Graham 2.2 Damping.


I know this thread is old & should be buried. I use a Transfiguration Phoenix 2 with a Graham 2.2 on an Oracle Delphi V with Turbo P/S. I agree with all that has been stated regarding Sirspeedy's findings. However regarding the use of other manufacturer's Damping Fluid, the following should be observed. Obtaining the correct stiffness in the arms movement to match any given cartridges compiant movement is only obtained by the correct amount of fluid used. Therefore using a less viscous damping fluid such as that from SME will surely only necessitate the use of more fluid to obtain the same result as when using Graham's own fluid.
yve9258

Showing 4 responses by sirspeedy

Having owned,and loved the 2.2(which is probably the best deal on the used market,btw)it truly was adjustable to almost anyone's particular tastes,through careful voicings.More-so than my current Phantom,which I do like alot(big time).
I was told,by a very good authority,that adding a particular motor oil(forgot which one...."something 300",I think)could potentially outperform the "blue fluid" which I use.Also,Graham was supposed to come out with a new,lower viscosity fluid,but that got held up.
So,my main feelings(soley an opinion)is to simply be happy with the Blue Fluid.It just happens to sound great,in both the still fabulous 2.2,and wonderful Phantom.
I just don't care,it is SO superb anyway!!
I am very sceptical about going SO high on the squared off portion of the bearing,as mentioned.My Orpheus likes a tad over the very most bottom.
Personally I am curious if there is a better mouse trap,in the way of out performing the IC-70 arm cable,which I use.
I've A/B'd the Purist Venustas to the IC-70 and thought the Graham cable beat it out in dynamics,and lack of darkening effect.BUT the jury is still out here,as there are so many variables affecting ultimate sound.
Gotta go....my wife & daughter are literally yelling at me to take them out to brunch......"OK,OK I'm coming"!
Best.
Barry,no I didn't think there were too many of the fairer sex into arm parameters :-)
This business of arm cabling is more complex than simple perceived performances,in a given set-up,I suspect.
The reason I say this(opinion only)is because I've read many different owners' opinions of various arm cabling,and I must assume they have vastly different expectations(from me) of "how" they might want their system to sound("voiced to differing tastes,maybe").
So,even though hobbyist "A" prefers cable "A" to cable "B","C",or "D" the actual perception that I might have could be different.
I'm certainly NOT disputing your claims.Just thinking it's a tough call,to go from a cable of the IC-70's performance(I had the IC-30 previously,and the IC-70 blew it away) to something else,unless it can be A/B'd in my set-up.
My friend had the IC-70 and moved to the Venustas.Three of us A/B'd the two cables,and I and another friend preferred the IC-70.
Of course,the fellow who actually spent HIS money on the Venustas(which is quite good,btw)preferred the Venustas.
I have a sneaky suspicion he is going to get the Tara "Zero One" arm cabling pretty soon,as he is itching to buy something new.Even though he needs "nothing"....Of course,being the self centered hobbyist I am,I am "definitely" pushing him to go for the Tara stuff,since he has the same arm and cartridge as me.Then I'll know a bit more :-)
The only caveat would be,if the Tara "killed" the IC-70!Then, I'd be unhappy....In a happy way-:)
Best.
Yve,believe my intent when I state that you can live with the "vastly underrated 2.2",for a LONG time!!The arm IS that good!!I love my new Phantom,but there is just "something" about the 2.2 that I miss...Be happy!!!

BTW,I do wish you could mention why you got rid of the Phantom!!Perhaps E-mail me in private?

Best.