A Copernican View of the Turntable System

Dear friends: This is the link that I forgot to posted in my 10-14-11 ( " another stand alone tonearm. ):

http://www.ttweights.com/momentus_duo_drive.html

R.

Thuchan,
Now you have me even more confused. I had been asking you about the SME 30 which you stated that you heard in two good system and did not like it. Now you write about the SME 20 and compare it to a Ford Mondeo. Did you hear the Model 30 or just the Model 20?

Could you please be more specific about why you don't think the SME 30 is a good turntable? Do you also think it is "flat and not vibrant" like the Model 20? And if so, why do you think it sounds like that? Please understand that I am only asking for your opinion based on your experience with your system in your room. In other words, a subjective opinion.

Dear Dgob: Good, the 100CMK4 is very good performer.

In the other subject certainly was not addressed by him. Please re-read my post about and if you want to discuss off line then we can do it.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.

Dear Thuchan: As you said different drive TT systems works depending on implementation and even more important than that: depending on the designer targets. Yes,, there are options other than the commercial ones for TT designs and the hybrid always is an alternative.

IMHO the main subject is not that designers does not looks to other solutions but that almost all are luking the TT as an stand alone item.

Today almost all the main/normal TT targets are accomplish one way or the other. speed accuracy, speed stability where we have specs/figures here ( from many years and today TT samples. ) as low 0.001% ( Walker Rocport, Technics, Denon, etc. ), with wow&fluter as low 0.007% ( Audio Turntable ) or signal to noise ratio/rumble at 90db to over 100+db almost undetectable ( Technics, Rockport Avid, Clearaudio, Walker, etc, etc. ).

So IMHO these subjects are already ( I posted several times. ) well covered from the point view of measurements. As always there is land to improve but whom of you can detect for example a TT with a speed stability accuracy of 0.001% against the same TT that measure 0.0003%?

IMHO a TT designer after fulfil the " normal " targets the main target is to fulfil the cartridge needs and I mean it.

This IMHO is where I think exist a " long land " to explore and I think and hope that in the future the TT advance that we could " see " will address the " fulfil cartridge needs " and what this really means.

Now, +++++ " The SME 20/2 is in my honest opinion a fine reproduction machine but to my taste flat and not very vibrant. " +++++

even that I talked on the SME 30/2 I will take your 20/2 statement and the first question is: is it not what we are looking for in a TT? a DEAD SILENCE TT design that does not add nothing to the cartridge performance and that does not take out nothing to the cartridge/groove tracking performance.

Why need we a TT with " dynamic, power, vibrant and the like " performance characteristics?, I don't want it, my target is only that the cartridge take the 100% of the information in the grooves with out no single " factors " that could disturb its job in anyway. Same for the tonearm.

IMHO several differences between this and that and the other TT came mainly ( I'm speaking on good/decent designs, any drive system. ) the way each TT DISTURB the cartridge work. Same for tonearm. Is here where differences on performance begin and appear and not because example: 150db SN against " only " 98db.

That you like it how the TT DISTURB the cartridge job that does not means is right but only that you like those type of colorations against more accurate/neutral designs and there is nothing wrong with that: it is your previlege and your audio way of living.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.

Peterayer,
sorry this was a wrong transfer when I wrote the last comment. I listened to and I always mean the SME 30.

best @ fun only