Anyone have experience with the Nanotec Nespa?

Actually I have a RealityCheck duplicator. Yes I do like it but it's the biggest pain in the ass to use. First you have to clean both the original CD and then clean the CDR, then copy it then make a lable, a VEY time consumming job. I'd rather be listening to music, that's what's it all about, correct? The Nespa is simple and quick, for the very short time I've had the unit, it is fantastic, I've even used it on my black duplicated CDR's and heard improvements, but I think I'll stop using hte RealityCheck unit and just Nespa all CD's and get back to listening.

After talking to the importer of the Nespa, he's sold now 50 units, there is a 3 week wait now for more, I would think there are now more Nespa units out there than RealityCheck units. My own RealityCheck unit will not be used for a long time.
Lee

I own both, and I agree with Leec that the RealityCheck,if you want to extract the maximum from it, is a PITA to use. But it and George's fluids DO work, so I just suck it up and slave through the ritual. Really, it's not that much different than cleaning LPs. As for the Nespa, I own the Pro version, and it does work extremely well. I was at the same demo as Dlwask, and I was pretty stunned by the difference. I picked up my Nespa at CES, as I had ordered it a couple of months earlier. The main differences I noticed were a significant increase in resolution and a much more dimensional sound. It was not subtle, at least to these ears.

Leec and Hooper,

Leec mentioned that there was an improvement if the Reality Check treatment was followed by Nespa's treatment. Is there an improvement if the Nespa is followed by Reality Check? If so, then both may be useful to get the optimal sound out of the CD (but at the cost of greater PITA).

Best Regards,
John

John, I've only Nespa'd the RealityCheck CD's AFTER they were made, thinking this would give me the most bang for the buck, and it was a wonderful improvement even after the copy was made. Still, at this time, not duplicating any more RC copies, just blasting them with the halogen light and enjoying muzic as it should be.........

The obvious question now, to me, is: has anyone compared an RC CDR to an original that has been Nespa'd? Of course using two originals (in my experience, one would have to make sure the two sound the same as well first - i.e. I've found they don't all necessarily sound the same!)would be the most fair comparison: original Nespa'd (without fluids) vs. fully RC treated CDR. Then, I suppose, the next step might be comparing a fluid treated Nespa original with a Nespa original that had not been treated with fluid. And comparing the fluid treated Nespa with the CDR. All in the name of better sound with the least amount of hassle, of course. And, of "double course", in the spirit of science, but while having fun doing it.