If I could afford, I’d purchase 100% Oswald Mills Audio gear

Lew; of course, this is exactly why we own multiple turntables, or move from one to another. it’s to find the exact musical equation that brings us the most listening pleasure. or maybe some just like collecting?

plinth shape in and of itself a dominant indication of presentation? never considered it before. OTOH a plinth plays a huge role in performance i agree.

certainly the Rockport, NVS and CS Port all have a big sound, the NVS and Rockport being more ultra dynamic in degrees, plus big and bold. unlimited really. but my room now is more supportive of that than when i had the Rockport......so hard to know exactly between those 2.

the Rockport has a 200 pound air suspended plinth made of a lead/steel carbon fibre encased sandwich. the NVS a cast aluminum skeleton. the CS Port and small square hunk of granite.

none large and square. but all very ’engineered’.

the Saskia idler is more focused and less expansive than these others, but that plays wonderfully to the forward lean to the bass, and tonal density that works for my favorite jazz pressings. is this related to the plinth shape? i tend to see the 180 pound slate Saskia plinth as adding heft and solidity, and the Pabst motor idler mechanical’s more scale related than the plinth.

The question in my mind is where on the scale of importance is exact speed control vs. other issues that a turntable has to address. For example, does the ability to deal with spurious sonic energy matter more, or less? Certainly all parameters matter, particularly when you are taking such small signals and the ability to reproduce same, but what is the order of significance?
This seems to be something that turntable designers have yet to come to full agreement on.
OTOH, the cost to address some of these issues seems to be greater with ultra precise speed control than some of the other variables. Do we agree on that, and more importantly, do we agree that this is where the money should be spent firstly?

@chakster 
A friend pointed me to this thread. I don’t know how I missed it
re your comment about me posting details on K3’s design and development here… I don’t think that it would be appropriate, as it would effectively be a marketing exercise. Not what A’gon is for.
That said, if anyone wants to pm me with questions, I would be be happy to reply privately. Cheers 

I thought so too at first. The reality is that Jonathan Weiss is a nasty, vile, human being. He ends up burning his relationships. Ask around and you’ll see…

Character of the founder is important when you are buying at this level. It’s a hobby and a pastime that is meant to bring the owner pleasure. Dealing with nasty people negates the benefits.

He also doesn’t know that much about audio. If you question his statements, you’ll find out that he builds on kernels of truth that he then distorts erroneously. I can cite many examples, one of which is how he used a cutting lathe as a model for the K3. Cutting lathes do NOT make good models for turntables. They serve opposite roles. His use of cast iron and belief that it’s a unique high-end material is laughable… he thinks that the more powerful the motor, the greater the sonic benefits… that’s just wrong. 

I would not have OMA in my system even if it were free.

Richard Krebs designed and probably built at least the first prototypes of K3. Richard is an honorable gentleman and a qualified engineer. The K3 evidently went where Richard’s brain took it. None of us know what we don’t know about it, so perhaps silence is golden when it comes to a critique. Even Mike has only third person knowledge. I am no big fan of the OMA proprietor either, but that’s no reason to denigrate the K3.