Micro Seiki, or TW AC-1


I'm trying to decide between Micro Seiki RX 5000 and TW AC-1.
They are approx. the same price used (about $10K)
Both are belt drive.
Unfortunately, I don't have a first hand experience with either of the tables.
You can see my current set-up in my system page.
The reason, I want to make a change from DD TT to belt drive is just to try a different approach.
Also, I have a feeling, that the bass would be one of the areas, where MS and TW might have an edge over my current DD Technics SP-10 MkII
My endeavor into analog is fairly new, so I'm not sure what my final choice in analog would be, unless I try it in my own system.
What I'm really interested in is the following:
Sonic differences b/w MS, TW and Technics SP-10 MkII
Reliability
Service availability.
maril555
maril555
fwiw, i use a living voice mystic mat over the integral copper TW mat. i also use the mystic mat over a copper mat on the 1500 platter. i find the TW sounds great with a furutech record weight and the 1500 prefers the bdr weight.
Corby,
Your input is just priceless to me, since you have both tables in the same system.
One question, though- did you hear "the leading edge" problem without the Living Voice Mystic mat on TW?
Maril...I'd like to make a few points in response to your concern with the "leading edge" issue. I've already indicated I use the Raven One, and like Pani, initally heard what he did. In fact, a short while ago I posted a thread seeking some assistance in acquiring a cartridge with less leading edge and more trailing end information. That was prior to having my monoblock amps restored to their original status after previously having them modified quite a few years ago, newly inserting them with iec capability enabling choice in power cord selection, changing their 12ax7 and EL34 tubes with different brands and making vta adjusments to my TW Acustic 10.5 tonearm. Collectively, these measures enabled me to effectively eliminate the excessive edge issue without even changing my Dynavector XX2 cartridge. Incidentally, I have not used nor do I presently use any mat with the Raven One platter. I also have not modified either the feet or the foundation or stand on which the table rests. So yes, I initially experienced a bit too much leading edge, but was successful in achieving system synergy and overcoming it. Obviously, I cannot speak for others regarding whether they have faced the same issue, and if so, whether they have managed to optimize their systems to their own satisfaction.
Maril55 -
The verdier platine comes with an option to use a ball and thrust plate. Essentially this means the platter is grounded, and provides an energy path to ground for unwanted energy or resonance. In this mode the magnetic repulsion is still employed, but it means the tt has a high mass platter, but the grounded bearing only sees a fraction of that weight. This is a very elegant solution and is used in the Continuum. I prefer this mode, the grounding tightens and focus' the sound, increases resolution and articulation if applied properly. The weak point of the Verdier is probably the motor, and there are aftermarket mods available. The battery supply version is gutless.
In my own Final Audio the motor drive system uses oscillator preamplifiers that regenerate the power supply and provide precise sine and cosine waves to the 80wpc power amp that drives the ac motor & 20kg platter.
Micro ringy platter - if you look at the cross section of the Micro Seiki platter it looks like an upside down plate with a lip. ( upside down U ). This rings. The ringing is ameliorated by using a heavy copper mat - the combination of the 2 metals, gunmetal and copper, acts as bimetallic dampening. There are probably other alternatives to getting rid of the platter resonances - eg use of heavy polymer mats such as delrin or lexan for example.
The Micro 5000 is significantly better than the 1500/2000/3000 models and comparisons should not be used. I have never seen a failure in the Micro power supplies so cant comment on what goes wrong if anything.