 301. They all run about the same money.
The reviews and comments out there lead me to believe I will be better off using a non SME arm on the 20/3...I will probably go with a Graham Phantom. (I like the removable arm tube concept too) For now I will use my SME IV.
keep reading the SME detractors claim that the tables are lifeless. Not something you can accuse a Delphi of for sure. The HiFi News reviews of both tables are nothing short of glowing. As far as I can tell the Oracle is possibly more nimble and musical(?) while the SME is more "solid".
Your thoughts are welcom
mauidj
Robob, "Not much to resonate there". What about the suspension itself? By definition, it resonates at a certain frequency.
ll these discussions about the "Performance" of a Turntable - the internal Qualities - will hardly end in a final Solution. The final solution exists, but when the Listener has different "Priorities" (-> Fun, Life, Action, Bass...) well...it depends. Money isn't the Solution, because there are lots outs there which are very expensive and at the end of day they won't tell you any new for 1/3 turntables.

Garrard
The right ones for Listeners who want Pace, Rythm, Timing, Bass and don't care about coloration or Precision in Reproduction, or in a full Swing Performance. The rattling idler moves so much energy into the platter and spindle that you will hear in every Record the Subway below Kingsway Hall.

Oracle
One of those designs which solved a lot of Problems (suspension) and does sound right. A classic. But based on its Chassis and light Platter it can't produce the lower octaves from Organ and other extreme earth quakes. But from overall Performance very well done.

SME
In a way the most serious ones of the 3. Their "Problem" when we can call it that way, is their own SME Arm. It is limiting the abilities from that table. Good as the SME V is, compared to others in Soundstaging, "Gestalt", right size of Instruments and distance, it is 2. rate. And very limited in the choice of cartridge alignment.
I would use that table with a Phantom II Arm or a DaVinci.
Then it will tell the listener something really new.
Many mahalos Syntax.
You have summed up my impressions from countless hours of research and questions on various fora.
While everyone has a different ear, perspective, system, environment musical taste etc etc...I believe a consensus can be arrived at after distilling all the data available on the internet....and I believe you have summed it up very well.
I am still listening to others' stories and advise but as each day passes I must admit I am moving slowly but surely towards the 20/3 with Phantom arm.
Not quite there yet.......
Just curious what your impressions are of direct drive units and the TW Raven which seems to have a loyal following on this forum.
Aloha!
Agree with Syntax, SME will be around forever to service this ( their main business is military equipment ), and with the new power supply/thicker chassis etc this is the bargain of the SME line. In many ways the SME IV is a better arm now that it has the same bearings as the V, but no damping/VTA whilst playing mechanisms that muddy the sound. I recall that Bob Graham used an SME 30 for a long time so I would be confidant the Graham is a good match.
Mahalo Syntax.
Do you know when they changed the bearing in the IV?
I purchased mine about 4 years ago.
Aloha!