Modified Lenco vs TW Raven


Hello,
I have a TW Acustic Raven for a few years now. I made different upgrades along the last 3 years : new battery PSU and 3 motors in a round shape. I was thinking about the last upgrade (for me) : the BN platter and new bearing when I heard for the first time to modified Lenco by TJN. I read most of what there is to read for a non DIY, and there is a lot...
Before deciding if a make the jump I'd like to know if some in the community have made the same decision : I mean going from a top belt TT to a top idler wheel. I think of the ref models from Jean Nantais and tell me if they are happy now.
Thank you for helping
Barba
barbapapa
So apart from Syntax’s ongoing personal vendetta against Thomas Woschnick and his TW Acustic Company

Well, just between you and me, and I write this slowly, please read it slowly, too:
I have no personal vendetta against TW. You write this nonsense all over again like a broken record. Both we know very well, that I forgot more about high quality analog reproduction than you will ever learn.
Dev, Inshore and others wrote much more about their "experiences" with various TW products and YOU (and some others) never got it. Instead you (and some of the TW community) write that I have a personal conflict.
When I remember right, my only comment about Raven AC was that it sounds black and heavy. This ironic comment created a reaction from you where you wrote you will attack me for the rest of your life because I wrote that about one of your units. I have no problem with that, but I seriously think, you are sick when you create a personal conflict about a technical unit.
And next, the Time Line Speed test with the Seiki, I explained a few times here at Agon why the laser point is not clearly seen at every rotation (it is based on the camera frame per second), a few agreed in that thread about this. Except you, for whatever reason. Don't get me wrong, I have absolutely no problem with you but you should seriously start thinking about yourself.
And my last sentences, specially for you and I hope you get it now:
I have no conflict with TW, never had and never will. I write about technical observations which have a sonic result. When you can't handle that, then you are wrong in an open US forum where everyone has the right to post his personal opinion. To ruin someones reputation that way is done usually in socialist states. When you like that way, go there.
I write about technical observations which have a sonic result.
Technical observations....😳❓
Like what...❓That their motors can't keep constant speed...⁉️
Do you have the evidence now my friend...😜❓
Perhaps you should run your Micro with the Feikert Speed App to show you where the problems lie with your turntable's speed deficiencies....⁉️👍
Thanks again for all the work you put in testing your tables. There is a lot there for analog lovers.
You're welcome Tdaudio...😊
I needed to counter objectively what the Trolls peddle via innuendo and lies...😡
Every Raven owner should rub these results into the noses of those who proffer their unsupported heresay about the speed accuracy of Raven turntables on future Forums....😎👍
I also listen to live music (both unamplified and amplified) on a frequent basis, and while I agree with Lewm on the remarkable dynamics, his comments on imaging are misleading. What I find is that imaging of live music is level-dependent - it tends to be quite clear up to a certain amplitude, but can fall to pieces when the playing is louder than this threshold. This is because the structure (or furnishings) of most rooms will go into resonance at various frequencies, and the resonance threshold is governed by loudness. When the room is not resonating, imaging can be very clear and precise, but when the room is resonating, the acoustic cues that the ear interprets as imaging will be masked.

FWIW, the human ear can be very sensitive to spatial imaging in real life (sensitivity changes according to the individual listener, but can be augmented by training). The paralympics sport goalball would not exist were it not for the ear's sensitivity to imaging.

hth
"What I find is that imaging of live music is level-dependent - it tends to be quite clear up to a certain amplitude, but can fall to pieces when the playing is louder than this threshold."

So I guess there is room for both of us to be "right", if that is important. One of my favored venues in DC is a place called Bohemian Caverns. In a way, it's a dump. However, it was constructed many decades ago such that the interior resembles a real cavern, with faux cave-like painted plaster surfaces. I would venture to guess that no two surfaces in the room are parallel to each other, nor are there any surfaces that are not complex curves. Thus by accident it is a great listening room, but only if you sit directly in front of the performers. One must avoid the direct radiations of their grade B speakers in favor of direct listening. At "the Caverns", the imaging can change during the course of a single tune from excellent in the audiophile sense to vague, and back to excellent.Anyway, in my original observation, I did not intend to be seen as rendering an absolute judgement about imaging in a live performance, which can mean anything from an unamplified recital in the home to an orchestra in a concert hall and in the latter case depends upon where one is sitting, what concert hall, etc. And everything in between.