The passive vacuum suck down is not continuous. Once suction is obtained, the pump is disconnected from the platter.
I wonder how long the vacuum can hold. The suction will slowly drop in time. It will be interesting to know if there is changes in sound from first track to the last.
I think MF is a trustworthy reviewer. This tt should be as great as he said. Maybe one day I would like to try. My itch on gear is already put to sleep but it is friend like you and Bonzo that gonna make it wake up and get me to trouble again.
I think MF is a trustworthy reviewer. This tt should be as great as he said. Maybe one day I would like to try. My itch on gear is already put to sleep but it is friend like you and Bonzo that gonna make it wake up and get me to trouble again.
I think MF is a trustworthy reviewer. This tt should be as great as he said. Maybe one day I would like to try. My itch on gear is already put to sleep but it is friend like you and Bonzo that gonna make it wake up and get me to trouble again.
Tang, trouble is your middle name and direct experience your game When I come and visit all the tables, I want to see and hear all the good ones, and you have most of them now, but not all
Heh. Knowing how much Shane loves record clamps, I couldn't help think of him when I read this:
"Put a record on the platter, then flip the pump switch and insert the nipple into an elastomer-ringed outlet on the side of the platter. In about 10 or 15 seconds, the air is evacuated through tiny holes atop the platter. Then you just [!] turn off the pump and screw on the clamp—or you can clamp first and then vacuum.
When the record side is finished playing, you insert a supplied mini-Torx screwdriver into a tiny release valve on the other side of the platter, allowing air back in via those tiny holes; you may now remove the record."
Heh. Knowing how much Shane loves record clamps, I couldn't help think of him when I read this:
"Put a record on the platter, then flip the pump switch and insert the nipple into an elastomer-ringed outlet on the side of the platter. In about 10 or 15 seconds, the air is evacuated through tiny holes atop the platter. Then you just [!] turn off the pump and screw on the clamp—or you can clamp first and then vacuum.
When the record side is finished playing, you insert a supplied mini-Torx screwdriver into a tiny release valve on the other side of the platter, allowing air back in via those tiny holes; you may now remove the record."
Heh. Knowing how much Shane loves record clamps, I couldn't help think of him when I read this:
"Put a record on the platter, then flip the pump switch and insert the nipple into an elastomer-ringed outlet on the side of the platter. In about 10 or 15 seconds, the air is evacuated through tiny holes atop the platter. Then you just [!] turn off the pump and screw on the clamp—or you can clamp first and then vacuum.
When the record side is finished playing, you insert a supplied mini-Torx screwdriver into a tiny release valve on the other side of the platter, allowing air back in via those tiny holes; you may now remove the record."
Hmm, that Fremer "review". Basically a long exposition of the promotional brochure, plus tidbits as to how highly resolving the tt is. "I never heard THIS before, I never heard THAT before".
What shocked me was the prices of his various tonearms. Multiple examples approaching €80k.
Heh. Knowing how much Shane loves record clamps, I couldn't help think of him when I read this:
"Put a record on the platter, then flip the pump switch and insert the nipple into an elastomer-ringed outlet on the side of the platter. In about 10 or 15 seconds, the air is evacuated through tiny holes atop the platter. Then you just [!] turn off the pump and screw on the clamp—or you can clamp first and then vacuum.
When the record side is finished playing, you insert a supplied mini-Torx screwdriver into a tiny release valve on the other side of the platter, allowing air back in via those tiny holes; you may now remove the record."
Hmm, that Fremer "review". Basically a long exposition of the promotional brochure, plus tidbits as to how highly resolving the tt is. "I never heard THIS before, I never heard THAT before".
What shocked me was the prices of his various tonearms. Multiple examples approaching €80k.
some members here have a clue on the sound of a SAT dd tt (equipped with CF1-9 and CF1-12) through the videos i had sent them last summer.
They had the chance to compare it against Continuum and AF1 on the same system.
I think MF is a trustworthy reviewer. This tt should be as great as he said. Maybe one day I would like to try. My itch on gear is already put to sleep but it is friend like you and Bonzo that gonna make it wake up and get me to trouble again.
Hmm, that Fremer "review". Basically a long exposition of the promotional brochure, plus tidbits as to how highly resolving the tt is. "I never heard THIS before, I never heard THAT before".
What shocked me was the prices of his various tonearms. Multiple examples approaching €80k.
Most reviews include the design philosophy and the construction materials of the component being reviewed -- often straight out of the marketing brochure, because this is the most efficient way for the reviewer to learn this basic background information.
Would you please explain to us with insightful analysis what is wrong with Michael comparing two turntables, swapping the tonearms on each one, and concluding that with familiar tracks on the SAT turntable he is hearing things he never heard before? Isn't finding and reporting on a product which takes the reviewer to a higher suspension of disbelief something we want reviewers to be doing for us?
Why is it shocking that the top analog replay component reviewer in the history of the industry would be asked to review the most expensive analog components? Michael, to his credit, except for cables, does not engage in the unethical practice of "long-term loans." He uses his own money to buy his components.
what might be interesting would be to compare direct drive turntables (NVS and SAT) on the same platform. say my Taiko Tana, or the MinusK that is under the SAT.
i know what it did for my NVS, and wonder the degree of contribution to the SAT (i don't wonder very much as i know how it would go).
my Taiko Tana platform could accommodate either turntable; that is assuming the SAT does not have any self generated noise that could be picked up by the Tana sensors. whereas with the MinusK you would need the specific CT-2 model designed for around 100-110 pounds with arm(s) for the NVS.
or even compare both tt's on the decoupling passive platform standard with the NVS. it's adjustable for tt weight.
you can't add vacuum to the NVS, there is that. my Durand record weight has always been effective for me.
i do like that somehow now that we have an 'uber' priced direct drive turntable getting attention, that direct drive is in fashion again. funny how those things go. maybe the NVS needs to double the price.
not saying which direct drive turntable would come out on top......it's fair to favor the SAT. but i think the NVS designers are capable fellows too.
