Graham Phantom mk II & JA Michelle ORBE se help

Hello Audiodany, could you explain what 'the wrong front mark' is on your Michell armboard, don't think mine has this:

...O.............O
.
..........o o
..........o o
.
...........O

As long as I position it like this the only problem is a bit of a tight squeeze with the counterweight against the vta post when setting the pivot to spindle distance

Zargon, could you tell me how re-drilling the board will help

The main problem is the Orbe likes to have a combined tonearm + Michell armboard weight of about 1kg, anything significantly over/under then suspension setup is a pain and is compromised. My armboard has always been too heavy with my 2.2 so I've just had it machined thinner - better but still too heavy, I have ordered an acrylic armboard from Michell.

It's my understanding that the Phantom is heavier than the 2.2 so are owners using Michell acrylic armboards? How is the suspension with the Phantom?

Lastly, what tonearm cable are Michell/Graham users using? and do you have enough clearance between the Graham output post and the turntable?

Thanks

Ade

Hi Ade
My problem was the sticker "front" attached under the armboard.
Now my armboard is mounted like your plan ( but sticker "front" is always under the actually right hole
...O.............OX this was marked like"front"
..........o o
..........o o
.
...........O
I'ven't got any problem about the arm weight. I've found a stable level relatively easily, with no great difference between spring's charge. Other matter was the DIN connector clearance: space is narrow, very narrow! I've a Synergistic Resaearch Tricon Phono ( great cable!!) but it was a fight to stick it in place! The only advantage is that I'll never try another phono cable, I think, for a long long time :-)))

Did you ever contact Artech about the armboard? Are you still using the orig. alum. armboard for the Phantom? Acording to Artech, the Phantom's 1100 g. weight is too heavy for use with the orig. armboard and you should get the newer acrylic one made specifiaclly for the Phantom's added weight. Have you noticed that the suspension is more easily set into motion with the Phantom?
When I first set up the Orbe+Graham I had three different armboards all marked Graham 2's. All three were different. One was actually for a SME arm and the others were for the Graham 2 differed in weight (and height) by 40 grams or more. I also have issues with the way the holes are drilled and my weights come in contact with the VTA pillar when I swing the arm back to the arm rest. I experimented with the rotaion of the arm base and the armboard holes and found that you could mount it so the VTA pillar was farther to the rear. Unfortunately, the SME style mount doesn't work that way.

Hello
Please I have the same problem
Impossible setting correct, the counterweight hits the vta column
The J.A Michell have solved the problem?

The SME V has the base facing slightly towards the turntable spindle. The older
traditional SME arms had the base facing more directly at the spindle. Some
arms with SME bases can accommodate being mounted with the base facing the
front of the deck (as can SME arms with a reduction in range of adjustment of
overhang on the base slide).
I would imagine that the Graham SME mount is like that for a SME V. I know the
old standard J. Michell SME base can be rotated by 120 degrees to point forwards
or at the spindle. The illustrations above look like the traditional SME arm board.
Perhaps the SME board for the Phantom is like that for the SME V, except with a
different weight. Have a look at pics of Gyros with SME V. Hope that helps.

John