Micro SX-8000 II or SZ-1

Thuchan, I'm still thinking about it, but I think Quiddity's earlier point was that the high speed of the flywheel in the SZ-1 motor (and therefore, probably similarly, the HS-80) offers more theoretical inertia than a (second) heavy platter does if the second heavy platter is spinning at 33.3rpm. I cannot deny that the second SX 8000 would be able to mount 4 tonearms, but then again, so could an SX1500, SX5000, or SX8000 without the "II." I don't know where the 30% number comes from or how one would calculate it. Personally, I've never been able to compare a table to another and come up with a 'percentage improvement'. Best of luck in your quest.

I'd like to confirm T-Bone's opinion.

Two sx8000s chained together would be about 1/10th as effective as the high inertia motor assembly of the SZ-1, from the point of view of inertia alone.

The two platter solution would however result in far less belt creep. There is no solution for this dilemma within the compliant belt drive paradigm.

Mark Kelly

Good! You answers make me rethinking the whole approach and maybe returning to the HS-80 solution.
The percentage thing is just to give a clue via distance what it could be about, it is personal and vague.
I myself had the opportunity to have the SX 8000 II as well as the RX 5000 in my chain, the latter for a very short time because it was promised to go to a friend.

As the RX 5000 is an excellent big Micro and even better than most of its modern copies the air bearing concept brings a bit more smoothness and brilliance in the picture - in my opinion.

what do you think about the VPI HRX/TNT 6 DUAL MOTOR FLYWHEEL ?

Thuchan

Assuming that question was directed at me;

I think it's an interesting contrast with the Micro Seiki approach. The MS product shows a level of design sophistication and engineering input which is well beyond that achieved by VPI.

This is reflected in pricing too.