A Copernican View of the Turntable System

The interesting parts for me and this thread are his remarks about the self-standing tonearm towers. At least with his design, he seems unconcerned about the arguments against them. Furthermore, when he writes, "In any case tonearm and platter would never be resonating coherently because they are so different in shape and acoustic response" I take that to imply that rigid coupling of tt and tonearm via a plinth does not offer the advantages that some on this thread claim for it--or at least that what Aleks believes.

I wish someone would comment on the other technical assertions he made in his emails and on his website. They strike me as substantive enough to merit a conversation (as opposed to useless sarcastic remarks). They are not ad copy, that's for sure. He made a claim about the bearing design being novel and some quickly dismissed it--what now?

Of course, all this technical stuff is distinct from the quality of the sound, as he himself says in his email.

Thucan: what are you talking about? If by 'messenger' you mean me, then I should say that I never heard of Onedof until I saw Halcro's link above. I certainly have no financial relationship with them. I should disclose however that if he were to offer me that turntable for free I wouldn't turn him down :).

Dear Banquo363: Thank you again, very enlightly.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.

Dear Raul,
i have one advantage if you let me put it into these words. I have seen and listened to this turntable. So pls. take your chance and convince yourself in Denver. Then let's continue this discussion. Okay?

best & fun only

Dear Raul, All that you say about the current state of high level R&D in audio is probably true. On the other hand, modern designers have available methods for machining parts both for beauty and for function that were never dreamed of when those Technics engineers went to work on the SP10, for one example. Further, we now have transistors, ICs, resistors, capacitors, etc, that far outperform the 1970s vintage of the same items. It's kind of a trade-off between the good old days and now. And in the end, the person who is buying this turntable needs to be convinced that somewhere in there are some unique and transcendent qualities that make it worth the price. That too is the job of the designer/inventor. I would also reiterate that I already stated I do not hold with those who condemn things purely on the basis that they cost "too much". But, sorry, right now I just don't see $150,000 here. I will keep an open mind until I have a better understanding of the unique qualities of this piece, if it has any. If I decide to go to RMAF, I will look for it there.

That bit about the tonearm mount and the turntable/bearing resonating at different frequencies is possibly more true for separates than it is for turntables with integrated tonearm mounts, IMO. (But I don't want to flog that horse here any longer.)

Even if one hears the ONEDOF at RMAF, how will he/she be able to isolate the sound of the table from the rest of the system? Pardon the pun. And what will the rest of the equipment in the system actually be?

I went to RMAF last year for the first time and spent most of the weekend listening to different tables, arms and cartridges. Some combinations sounded great, but I certainly did not gain any real understanding of what any individual component actually sounded like.