Basis Vector 3 vs. Schröder, Triplanar, Graham

So, by your reasoning, can any Basis owner be objective? I have owned both the Graham 2.2 and the Vector (model 1) and used them both on a Basis 2500. I don't know how these two arms stack up against the others mentioned but I do agree that they are pretty close to each other. My experience with the Graham and Vector led me to believe that it came down to which cartridge was mounted. I liked one cartridge on one arm better than I liked the cartridge on the other. I have not mastered the techniques used to get the most from the Graham so I tend to think mine could perform better. At the same time I am not familiar with how much of a difference there is between the model 1 and model 3 Vector.

Also, Chris does not manufacture arms and he does list the Vector on his website. He is talking about arms here, not tables, so I don't see the conflict.

I was there for those arm comparisons too. I own a Teres but I don't sell tonearms, though I have owned a few. I hope that makes me objective enough. FWIW, my "ranking" from those sessions would be as follows:

SESSION I (using two Shelter 901's, Koetsu RSP & Urushi)
Schroeder Ref
(unbridgeably large gap)
Basis Vector I + Teres VTA adaptor
Graham 2.2

The Basis and Graham were close, but I gave the nod to the Basis for slightly superior dynamics. The design of the Vector certainly seemed more promising than the Graham's. It had a more stable bearing, a more stable headshell/cartridge interface and a continous run of wire. For the price, the Vector I + Teres adaptor was an easy winner vs. the Graham. Even if it only matched the Graham it was $800-900 cheaper, which would have bought a nice cartridge upgrade.

Neither one, however, belonged in the same room with the Reference. Its superiority was jaw-dropping, as befitted its price.

SESSION II (using two ZYX UNIverses & Lyra Olympos)
Schroeder Ref/TriPlanar VII (near tie, a matter of taste, system and budget)
Schroeder DPS
Schroeder Two
(very large gap)
Graham 2.2

IMO the big surprises from this session were:
1. How close the TriPlanar VII came to the Ref
2. How thoroughly the $2400 Model Two quashed the $3900 Graham (priced with cable).

Unfortunately, we did not listen to the Basis on this occasion, so placing it against the lower Schroeders requires speculation. The Schroeder Model Two costs even less than the Vector and "probably" outperforms it by a good margin. If I were in the market for a tonearm and had to choose from those above, I'd go for a Schroeder Model Two for $2400, a TriPlanar for $3900 or perhaps a Schroeder Ref for $5500, the latter two being very close.

***
Notice: This article contains backward-looking statements. Past performance is no guarantee of future results. This article is not a solicitation to sell. Always demo in your own system. Listen carefully before investing or sending money. Consult a marriage advisor for possible domestic consequences. We are not licensed to offer marital advice. IMO, IME, YMMV, FWIW, IIRC.

Just to set the timetable right, the Model 2.2, after being such a good product for years, is now entering retirement with gratitude and thanks. The Phantom replaces the 2.2, being superior in all areas of function and performance. I hope it, too, will enjoy as much acceptance and even more musical satisfaction for it's owners than the earlier arms have. And there's more to come! (Did someone mention turntables?) - Bob Graham

Well for what it is worth I have to break my promised silence,here,in defense of CELLO,and his supposed "preferences"for any particular product (something which to even hint at,is absurd,if you've met him)!I base these comments on what is in his set-up,and how it performs in that specific configuration.Everyone has their own set of "audio turn ons",but when you hear something really well thought out,and set up(even when it is not to your exact preference,but REALLY works),you cannot help but notice.BTW-I am not a close friend,or was ever at any other listening session,there.I DO have alot of experience/years in the hobby,and also have a bit of a "big mouth"!For the latter,I feel bad,but that's the way it is!(WAS!!!)

I was at Cello's for a listening session last fall.Though I did have my own "silly" issues (which basically, I felt, embarassed me off the web,and rightfully so)I have to state that there is NO way I believe Cello is jaded towards any product,or manufacturer.It would also seem fairly normal,in a good business sense,to have a mfgr be on friendly terms with a hobbyist who has some exposure to other hobbyists.I have my own relationships,like this,and some of my friends have very healthy ones,as well.In reality,this is a very symbiotic relationship,and doesn't have to mean collusion!Also,if "said mfgrs products"are not up to "long term snuff",they are ALWAYS short lived,to a true music lover.

I guess one would have to actually meet,and converse with Cello to get a sense of how he operates,and vying for mfgr.favoritism doesn't seem to be in his persona.Trust me,he could probably get whatever he wants.What impressed me most was that he seems to make buying decisions based on confidence in his own hearing perceptions,and tastes ONLY!I have a couple of audio pals who rationalize product purchases,based upon "deals/product reviews/and newness",which is long term foolish.Guess how long they hold on to something?Guess whether,or not their systems impress as much as Cello's?BTW-Cello's speakers are far from the latest "rave",and are older than my back issues of "Sounds Like"!AND,as configured, are great(as in accurately reproduce "music").Yet,it is a rare hobbyist who goes after what ONLY he/or she hears as "good".So my hat is off to those(really few)who have that particular propensity!

That being said,and admitting that this could seem to come off as some kind of suck-up(which it is NOT,but this is the real "me",this time around)I must confess that after hearing the "now famous" Nola Grand Ref/ASR Emitter/all Nordost" set-up two weeks ago,I preferred the overall presentation,and intimacy of Cello's more modest,yet carefully thought out(more carefully thought out than any of MY past posts,BTW)system.So,to my way of seeing things,and in lieu of my own foolish misgivings,his observations ARE sincere,and accurate enough to be taken at face value!!

@Tubes 108. True.