Am I missing something here? This device "carves" a differently sized centre hole.
So what happens when you play the same LP after a time. Is the "new" hole immediately "aligned" correctly?
I ask because people are worried changing to another record weight will possibly shift alignment.
Did you try rechecking the alignment after playing with your other weight? I saw in Fremer’s review he was also removing it and putting another weight on.
Am I missing something here? This device "carves" a differently sized centre hole.
So what happens when you play the same LP after a time. Is the "new" hole immediately "aligned" correctly?
The device itself doesn't change the hole. If the record is stamped off centre enough and/or your spindle is large enough that there is insufficient "wriggle room" in the existing hole to correct, then you use the supplied reamer to make the hole big enough so you can correct. That's a permanent physical change. Regardless, you will need to recorrect the position of the record each time you play, or find some way to remember/mark correct position for quick placement on future spins. It definitely adds another step to record preparation. But it doesn't take long, and with experience no doubt gets quicker. And the sound quality improvements, seem worth the effort.
- Requires permanently widening the spindle hole
- Forces a full re-centering every single play
- Really only practical on low-mass DD turntables due to repeated start/stop cycles
- Struggles to identify the innermost groove on some records, etc.
- Requires permanently widening the spindle hole
- Forces a full re-centering every single play
- Really only practical on low-mass DD turntables due to repeated start/stop cycles
- Struggles to identify the innermost groove on some records, etc.
- Requires permanently widening the spindle hole
- Forces a full re-centering every single play
- Really only practical on low-mass DD turntables due to repeated start/stop cycles
- Struggles to identify the innermost groove on some records, etc.
It's unfortunate, but also a physical reality. There is no way around it unless perhaps you can replace the spindle on your turntable for a narrower one to gain some "wriggle room".
That's a choice. You could choose to play as always, just drop the platter and away you go, although previous widening of the spindle hole would likely mean more error than originally. Alternatively, and what I'm currently doing (using a little round sticker on the protective sleeve) is documenting the corrected spindle position against the spindle hole. In this way I can drop the record on and move it to the general area and get most of the correction for no further effort.
I've seen it fail twice so far - once on a very colourful pressing (a good reason to prefer black vinyl). And also on the recent Nick Mason Echoes LP which is pressed backwards so the runout groove is on the outside edge and obviously cannot be read by the DS Audio.
What I do know is that every record I've corrected and played sounds "MUCH BETTER", and it brings a consistency of qualities to replay between records, and that's a huge thing. My vinyl replay these past few days has never sounded better, or been more enjoyable. We all have great pressings, and also a lot of mediocre ones. I'm starting to think some of the source of mediocrity is off centre pressings and if you were to check those great pressings more of them would be correctly centred.
So, even recognising the short comings you've highlighted, it's a huge step forward, IMO.
It’s a Must Have if you want to maximize sound quality and already have a high end system.
Unfortunately, I don’t think it works with vacuum hold down, but I think the benefits of centering outweigh the benefits of vacuum hold down.
I considered it in 2023 and in the end decided that if my records are flat (I use the German API flattener), then other things are more important, such as eccentricity.
I wouldn’t say that. I had a vacuum table and got better sound by not using the vacuum and instead using a carbon platter mat. Seems like this DS Audio device makes an obvious improvement.
Everything in this hobby has compromises. Vaccum fixes uneven/warped vinyl and (perhaps) improves groove contact, at the expense of a more complex setup, potential vibration from the vacuum system, and inability to correct for eccentricity.
I trust Nagra. When they designed a new from the ground up TT, they did not include vacuum. There was no real concern for cost - if they felt it would benefit the design overall, they would have included it.
Disagree, it’s a lot more money to design a table and have the vacuum preform without problems. I’m not impressed with the Nagra table’s sound. Putting a lot of money in a table does not guarantee great sound.
Disagree, it’s a lot more money to design a table and have the vacuum preform without problems. I’m not impressed with the Nagra table’s sound. Putting a lot of money in a table does not guarantee great sound.
Can't please everyone! I think it sounds incredible - in some ways better than my R2R setup.
If you haven't heard it in a proper room and system (with all Nagra HD/REF components), then don't judge. Nagra doesn't pay for reviews like most brands, so you won't see Fremer review it. He has told me personally that he thinks it's the best sounding table for the price, and he himself has only heard it at Munich.
