OK, Ron, without using quotation marks in your post, it is hard to tell what YOU are saying and what you are saying SOMEONE ELSE is saying. I will say that whomever made the comments regarding the Spacedeck/Aurora comparison and the description of 'Nots, in general, sounds like they are either 1) a dealer who does not carry 'Not, 2) a dealer who is simply pimping the Aurora, 3) a person who has not done a real audition, doesn't know how to set up a TT, and/or is full of crap.
While I try to respect other folk's opinion on components, everyone having different tastes, some of the "quotes" in your post deserve serious rebuttal.
One:
"I just did an AB of the spacedeck to the aurora. If you prefer a thick, duller sound and confuse that with 'analog' the Spacedeck is it. Its (sic) a fine performer but I think the Aurora is much better; way more open, faster, detailed but not fatiguing."
I have had a Spacedeck for almost two years and to characterize it as "thick and dull" and a confusion to analog sound is a total disservice. I took part in a comparison of the Spacedeck and the Aurora with a group of audiophiles at a local analog dealer and it was absolutely no contest. The Spacedeck destroyed the Aurora on all votes. Better space, better timing, more detail, deeper bass, more extended highs. And that was with the OL silver and a Shelter 501 on BOTH tables.
Two:
"I don't have a hyperspace deck here now, but as I must have told you, I did before. When I compared it to the resolution it was smoother but less detailed and open. The Nottingham's are like tuby (sic) tube gear while the Origin is more like refined SS that maintain the naturalness of analog. Personally, and as a guess as I haven't done an a/b, I could go either way between the Aurora and hyperspace but for my taste would leantowards (sic) the aurora, I have to hear them. Between the aurora and spacedeck, no contest - the aurora."
Just what was whoever wrote this smoking (and make sure it stays out of your stash)? Putting the Aurora in the same league as the Hyperspace? Please, do me a favor. You might recall a post I made about a very extensive, and very controlled comparison between a number of tables using the OL Illustrious and the Shelter 901. The Hyperspace competed in nearly a dead heat with the Teres 265, some preferring one, some the other, but all thinking it very close. Giving a favorable comparison between the Aurora and the Hyperspace is, frankly, laughable.
I say this not to denigrate the Aurora because it is a very nice table in its product position, and a good deal for a bit less than retail price. But letÂ’s keep things in perspective. Just my opinion (along with about 12 of us here locally who took part in the comparisons).
I also say all this because Terry is looking for answers and should not be mislead, though if he has owned a Michell, I'm sure he probably isn't deceived easily.
David
