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.

While the DVD Consortium's Working Group 4 (WG-4) is still working on the 0.9 specification for DVD-Audio, Sony and Philips have been silently carrying on work on their Super Audio CD, the consumer implementation of Sony's DSD. The Sony/Philips disc will have two layers, one carrying normal 44.1kHz, 16-bit CD information (and thus guaranteeing backwards compatibility with existing CD players), the other carrying eight channels in DSD format (two for high-quality stereo, six for surround), plus text and/or graphics.

The market for recorded music, measured by what manufacturers ship to retail and non-retail channels, experienced a decline in unit shipments and dollar value according to a <A HREF="http://www.riaa.com">Recording Industry Association of America</A> (RIAA) report released February 19. Concurrently, accounts from US record retailers and mass merchandisers indicated a banner 1997.