Wave Kinetics NVS Turntable - Stereophile Review

Raul, I see your point. One "truth" is the 25th row center at the Boston Symphony Orchestra. If that is one's reference, we have still quite a way to go with our music reproduction systems.

Regarding the NVS turntable: Has anyone tested its speed accuracy with a Timeline? Can one adjust the speed if it is slightly off? It seems that at a minimum, Fremer could do this for his readers. Assuming it is truly a state of the art DD table, it would have to have perfect speed and that would be a huge marketing advantage over other drive types, I would think. But I don't see this stated in reviews or in advertising. This is one objective measurement of turntable performance.

Peter, one thing I've found re speed stability/accuracy in belt drive versus DD/idler/rim, is that in belt drive it can fluctuate over the course of a few seconds due to stylus drag/groove modulation, whereas with many of the non belt drives I've auditioned, and esp. my direct rim drive, there appear to be no/minimal fluctuations over the course of quite a few minutes, but some speed drift day to day, perhaps due to enviromental factors which can be eliminated by adjustment of speed at the start of a listening session.
Still can't find a link to the NVS review.

Dear friends: +++++ " Framer gives the nod to his Caliburn but a close call. " +++++

Reading carefuly the Onedof and NVS reviews IMHO today MF knows for sure that both TTs outperform his Caliburn.
He wants that we believe that both TTs have some " trouble " to even the Caliburn that for him is a " perfect " TT!!.

Why not to think or see the other way around: that the Onedof and NVS TTs have lower distortion/coloration that he seen as a " trouble " in both when he likes the higher Caliburn distortions becaquse that better dynamic/alive in the Caliburn could be distortions/colorations that are not well damped in the Caliburn design.

I don't heard the NVS yet but I don't think for what the owners posted here that the NVS has any kind of dryness as MF wants that we see the NVS quality performance level ( with the Onedof the MF objections seems to me has the same " defense " attitude for the Caliburn. ).

Even that the Onedof showed a better speed accuracy/stability than his Caliburn he write a fast excuse about telling: " that his unit is an early one and that he knows that in today units changes were made about ".

Onedof and NVS are more accurate than the Caliburn ( at least on spedd. ). Why MF can't think that that critical fact is a problem with the Caliburn performance against " perfect " TTs as the Onedof and NVS?

After all those years MF is still writing for rooky/newbie audio readers, his mistake.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.

IMHO MF Caliburn early unit or not has no single excuse about speed accuracy/stability for those 140K+ dollars!!!!!

and he writed what for me has no common sense coming from a " pro " reviewer: " that due to of-centered LP spindle hole the accuracy on speed is not so important ( something like this. )..." How any one but MF could speaks in that way?

I forgot, in the constant Caliburn defense he writed on the Onedof review a sentence about the unique Onedof TT bearing:
"""" A few years ago,MD ( then with Continuum Audio labs, showed me a prototype for a similar bearing designed for Continuum.... ".
I don't think that trying to diminish the main Onedof design characteristic is a way to make honest not biased reviews.
The Caliburn not needs that kind of " help ", the Caliburn has its own merits with and with out MF " help ".

R.

Spirit, if the review came out in Stereophile this month it will not be available online until next month.