Yes, I really like the Reed TT. When I first got it I switched back and forth between the friction and the belt drives. I much prefer the friction drive though the belt drive can sound a little more 'romantic.' I suspect this is because music tends to sound more languid, with longer decays. With my previous table I switched the belt drive to an idler (Teres) so I guess I gravitate to the benefits that come with that approach. Having said that, I've never owned a DD so I can't say that I'd prefer an idler in all cases.
A quick question about open baffles...
I've actually never heard an open baffle nor a magnaplanar but I have heard a few electrostats from ML, Quad, and Soundlab.
I used own SoundLab A1s and the reason I sold them is because regardless of how I positioned them I couldn't get them to generate an immersive sound field beyond the speaker plane. In other words, they weren't room-filling. All the action happens behind the speaker plane and I'm left to feel like a bit of spectator looking through a window and watching the proceedings. My girlfriend at the time referred to this as "gulfy" -- there is a gulf between the listening position and the music. I experienced this sort of presentation with a pair of U1s at a local audiophile's place and another pair of A1s in the US so I know it wasn't a function of just my system or room. So, my question is -- is this a dipole thing or is it an electrostat thing? The main reason I purchased the AN-Es was their ability (when painstakingly positioned properly) to load or pressurize the room and, on the right recordings, throw an immersive/room-filling sound field. They do that in my space and, for all the other failings of my system, I am very hesitant to move on from them for this reason.