The HD Phono is so good, it's probably what makes the TT sound the way it does, more so than the TT itself. Nagra designed it all as a system, with no object to cost and only because they are passionate about what they do. Nagra today is mainly a security company -- the audio group is only there because they are passionate about audio. They are not nearly as profit driven as their competitors.
Disagree, it’s a lot more money to design a table and have the vacuum preform without problems. I’m not impressed with the Nagra table’s sound. Putting a lot of money in a table does not guarantee great sound.
Disagree. Whenever you think "Feature A" has no downsides, you are making a mistake. EVERYTHING in this hobby has a downside. Even a well designed vacuum system has downsides.
If you don't like Nagra, look at other modern ultra high end TTs that also chose not to include vacuum:
• Thorens Reference
• OMA K3/K5
• Wilson Benesch GMT-One Fremer's new favorite (i.e., the latest company to give him a massive discount)
• Dohmann Audio
These are all cost no object designs. Vacuum would have been included if they thought it would benefit.
If you design the entire TT well, you don't need vacuum hold down. And correcting for warped records with vacuum is not solving the root cause. I inherently believe it's best to flatten the record (if you think it will affect SQ).
Vacuum hold-down on turntables sounds like a universally “good thing,” but there are reasons why some top-tier makers avoid it. Let me break it down.
From Chat (5o):
Vacuum hold-down on turntables sounds like a universally “good thing,” but there are reasons why some top-tier makers avoid it. Let me break it down.
A vacuum pump sucks the record against the platter, flattening warps and coupling the vinyl tightly to the platter surface.
Reduces resonance between the record and platter (“vinyl roar”).
Makes warped discs more playable.
Why Some Manufacturers Don’t Like It
1. Noise & Vibration
A vacuum system requires a pump, hoses, and valves. Even with damping, that introduces mechanical noise and vibration.
In ultra-high-end turntables, the fight is always about reducing noise floors into the nanovolt range. Adding a pump risks adding more noise than it removes.
2. Complexity & Reliability
Pumps wear out, seals leak, hoses age.
For a manufacturer like Wilson Benesch or Nagra, whose philosophy is “build forever products,” the idea of a vacuum system with moving parts and maintenance overhead doesn’t align with their engineering ethos.
3. Energy Storage in the Vinyl
When vinyl is sucked too tightly against a massive platter, some designers argue it can over-damp the record.
Instead of the vinyl being allowed to dissipate vibration in a controlled way, energy may reflect back into the stylus.
Companies like OMA (Oswalds Mill Audio) or Thorens Reference tend to believe in tuned mechanical impedance matching between vinyl and platter rather than brute-force suction.
4. Resonance Control Philosophy
High-end tables have very different design philosophies:
Non-vacuum advocates (Wilson Benesch, Nagra, OMA) → carefully design platter materials and mats to control how resonance is drained and dissipated. They argue that a vacuum is unnecessary, or even counterproductive, if your platter/mat interface is already acoustically optimized.
5. Record Damage Concerns
With strong vacuum hold, records can be stressed at the label area or micro-cracks can develop if the vinyl is forced flat over many years.
Not everyone agrees this is significant, but it’s cited by some engineers.
Why Ultra-High-End Builders Skip It
Wilson Benesch GMT One → carbon-fiber, kinematic bearing, ultra-stiff system. They believe the design controls energy better than suction.
Nagra Reference → Swiss precision, focus on mechanical silence and serviceability. A pump doesn’t fit that picture.
OMA K3 → mass and material philosophy (cast iron, graphite). They rely on platter impedance matching, not vacuum.
Thorens Reference → heritage and mechanical damping tradition. They prefer weight and suspension to vacuum.
For these builders, adding vacuum is seen as a compromise in simplicity, reliability, and sonic purity.
Look at Points 3, 4 and the final paragraph. Seems like all modern ultra high-end (except for SAT, but their TT is not great for what they charge) have chosen to skip vacuum hold down.
Many reviewers even say: Vacuum tables wow you at first with control and silence. Non-vacuum tables win you over long-term with musicality and emotional engagement.
I wouldn’t say that. I had a vacuum table and got better sound by not using the vacuum and instead using a carbon platter mat. Seems like this DS Audio device makes an obvious improvement.
