Brinkmann vs TW Acustic

Ebm, it doesn't take rocket science to set-up a TW table but then again you would not know because as you stated above you had someone else do that for you so you really are the clueless one. Can you actually offer any constructive information besides you normal silliness.

Adding to that Ebm I still owned my AC3 at that time when I was inquiring about a tour and was looking to purchase the BN table something that you can only dream of owning.

Still no one has answered, is there in fact a TW facility and if so where specifically in Germany, it appears ghostly.

It's sad that some of you "mostly TW owners" are so close minded on this topic of product but very opinionated about others, all one needs to do is read your past threads so what would one call that?

I personally owned numerous TW product up to their flagship pce, how many of you can say that say I can and will convey my findings be it good or bad.

I am providing first hand information in a discussion, if you take it as bashing or personal well then you have the problem.

These forums are for discussions, I provide first hand while some of you are flying on the seat of your pants and so full of sh..

When looking at product "any" nothing is perfect and the usual is to discuss so improvements can be made.

As per Dgad's reply above, he says he has had numerous versions.

Why would there be numerous versions?

Dgad mentioned his table now is locked in on the 33.3 speed and said he can hear the difference, if the speed was not a concern as so many of you seem to babble about then why would Thomas work on such and why would Dgad write such.

Dgad said the latest version now holds an approx. 20 hour charge. Wonder which version this is as mine only held 4-5 hours, far cry from 20 hours. I sent mine back to Thomas and he said he checked everything but upon arrival still the same.

So why would there be a latest versions if all was good.

AC tables that most of you own you don't even know what version it is, I bet most are the older version with the old noisy bearing which can not be upgraded due to the substantial redesign so you best just get a new table but if you can't hear the difference as most "glow about" really doesn't matter does it.

Why do you think there was such a radical costly redesign?

Come on guys .... wake up already

In the end as long as you are happy with your sound, not looking to improve, don't kmow or can't hear the differences than so be it, individuals whom I know are looking for improvement's just like Dgad otherwise he would not be trying different versions would he.

I'm thinking of buying another TW BK to actually see if there are any improvements :-)

Wrm57,
What I see are a volume of attacks by Syntax,Dev and others in every thread that mentions TW.
As Dev has mentioned ,his current system is far from his first and I would think Syntax had other components prior to his current listing,Yet they do not bash,knock ,downgrade these other components that they have moved on from.
I'm not writing to defend TW although I do own the GT and 10.5.and they certainly dont need my defense.
Please re-read Dgad's 04-15 post it just about sums it up but I still wonder what is Syntax and others real objective.
I'm sure its not to save us from the horrors of a great turntable

I think both Raul and Dev are right too in their assessments. And I agree no product is perfect and if there was one and we could afford it, everyone would own it.

Onee thing that strikes me from Dev's post is the noisy bearing in some TW models with the 'old bearing.' I purchased my TW AC-1 about a year ago and I've noticed two different looking bearings on internet pictures. Ones with a 'flat-top' bearing and ones with a slightly convex top to the bearing. I have the slight convex-top bearing and the housing at its end (inside platter) has a slight concave shape to it.

This bearing is exceedingly quiet so I am assuming its the new bearing and housing. It is so much more quiet than the VPI Aries 3 bearing/table I had.

A refinement of improvement as the product evolves.

Speaking as a Raven One user, I do not feel the Brinkmann is any less well made. Indeed, I’ve often admired the manufacturing quality of their product and tend to see them as a reference for good manufacturing.

One of the items that has emerged from the discussion which I suppose relates to all turntables to a greater or lesser degree is neutrality.
What should one consider to be the design properties of a neutral turntable?

Since we appear to have been focussing on them, the Raven/s consists of -
- Heavy, essentially non-resonant chassis, comprising polymer/metallic components.
- Heavy, inert, sonically dead platter, closely matching the impedance of vinyl.
- Large, closely toleranced main bearing made to within 10 microns or so.
- Unsuspended construction which “grounds” any internal vibration (albeit, typically of unsuspended, allowing ingress in the opposite direction…)
- Speed stability which is relatively beyond reproach.

Given these characteristics, one wonders if neutrality is as questionable as has been suggested if indeed the above factors are important/relevant in achieving the ideal of Neutrality?
(Which returns me to my original question – what are the salient mechanical properties of a neutral turntable?)
I would have thought tonearms would offer a great deal more opportunity for colouration and resonance than an inert platform?
Indeed I would suggest that such construction offers the chance to hear the differences between those tonearms and the discovery of where their unique resonances lie?
Better a well damped design than to have metallic resonances circulating around a suspended closed loop with nowhere to go?
Just to put things in perspective I am also an avid fan of what the Acutus does (pardon the pun) but it is one of the most expensive suspended T/Ts around so I would demand exemplary performance for such a price. The Acutus has its own ways of managing resonance. Even at its price point it is hard to beat but no turntable is perfect.

Turntable choice is and always will be a personal one. All turntables sound different. Each turntable accessorised differently will sound different again. Good examples of perception changing accessorisation consists of supports and platter mats. Platter mats e.g. Ringmat vs Achromat, are capable of changing the sound of a turntable from Dr Jekyll into Mr Hyde (which is which will depend on your preference). 2 radically different sounds from radically different mats – undamped vs damped.
50% might buy a turntable with one but not the other.

I should also give Stillpoints a mention. Several years ago I discussed the usage with the Company and they defended the rules of use i.e. loosely not tightly screwed to the underbody of the turntable. Odd but true. The object is to use the screw as an additional form of decoupling. IMO the greater the overlapping area the more energy gets sunk (or sourced). Once weight is applied to the thread (reportedly) it locks and does not micro-rock. For this reason I tend to see Stillpoints simply as a multi-stage minimum-coupling mechanism. 3 stillpoints must be better than 4.
Kind regards,

Dev,I can buy a BN anytime i want just don't have the room,just got BN 3 motor unit upgrade ,Please my money is none of your business.Keep on trucking.