I went opposite to you at one point and switched from an Audio Grail grease 301, Woodsong plinth, Reed arm to a Stabi Ref2 with 4Point. Very different sounding setups so difficult to compare but I was more happy with the Kuzma.
Kuzma Stabi R compared to a Garrard 301/401??
- Thread starter kozzmo
- Start date
There is certainly a gap in performance between 301 and 401. Reed are colored tonearms and quite energetic (i used to own a couple of them) and i don't consider them as a great match with an idler turntable and the special drive they have.
Stabi Ref because of its suspended (mass) brings a level of diffusion - which 4point tries to balance this out. Also the chassis/platter materials bring a damping effect to the sound - which exists to all of the KUZMA turntables having a similar design platter. Special sounding for sure that leaves you wanting more of the same plus something extra.
Last but not least - without having any intention to degrade Kuzma's engineering, i assess the overall suspension approach completely wrong. As there are four suspension pillars / one in each corner and weight on suspended sub-platter not being equally distributed (tonearm with is substantial weight is on one side for example) suspension doesn't return sub-chassis always to the same exact position. This brings levelling issues that reflect to Azimuth and anti-skating. In a highly resolving system a single vinyl record almost never sounds the same each time you play it. This apparently, doesn't let the precision of tonearm to be taken advantage by a precise adjustment.
I believe all that, bridges somehow the gap on our perspectives.
Stabi Ref because of its suspended (mass) brings a level of diffusion - which 4point tries to balance this out. Also the chassis/platter materials bring a damping effect to the sound - which exists to all of the KUZMA turntables having a similar design platter. Special sounding for sure that leaves you wanting more of the same plus something extra.
Last but not least - without having any intention to degrade Kuzma's engineering, i assess the overall suspension approach completely wrong. As there are four suspension pillars / one in each corner and weight on suspended sub-platter not being equally distributed (tonearm with is substantial weight is on one side for example) suspension doesn't return sub-chassis always to the same exact position. This brings levelling issues that reflect to Azimuth and anti-skating. In a highly resolving system a single vinyl record almost never sounds the same each time you play it. This apparently, doesn't let the precision of tonearm to be taken advantage by a precise adjustment.
I believe all that, bridges somehow the gap on our perspectives.
Last edited:
I’ve built it myself. Came out quite nice so I built another one now for a friend of mine.
It looks great mate - brilliant job!
Im looking at a Solid Sounds PRISM plinth for mine, similar to this:-
IMHO your claim is unfounded. Are you aware that bearing therefore sub platter and platter is not located at the geometrical center of suspended plinth? That’s for even weight distribution. Please check pictures below.
I don’t own anything from Kuzma and not defending them but I’m sure their engineering is ok.
No performance gap between those decks can close highly colored vintage sound that they present.
I am very aware @mtemur of the design of this turntable. I lived with it for few years.
Yes, platter remains levelled as it's in a fixed position on lower sub-chassis. Tonearm is not. This creates the behavior or issue i am talking about.
What i am saying is that: if you see the top sub-chassis and specially in the photo you've shared, you understand that as it 'floats' on the four suspensions that are on corners and the placement of a HEAVY tonearm is not centered to them its weight is not equally distributed among them. Therefore each of the four suspensions work differently after any small bump you do to it - which is expected when you change records or record sides. Having a precision bubble level, using AnalogMagik or just listen to it you understand that Antiskating and azimuth change.
Yes, platter remains levelled as it's in a fixed position on lower sub-chassis. Tonearm is not. This creates the behavior or issue i am talking about.
What i am saying is that: if you see the top sub-chassis and specially in the photo you've shared, you understand that as it 'floats' on the four suspensions that are on corners and the placement of a HEAVY tonearm is not centered to them its weight is not equally distributed among them. Therefore each of the four suspensions work differently after any small bump you do to it - which is expected when you change records or record sides. Having a precision bubble level, using AnalogMagik or just listen to it you understand that Antiskating and azimuth change.
Last edited:
First of all, I set up a Kuzma Ref2, along with several other turntables, and found its suspension to be very effective. The tonearm used was the 9” 4Point. Evaluating suspension effectiveness using antiskating and azimuth is challenging, but it’s nearly impossible to draw meaningful conclusions if all suspension towers don’t respond to a bump at the same frequency. That said, suspensions operating at slightly different frequencies can also be beneficial for reducing resonances.
It’s important to note that resonance is not the same as vibration. The key to achieving perfect suspension alignment is to align the upper plinth with respect to the lower plinth, without focusing on leveling initially. Once you’ve achieved the recommended spacing between the plinths as outlined in the manual, you can then level the platter (always the platter not the plinth) using the adjustable feet under the lower plinth. This might be the issue you’re encountering. Or maybe tonearm you used exceeded turntable’s weight limit or tailoring the tonearm wire was the problem.
I hope this helps.
Last edited:
@mtemur I feel you don't get my point for some reason. I will give a final shot and then I will move on. Having on a suspended sub-chassis a heavy tonearm like 4point (11") that it's weight is not evenly distributed makes each suspension pillar to work differently. This brings issues when this sub-chassis is taking a bump for any reason. This sub-chassis almost never gets to the very same place like before. Tested among 3 Stabis. Franc (Kuzma) when we discussed that, he said that this should not be a problem. Apparently in certain circumstances it is.
I got your point but surely you haven’t got mine. Besides I couldn’t get a clear answer that the possible problem areas I mentioned are eliminated by you before reaching final conclusion.
I don’t know how you check it but suspended plinth should stabilize itself at the exact location before the hit. The reason for not returning to the same exact position could be due to misaligned motors (location, height etc) or belt, besides other possibilities I mentioned earlier. Also settling of silicone takes time. I’m trying to help. It’s very difficult -even deliberately- to design a suspended plinth that settles different places every time it gets a hit.
Last edited:
The 301 is a highly colored big and bold vintage “rounded” sound. It’s surely a fun sounding turntable but I felt a massive veil was lifted when moving to the Kuzma setup. Seems there was much left in the groove when using the Garrard. Would be nice to have both for the different flavors. I don’t remember having issues with the Kuzma suspension but I wasn’t pressing the top platter to compress it.
As i said, let's move on and politely agree to disagree. Afterall, there is no ground for your courteous help as I have moved on from this turntable to another one.
For the record:
1. all the areas of check you mentioned (i.e. belt, motor, checking suspension towers etc.) are original - without modifications and checked from local dealer and many times by myself. Checked also in other Stabis and got the same findings. Talking with Franc he accepted this behavior and in his view that's not a problem - probably considers that this is within the level of performance this turntable supposed to offer ? Who knows. In my view this is a design issue and a hard limit on how far the sound of this turntable can go.
2. I believe Kuzma stabi ref 2 is more than decent turntable. it has its sound and fits well within the Kuzma family. I didn't move on because of what i describe but mostly for other reasons.
3. if you ask me (again) which one i prefer (Kuzma Stabi Ref 2 vs well maintained/rebuilt Garrard 401), i would vote again for the Garrard.
Thanks for the detailed answer, I wish you’ve shared this in your first post. Anyway it’s a very interesting situation and thanks again for the insight.
You likely know that a large segment of major tonearm builders have been sourcing lift assemblies from Jelco (when they were in business) and Rega. Kuzma shifted from Jelco after the company's demise - retaining the same critical dimensions with their in-house built assemblies for parts compatibility.
In many cases, the platform on any of these cuing assemblies has a slight bend, and as you know, small height variations near the bearing pivot are magnified at the headshell end of the arm. Carefully nudging it to the correct height is all that it takes. Just don't be brutal about it ;-)
... Thom
Similar threads
