Why will no other turntable beat the EMT 927?

Tonywinsc, I've been following the thread with great interest, and I have to agree with your assessment wholeheartedly.
One would think there comes a point where the drive mechanism might sink into unimportance; after a certain level of (to use your term) blackness has been reached, then there is no significant gain to be made from larger motors or more massive platters etc.
This question of reflections (again to use your term) is the one that fascinates me. I recently had some (for me) shocking experiences with an arm of such little mass and friction - arguably one that could not have been much improved in these ways - that I am forced to question the whole subject of turntable and arm design.

Given the dynamic range of vinyl, could it be that the very lowest level of information retrieval is what we are seeking, and it is this ultra low level information that has the most effect on staging and holographic imaging? My guess is that this micro-information is the first casualty in losses due to 'reflections' at the arm/cartridge interface.
In fact, if I were to speculate wildly I would argue that almost all turntable design starts with an admission of a battle lost: since arms, by current thinking, have to have length and mass then we are already losing micro-information due to reflections. The conventional answer is to make motors and platters more massive. But, once the information has been lost or just muddied there is no way to bring it back. Fighting the wrong battle?
Ivor Tiefenbrun of Linn had a theory: his argument was that if you make the platter and bearing correctly, then after you get the arm correct it doesn't matter hugely what cartridge you use. Was he only partially correct? There are a large number of beautifully made tables and cartridges out there, and I think that we've reached a sort of a null in this matter: choosing a cartridge can be a simple as choosing a loudspeaker, in theory. It might simply be the interface between the arm and stylus that makes the all-important difference.
Could it be this that Thuchan is responding to?

Not modern, but superior.

The reality is once again that there is no consensus on anything in audio. I have a Nantais Lenco Reference on order and will use it with Ikeda 407 tone arm and 9TT cartridge. I have found Jean not pompous but rather justifiably proud of his achievement in elevating greatly the Lenco. Some have said that other Lenco updates are perhaps better, but I doubt it.

Thanks Thuchan for the description. Just to add more information, J.C Verdier is now making an even bigger TT called the Verdier Magnum. It is massive and is made to order only. You can read about it here:
http://www.jcverdier.com/ADSL/Platine_Magnum.html

Dear 57s4me: IMHO the first and main factor/characteristic/target on analog is: that the stylus tip ( at microscopic level. ) be always in touch with the grooves and I mean always with out any tiny deviation from there and this depends mainly in the whole cartridge design and not on the TT quality or even in the tonearm one.

Cartridge tracking habilities depends mainly on the cartridge it self, I'm not saying that we don't need at least a decent tonearm design because we need it but not at the level everyone could think.

I tested hundred of cartridges ( from LOMC to MM/MI ones. Vintage and today ones. ) in several different tonearms with different effective mass and effective length and build materials and my first hand experiences tell me that if the cartridge has high tracking habilities it will showed always it does not matters that even the resonance frequency with the tonearm be way out of the ideal range, example a heavy mass tonearm with a high compliance/low weight cartridge.

It is so " curious " ( I mean curious because is unknow for me the precise whys. ) that the same cartridge body on a MM cartridge when I tested with three different stylus original replacements where the only change was the stylus tip shape and even that shares the same whole design on suspension and the like there are differences on each one tracking habilities and sound quality level.

I agree with you that if you already losed groove information you just can't recovery and then the main target down there is to recovery all the recorded information in the grooves and this can do it " only " by the cartridge and from here all what you want: from TT mat to tonearm board passing for different steps to damp everywhere the analog rig stopping that feedback Tonywinsc and you touched.

IMHO a massive TT design as could be the 927 not warranty that non-feedback because we have to remember that a massive item don't stop per se that feedback but even could be worst and easyly perceived by that extremely sensitive " microphone " name it cartridge. The only way to be sure any TT design ( including the 927. ) is doing its job on the subject is making measuring taking in count the lowest " level " any cartridge can be disturbed. With out those measurements real tests all what we have to say on the whole subject is subjective and its validity is valid around those " ears " and the accuracy and distortion level of the audio system.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.