Micro Seiki, or TW AC-1

Every single resonance/vibrations of any type pass through that arm board/footers.

Raul has a point.....only if there is a direct connection between the 'footers' and the armboard support base?
It is not clearly evident to me.....that there actually IS a direct connection in either the MS or the AC tables (which share a similar armboard support concept)?
What IS clearly evident (in both tables).....is that the armboards are directly connected to (and supported by) the bases....ie plinths.
How much structure-borne feedback is allowed to travel through the supporting feet, into the plinth, into the armboard support and thence into the armboard itself....depends on so many factors that without supporting evidence......it would be a rash man who makes such a bold claim?
Nevertheless.....the fact that Continuum goes to so much trouble to 'isolate' their armboards from the plinth in the Caliburn and Criterion turntables.....indicates some obvious benefits in doing so?
In the absence of a really sturdy wall-hung shelf support for the turntable.....a Minus K isolation stand would always be an improvement for any deck...and owners of MS turntables seem to be unanimous in aclaiming the improvement from the use of such devices?

Maril 555,
for a good MS you don't need a new platter. Regarding extensions on both tables, MS and TW you need to work with (if you like), building up a nice solution and having fun and improvements by bringing in modifications. The other option is a plug & play solution which both tables do not offer.

regarding isolation platforms: it is a must. I would also go for separate platforms for the motor(s) and the table. If you do this there are no vibrations on original MS brass arm bases.

10-22-12: Thuchan
Pcosta,
I never made any negative remarks about the TW designs. I know Thomas Woschnik from the very first beginning he started with his first tables in Germany and I also followed the successful landing in the US market by the activity of Joe Catalano.

Has anyone ask Thomas Woschnik what he thinks is the best turntable?

Thuchan is right about neither table being a 'plug & play'.
With the Raven in particular........I have found that its sound can change depending on how it is supported?
If it sits on a stand located on a suspended wood floor.......it can be susceptible to structure-borne feedback, and sound slow and bloated as some have described.
Even on a concrete floor....if that floor is suspended and not 'on-ground'....again the structure-borne feedback can be intrusive.
Once mounted on a wall-hung shelf (or Minus K stand)....the table can be delicate and nimble.
With most mats I have heard......the sound can sometimes feel compressed and unexciting?
Placing the record directly on the copper platter together with a heavy weight will improve the apparent 'speed' and 'colour' of the sound.
Thuchan is also right about the three motors.
With the Timeline.......the constancy of speed via the 3 motors is inferior to that with only 2 diametrically opposed motors.
The speed constancy will never match that of a fine DD deck like my Victor TT-101 and I have tried many different 'belts'.....from various silk threads to Dertonarm's 'magic' string.
The Ravens however are designed with a Delcrin platter which requires the rough side of the rubber belt to actually 'grip'...to maintain its speed control.
The strings and threads just 'slip' too much.
When the Raven has been 'tweeked' to sound its best......if can sound surprisingly similar to my TT-101......perhaps the most neutral and accurate deck I have ever heard?

Albert , I did many times, but I will keep these personal discussions with me.
Halcro, Agree - you can make the TW sound very good.