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
Maril
I found my Raven AC boring , dark sounding like VPI ,music was totally uninvolved overall it was more then disappointing with the time and money spent on it.

Reading through the raves I just don't get these guys at all, especially the drooling over the Graham Phantom arm combination. Back then I had no idea how good my Graham arm Dynavector XV1s was until I swapped that arm onto another table.
Since then of course other record players, cartridges and tonearms have graced my system. Micro Seiki 1500 and 5000,Kenwood LO7D and a all for the fun of it modded panzer plinth VPI TNT.

I'll remind you of some recent history involving several members here on Audiogon lead by a well respected high profile member with a black diamond Walker VS a electronically refreshed Technics sp10 mk11 coupled to a purpose built plinth.
I followed Porters progress and decided to do work on my own fun panzerholz project sp10 mkii. I can tell you results are much differant from other sp10s coupled to factory plinths even nude including DIY off the shelf material projects.

I don't know what some of you TW owners are suggesting that somehow there had to be some sort of mismatch with system synergy?? or some other component mismatch?? I think the Graham arm revealed the Raven for what it is.
, the raven failed miserably at play back including a feedback test where I placed the stylus on a stationary record and then turn the gain up.
Incidentally I am not the only dissapointed tw owner.
Maril555 is also asking about the sonic differences between his own SP10Mk2 and the Raven and MS. Could those of you who have experience with the DD and either or both of the BD tables discuss some of the differences? I'm sure they go beyond just speed accuracy.

I don't have a lot of experience with different tables, but I have found that how a table deals with energy is very important. Both the energy generated by the cartridge traveling through the arm and into the armbase and plinth and also the internal energy generated by the motor and bearing and vibrational energy generated by the listening environment. I would think that shape, mass and materials are what matter here as well as drainage paths.
.... so much passion...

Well, be careful, shooting the messenger is very common in the dark group

wrong timing?
I was the one that raised the question of system synergy, given some of the diverse descriptions of sound, from too much leading edge, to dark and dead. I don't own an AC table; I'm using the Kuzma XL and Airline and am not promoting that either (although I've been quite happy with it, other than the pump for the arm).
Bill Hart
Syntax, Thanks for putting this foolishness in perspective and for the laughs.