What do you mean you “heard” the turntable

Weird, i tagged @slaw and it showed up blank. Very kind of you to say that, Slaw. Thanks!

What I’ve "heard" in comparing tables and arms in my system, using the same cartridge, was artifacts that went missing on the better set up. For example, when I went from a Kuzma Reference and Triplanar to the Kuzma XL and Airline, there was less of a ’halo’ and sense of a turntable spinning as the source of the sound. I didn’t appreciate that artifact was there until it was absent. Does that make sense?
Similarly, when I changed platter weights, from the factory screw down clamp to the Stillpoints some years ago, at first I thought the Stillpoints robbed the bass from the system, but after adjusting the woofers and tweaking the gain, it was pretty obvious that the factory clamp was adding something- a bump in the mid bass that gave the sound a more propulsive aspect; without it, and the Stillpoints in place (after adjusting other things mentioned), the Stillpoints made everything a little more relaxed, less frenetic. I prefer that.
These things weren’t something I had to strain to hear- they were apparent.
The difficulty in my estimation is getting the tables/arms, etc. in one system and being able to compare them directly without other variables.

@last_lemming - I agree that it is very hard to find an opportunity at retail where you can make such comparisons. I don't read the magazines much any more, so I don't know what they are doing in terms of turntable evaluations.
There was a very good shoot-out a number of years ago in HiFi+ on line stages where Roy G. and Alan Sircom compared 5 or 6 units, did in-depth reviews and second opinions and that seemed pretty 'spot on' as the Brits say. I owned one of the units being tested -(not the actual unit under test but another serial number of the same model) and the review seemed to match my experience in terms of the unit's strengths and weaknesses.
As for turntable comparisons, I suppose the best resource for this may be that handful of well-heeled audiophiles who run multiple tables, arms and cartridges. There have been 'visits' by other audiophiles on the forums where they discussed what they heard and posted about it. And, to the extent there is some bias by one person, perhaps that gets ironed out when multiple listeners are involved.  

I suspect some of the ’sound’ of the turntable goes beyond the usual measurable ’specs’ of rumble, wow & flutter and has to do with mass, materials, isolation, the sonic character of the interface between the LP and the platter (which could be a combination of materials, hardness or softness of that material), etc.
If you think about the process- transducer, like a microphone, amplified by phono preamp, again, by line stage, and again, by amplifiers, you are hearing the combination of all of it-- the character of the cartridge, the arm and the table-- magnified to a considerable degree.
Even if you eliminate some variables- same cartridge (assuming no unit to unit differences), same arm and same set up, mass and materials have a sonic character.
I have often wondered to what extent different vinyl formulations and LP ’weights’ contribute to the process-usually its just a matter of how ’quiet’ the surfaces are, but are there differences in, say, the ’resonance’ characteristics of ’heavy’ vinyl v. Dynaflex era records? (Leaving aside VTA/SRA to account for 'thickness' of the record?)
Think about the various experiments people make with different platter mats, weights, clamps and the like. I think it all matters.
Not that I have any scientific methodology to suss all this out- but if you are working with a good turntable, there are many ’tweaks’ that may enhance the sound of one set up and not sound as good on another.