Micro SX-8000 II or SZ-1

What is here disputed about the Micro Seiki skeleton TT's was already done so widely and brought to conclusion by the later 1980ies.
Micro Seiki introduced the Hs-20 and HS-80 to further improve the performance of the RX-1500, RX-3000, RX-5000 and SX-8000.
This enhancement in performance was founded on increased inertia and decreased noise and wear in the lateral bearing because - proper applied and aligned (no problem at all - belt or string, you just need balanced distance, equal length or a decent spring-tension-gauge) - the lateral bearing is force free.
This - BTW - works on most if not all (direct TT's are an obvious exclusion and Idler-wheel-drive needs some different treatment) TT's, as it is a simple mechanic principle of force vectors eliminating each other.
Each and every bearing with a shaft - i.e. with a lateral bearing - being addressed by a string pulling towards the motor in order to apply any tension on the medium (string, belt, tape) spinning the platter will benefit from the elimination of that one-side force.
Lesser noise - lesser friction - lesser wear.
Its obvious - a simple sketch on a sheet of paper does illustrate the point and principle very nicely.
The dampening of the "bell-platter" of the big Micro Seki's was addressed by Micro Seiki's copper-mat and in the early 1980ies by several soft and hard platter mats introduced by japanese manufacturers to better or lesser results.
I have too seen Micro platters damped inside (not easy done with good mechanical results, as the coating has to be done very precisely and homogenous so to not ruining the inertia force of the platter) with very good results, but these were all further damped with acrylic-mats (glued to the platter...) on top of the platter.
The improvements with inertia units by Micro Seiki or custom made devices are sonically apparent to all audiophiles who care, whose set-up is capable to show it and whose hearing isn't deafened by dogmatic prejudice.
This - for once in our audiophile world of often nebulous results and experiences - is fully backed up by applied science and simple mechanical laws found in every middle high-school physics book.

And yes, - I have used the RX-5000 too and am currently using a highly modified RX-Micro Seiki ( 4 inch double platter with isolated spindle (no contact to bearing) and 38 lbs highly dampened platter - gun-metal and PVC) and will soon incorporate an inertia unit similar to the HS-80.

We all seem to be aligned then on our experiences of using a mat to dampen the ringing. I tried a variety of mats and materials on my previous RX-5000, from heavy gunmetal mats, passive vacuum platter from Audio Technica, other metal mats, ceramic, etc. and found by far the best comination to be a light but hard vinyl/acrylic mat from a source in Germany, along with the ST-10 stabilizer. This gave a dynamic, detailed and controlled presentation, holding the famous Micro characteristic accuracy of timbre and the ADSR envelope.

As some know here, I am shortly moving to the SXC-8000 Mk1 with vacuum platter, and so it will be interesting to hear the differences.

...by far the best comination to be a light but hard vinyl/acrylic mat from a source in Germany

Probably from DeltaDevice

**** As some know here, I am shortly moving to the SXC-8000 Mk1 with vacuum platter, and so it will be interesting to hear the differences.

Radicalsteve, so you were apparently the person who got the 8000 MK1 from this site a few days back. Congratulations, it was very good setup and it was not overly expensive price. You will need to re-service it and then pretty much forget about TT to the rest of your life. That TT will easily succeed over many today’s TT that are being sold for 7 times more then what you paid. The MK1 is considered less desirable then MK2 and cost less but I like MK1 more – it more flexible with organization of space. You got the best deal of all as you have the white platter. Most of the MK1 come with yellow platter and most of the MK2 comes with white. The only thing that you would need to decide for yourself is if you willing to use the vacuum hold down. The vacuum hold down is tricky you might play with it. If you decide to use then you can make a very-very thin but hard cut of leather that you would place between the Micro’s levees. It will not screw up the vacuum but it will create a decupling layer between record and metal platter.

*** What is here disputed about the Micro Seiki skeleton TT's was already done so widely and brought to conclusion by the later 1980ies. Micro Seiki introduced the Hs-20 and HS-80 to further improve the performance of the RX-1500, RX-3000, RX-5000 and SX-8000.

There is no such a thing as conclusion was reached in later 1980ies. Do you remember your setup in the later 1980? Would you go beak to that sonic result? Leaving aside on psychological moments of being younger… Besides whatever Micro Seiki or any other manufacture produces it is just what they produce. Micro Seiki is just a machine shop and they will cut anything they want you to buy. To make a final judgment about sonic benefits is not Micro Seiki responsibility by my responsibility, and yours… I made my experiment and I concluded that there is a certain patter mass after which any further increase of inertia moment becomes irrelevant in practical terms. The conversations about the minimization of wearing I juts discard as completely off the wall.

**** The improvements with inertia units by Micro Seiki or custom made devices are sonically apparent to all audiophiles who care, whose set-up is capable to show it and whose hearing isn't deafened by dogmatic prejudice.

I do not know. I do not hear well after my surgery a few years back and I do not have the capable set-up. After my wife and I had 6 childrens she does not allow me to pay music loud. But I have my amplified Radio Shake headphones that I think make me able to hear a lot. I did not hear any inertia improvements with 8000, but might be my hearing aid had weak butteries that day….

*** This - for once in our audiophile world of often nebulous results and experiences - is fully backed up by applied science and simple mechanical laws found in every middle high-school physics book.

It you care about the applied science, not the lever that people like to demesne at those internet forums then look for papers that represent of belt simulation as filtering devises, what the horizontal force on the palter acts the modification of the filter’s Q. The free-standing, or the latitude-neutral platter acts as the second ordered but the properly belt-biased palter more move the filter to the Bessel Q. You need to get a proper relationship between the patter mass and bias from belt and if you hit it then there is not father improvement, you might have twice more mass and inertia but it will just reset the need for different tension, nothing else. Sure it works staring from a certain mass of the platter. The 8000 is in the Zone of the right mass…. It is possible to do the same with lover mass but then you will need to make the shaft longer, the way how it is done in EMT 927 but this is a whole another story….