Triplanar VII U 12
- Thread starter gian60
- Start date
I used to own the 10 version Gian. It was a very nice arm to own in terms of adjustability, tracking, cueing, setup. I didn’t hear another arm on that TT (Kuzma Ref) so couldn’t say how it compares to others.
Since 2013 I've had a Tri-Planar Mk VII U2-SE ordered with copper wiring - this is the 10-inch version. Back then I also had an SME V which after a while I sold. At present I also have the Kuzma 4Point 11-inch.
In some areas, the 4Point draws from the Tri-Planar design heritage: VTA tower w/ VTA on the fly; removable horizontal damping fluid trough; similar azimuth adjustment. Both 'arms are easy to set up and easy to use.
The Tri-Planar holds its settings very well over time. Azimuth has slightly finer adjustment than 4Point. 4Point has finer VTA adjustment than Tri-Planar. Tri-Planar allows adjustment of cueing speed, 4Point does not. On Tri-Planar you must have arm lock open before raising cueing lever or eventually cueing mechanism will leak.
Effective mass of Tri-Planar is 11g; 4Point is 18g. Lower compliance cartridges work well with the 4Point. As usual pay attention to cartridge matching. As @Audiophile Bill and I learned, some vdH carts out of box will not fit Tri-Planar - see here.
Sonically, 4Point is a bit more transparent and resolute, most notably in the lower mid-range and mid-bass to low bass region. Both arms do well on music with a vivacious fluid character, themselves bringing no grain or etch. Upper-highs may be a teeny bit smoother on Tri-Planar ... may be. If I look at my own usage between the two, I use the 4Point ~ two=thirds of the time.
In some areas, the 4Point draws from the Tri-Planar design heritage: VTA tower w/ VTA on the fly; removable horizontal damping fluid trough; similar azimuth adjustment. Both 'arms are easy to set up and easy to use.
The Tri-Planar holds its settings very well over time. Azimuth has slightly finer adjustment than 4Point. 4Point has finer VTA adjustment than Tri-Planar. Tri-Planar allows adjustment of cueing speed, 4Point does not. On Tri-Planar you must have arm lock open before raising cueing lever or eventually cueing mechanism will leak.
Effective mass of Tri-Planar is 11g; 4Point is 18g. Lower compliance cartridges work well with the 4Point. As usual pay attention to cartridge matching. As @Audiophile Bill and I learned, some vdH carts out of box will not fit Tri-Planar - see here.
Sonically, 4Point is a bit more transparent and resolute, most notably in the lower mid-range and mid-bass to low bass region. Both arms do well on music with a vivacious fluid character, themselves bringing no grain or etch. Upper-highs may be a teeny bit smoother on Tri-Planar ... may be. If I look at my own usage between the two, I use the 4Point ~ two=thirds of the time.
My triplanar has silver wiring, thought it was standard on the new SE arms along with the carbon fiber arm tube and all edges rounded off.
After initially having (in the past) Linn Ittok, Sumiko the arm, sme iv then v, I’ve had 2 triplanar, the most recent of which is only a few months old, as I had no analogue set up whilst in the Middle East.
There’s a lot of choice out there, but regrettably, I can only go mfsl personal experience.
Good luck with whatever you finally decide to use.
After initially having (in the past) Linn Ittok, Sumiko the arm, sme iv then v, I’ve had 2 triplanar, the most recent of which is only a few months old, as I had no analogue set up whilst in the Middle East.
There’s a lot of choice out there, but regrettably, I can only go mfsl personal experience.
Good luck with whatever you finally decide to use.
I was the distributing the original Triplanar in the early to mid 90,s working closely to its original designer Herb papier a real gentleman. Back then the three top tonearms were the Sme V, Triplanar and the Graham. The triplanar had a nice even midrange it was by far the best tonearm for the Sme model 30 a combination that actually did work well,on some decks like the Kuzma I always found the tonearm rather lifeless and boring. The bass was never that defined and controlled and lacked real weight I worked out the Vta tower was weak point and was not very ridged so I went about modifying the tonearm adding extra stability by driling and tapping the main collum and adding a extra bolt. The difference was staggering the bass was much deeper and better defined. I always found the arm pleasant but had to be carefully matched in terms of Turntable and cartridge and needed a lot of care in set up. I have owned every version since the MK1 to the latest offerings the arm is certainly capable and one could right pages on what decks and cartridges worked well, I still find it quite a fussy performer in getting the best out of it but with care its a fine arm not a easy one to get the best out of I still hear some of its original virtues but to a lesser extent. It certainly is not the most transparent arm around neither does it shout out its virtues but if one wants a nice sounding tonearm and is not hankering for the most earth shattering bass capable its a enjoyable performer and can still make you smile. I am happy its still in production and can see Herb Papier smiling that his design still pleases so many. I have collected every version from herbs originals to the latest because I knew how passionate herb was in creating this tonearm. One might hanker something more exciting and less coloured and better bass but for sure it can still play nice music in the right set up.
This is a great comparison Tim. I realize this is really old, but I’m trying to decide between a Triplanar U12 and Kuzma 14 4 Pt so this is helpful. Thanks!
Last edited:
You are quite welcome. My post is a few years back but the arms are essentially the same although the 4Point now has upgraded bearings.
Two other items: The Tri-Planar has a flat base with its cable coming off the side of the VTA tower, while the 4-Point requires a hole for mounting with its lower section below deck level, with its cable coming out the bottom of the arm.
Both arms can be ordered with different wiring. The default for the Tri-Planar is silver but can be ordered with copper. The default for the 4-Point is Crystal Cable silver-gold tonearm wire; options include Cardas Clear (copper,) Konda (silver,) and Crystal-Cable MonoCrystal. I have the Kondo but caution it is expensive. If I had it to do over again I might opt for the Cardas.
Last edited:
I like both arms. The 4P has the removable headshell which makes cartridge change easier. The 4P has a slight edge over the Tri-Planar in mid to low bass articulation and tone.
A recent conversation with another Triplanar user suggested that its arm's advantage can be attributed to the bearings. This discussion seems to indicate that the most recent 4P improvements are, in some respect, due to improvements to the bearings. Can you elaborate?
Hi John
I believe what you write is correct.
The 4Points jeweled bearings (ruby and sapphire) on all four of its points contribute to the most recent 4Point's sound. Check the link in my post #11 above. I wrote an article on the change in 4Point bearings.
The Triplanar has extraordinarily hard and precise milspec bearings implemented with extremely low friction. The bearngs are on the same plane as the record which supports consistent tracking pressure on the record.
Nice to see you,
Tim
Similar threads
 | Steve Williams Site Founder | Site Owner | Administrator |  | Ron Resnick Site Co-Owner | Administrator |  | Julian (The Fixer) Website Build | Marketing Managersing |