When Bob Graham introduced his <A HREF="http://www.stereophile.com//analogsourcereviews/400/">1.5 tonearm</A> at the end of the 1980s, many thought he was dreaming: Vinyl was going the way of the console radio&mdash;who would invest two-grand-plus in a <I>tonearm</I>? But there was a method to Graham's madness&mdash;he'd designed his arm to be a drop-in replacement for more than 20 years' worth of SME arms, all of which shared the same mounting platform. Perhaps, in his wildest dreams, Graham had already envisioned the current "analog revival"&mdash;but even without it, he figured there'd be a robust replacement market, and he was poised to exploit it with what he thought was a superior product.

When Bob Graham introduced his <A HREF="http://www.stereophile.com//analogsourcereviews/400/">1.5 tonearm</A> at the end of the 1980s, many thought he was dreaming: Vinyl was going the way of the console radio&mdash;who would invest two-grand-plus in a <I>tonearm</I>? But there was a method to Graham's madness&mdash;he'd designed his arm to be a drop-in replacement for more than 20 years' worth of SME arms, all of which shared the same mounting platform. Perhaps, in his wildest dreams, Graham had already envisioned the current "analog revival"&mdash;but even without it, he figured there'd be a robust replacement market, and he was poised to exploit it with what he thought was a superior product.

When Bob Graham introduced his <A HREF="http://www.stereophile.com//analogsourcereviews/400/">1.5 tonearm</A> at the end of the 1980s, many thought he was dreaming: Vinyl was going the way of the console radio&mdash;who would invest two-grand-plus in a <I>tonearm</I>? But there was a method to Graham's madness&mdash;he'd designed his arm to be a drop-in replacement for more than 20 years' worth of SME arms, all of which shared the same mounting platform. Perhaps, in his wildest dreams, Graham had already envisioned the current "analog revival"&mdash;but even without it, he figured there'd be a robust replacement market, and he was poised to exploit it with what he thought was a superior product.

When Bob Graham introduced his <A HREF="http://www.stereophile.com//analogsourcereviews/400/">1.5 tonearm</A> at the end of the 1980s, many thought he was dreaming: Vinyl was going the way of the console radio&mdash;who would invest two-grand-plus in a <I>tonearm</I>? But there was a method to Graham's madness&mdash;he'd designed his arm to be a drop-in replacement for more than 20 years' worth of SME arms, all of which shared the same mounting platform. Perhaps, in his wildest dreams, Graham had already envisioned the current "analog revival"&mdash;but even without it, he figured there'd be a robust replacement market, and he was poised to exploit it with what he thought was a superior product.

When Bob Graham introduced his <A HREF="http://www.stereophile.com//analogsourcereviews/400/">1.5 tonearm</A> at the end of the 1980s, many thought he was dreaming: Vinyl was going the way of the console radio&mdash;who would invest two-grand-plus in a <I>tonearm</I>? But there was a method to Graham's madness&mdash;he'd designed his arm to be a drop-in replacement for more than 20 years' worth of SME arms, all of which shared the same mounting platform. Perhaps, in his wildest dreams, Graham had already envisioned the current "analog revival"&mdash;but even without it, he figured there'd be a robust replacement market, and he was poised to exploit it with what he thought was a superior product.

When Bob Graham introduced his <A HREF="http://www.stereophile.com//analogsourcereviews/400/">1.5 tonearm</A> at the end of the 1980s, many thought he was dreaming: Vinyl was going the way of the console radio&mdash;who would invest two-grand-plus in a <I>tonearm</I>? But there was a method to Graham's madness&mdash;he'd designed his arm to be a drop-in replacement for more than 20 years' worth of SME arms, all of which shared the same mounting platform. Perhaps, in his wildest dreams, Graham had already envisioned the current "analog revival"&mdash;but even without it, he figured there'd be a robust replacement market, and he was poised to exploit it with what he thought was a superior product.

When Bob Graham introduced his <A HREF="http://www.stereophile.com//analogsourcereviews/400/">1.5 tonearm</A> at the end of the 1980s, many thought he was dreaming: Vinyl was going the way of the console radio&mdash;who would invest two-grand-plus in a <I>tonearm</I>? But there was a method to Graham's madness&mdash;he'd designed his arm to be a drop-in replacement for more than 20 years' worth of SME arms, all of which shared the same mounting platform. Perhaps, in his wildest dreams, Graham had already envisioned the current "analog revival"&mdash;but even without it, he figured there'd be a robust replacement market, and he was poised to exploit it with what he thought was a superior product.

When Bob Graham introduced his <A HREF="http://www.stereophile.com//analogsourcereviews/400/">1.5 tonearm</A> at the end of the 1980s, many thought he was dreaming: Vinyl was going the way of the console radio&mdash;who would invest two-grand-plus in a <I>tonearm</I>? But there was a method to Graham's madness&mdash;he'd designed his arm to be a drop-in replacement for more than 20 years' worth of SME arms, all of which shared the same mounting platform. Perhaps, in his wildest dreams, Graham had already envisioned the current "analog revival"&mdash;but even without it, he figured there'd be a robust replacement market, and he was poised to exploit it with what he thought was a superior product.

When Bob Graham introduced his <A HREF="http://www.stereophile.com//analogsourcereviews/400/">1.5 tonearm</A> at the end of the 1980s, many thought he was dreaming: Vinyl was going the way of the console radio&mdash;who would invest two-grand-plus in a <I>tonearm</I>? But there was a method to Graham's madness&mdash;he'd designed his arm to be a drop-in replacement for more than 20 years' worth of SME arms, all of which shared the same mounting platform. Perhaps, in his wildest dreams, Graham had already envisioned the current "analog revival"&mdash;but even without it, he figured there'd be a robust replacement market, and he was poised to exploit it with what he thought was a superior product.

When Bob Graham introduced his <A HREF="http://www.stereophile.com//analogsourcereviews/400/">1.5 tonearm</A> at the end of the 1980s, many thought he was dreaming: Vinyl was going the way of the console radio&mdash;who would invest two-grand-plus in a <I>tonearm</I>? But there was a method to Graham's madness&mdash;he'd designed his arm to be a drop-in replacement for more than 20 years' worth of SME arms, all of which shared the same mounting platform. Perhaps, in his wildest dreams, Graham had already envisioned the current "analog revival"&mdash;but even without it, he figured there'd be a robust replacement market, and he was poised to exploit it with what he thought was a superior product.