@ct517 the design difference has for shure not escaped me - "interesting differences" indeed!
But in regard of horizontal mass, the degrees of freedom of the air bearing (not the details of bearing tolerance and pressure) and its placement relative to the subchassis and platter, they are very similar. That's the point. And this is relevant regarding suboptimal drive pairings.
It's no accident that VPI and many VPI users have converted their originally suspended chassis towards rigid or semi-rigid subchassis coupling, similar to many of the newer (post 2000?) turntable designs.
This design change seems to be of sonical advantage (in general) already for conventional arms – my experience ist that this is even more true with air bearing arms.Interestingly, if one considers the Trans-Fi design or the Opus 3 Cantus and simlar "short arms", they reduce this sensitivity to rotational modes of a subchassis, because the rotational force on the subchassis pulls more along the arm instead of lateral.
But in regard of horizontal mass, the degrees of freedom of the air bearing (not the details of bearing tolerance and pressure) and its placement relative to the subchassis and platter, they are very similar. That's the point. And this is relevant regarding suboptimal drive pairings.
It's no accident that VPI and many VPI users have converted their originally suspended chassis towards rigid or semi-rigid subchassis coupling, similar to many of the newer (post 2000?) turntable designs.
This design change seems to be of sonical advantage (in general) already for conventional arms – my experience ist that this is even more true with air bearing arms.Interestingly, if one considers the Trans-Fi design or the Opus 3 Cantus and simlar "short arms", they reduce this sensitivity to rotational modes of a subchassis, because the rotational force on the subchassis pulls more along the arm instead of lateral.