SAT Direct Drive Turntable!

[spiritofmusic]

Ron, you don't want to ascribe any ulterior or hidden criticism of Mike on my part. Had you left that review, I'd have similarly commented on it.

For me it felt like one long infomercial. Whether Mike gets accommodation or long term loaner is immaterial to me.

Nowhere did I glean anything other than it being an audio microscope.

I guess if that's what I want from a tt, I'll start saving. As to anything else, zero impression from the review.

 

[Jeffy]

That is the craziest way to use vacuum. I have a basis table with vacuum. You place record on platter, press button and record sucks to platter. You press button again and record releases from platter, ingenious.

 

[microstrip]

Since I don't use as many rock examples as classical, I can accept that. Could you give me an example so I'll understand better?

Tim,

Can I suggest a great book that addresses with great care the differences between rock and classical sound reproduction and the preferences of professionals and listeners according to the type of music? Go for "Loudspeakers For Music Recording And Reproduction" by Philip Newell & Keith Holland - it is a very interesting reading, even for matters that are not directly related with loudspeakers. Just saw that there is now a 2019 second edition https://www.soundonsound.com/reviews/loudspeakers-music-recording-and-reproduction - I only own the old one from 2007.

BTW, this is the book every horn lover (particularly Ked ) should own - Philip Newell is an unconditional partisan of horns and chapter 4 is extremely interesting!

 

[microstrip]

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. (...)

MF does something very valid in his reviews - he records the same tracks in 24/96 using different combinations and then listens carefully - as he says "That way I could directly and rapidly compare the Caliburn with the XD1." Although the recording system is not completely transparent it would be great if we could have access to these files!

 

[microstrip]

That is the craziest way to use vacuum. I have a basis table with vacuum. You place record on platter, press button and record sucks to platter. You press button again and record releases from platter, ingenious.

Fortunately the AF1P works the same way. Otherwise I am sure I would immediately prefer the vacuumless playback ...

 

[Ron Resnick]

I am surprised about the turntable's design to release the vacuum pressure. My eyes at close range are terrible, and I would not relish having to aim the Torx tool at a small hole on the plinth without scratching the area around the hole every time I remove an LP.

 

[Jeffy]

I am surprised about the turntable's design to release the vacuum pressure. My eyes at close range are terrible, and I would not relish having to aim the Torx tool at a small hole on the plinth without scratching the area around the hole every time I remove an LP.

As well as the time and effort.

 

[dan31]

Even if you order the vacuum option, I bet most will get lazy and stop using it. I cant imagine the extra steps to play a side, stop release vacuum, re tighten torx screw, declamp, flip side, apply vacuum, reclamp, start, drop needle. The process would get to me. If I could afford a techdas I would go that route.

 

[Jeffy]

I agree right into the garbage can

 

[marty]

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.

I agree with Mike that one of the first things that went through my mind was the contribution of the minusK platform to the whole of the sound that Fremer describes and may have unwittingly ascribed solely to the SAT. Having the MinusK built in to my Dohmann Helix 1 is surely a great contribution to that table's sound. But there is no experiment that can be done to test the hypothesis of the precise contribution of the MinusK. The experiment Mike proposes might, and I can think of nobody better to perform that test than Mike! To quote the famous opening lines from Mission Impossible:

"Your mission, Mike, should you choose/decide to accept it, ... As always, should you or any of your TT Compare Force get a hernia from lifting the gear or mesmerized from drooling in your shoe during the assignment, the Secretary will disavow any knowledge of your actions".

 

[Ron Resnick]

The Bergmann Galder, for example, has a simple and elegant vacuum release system. So do the Basis Audio turntables.

Marc clearly is an absolutely amazing engineer. I wonder why he didn't design a vacuum release system which is initiated by a push-button?

 

[Vienna]

The Bergmann Galder, for example, has a simple and elegant vacuum release system. So do the Basis Audio turntables.

Marc clearly is an absolutely amazing engineer. I wonder why he didn't design a vacuum release system which is initiated by a push-button?

I think that his intention was to keep the price low

 

[dan31]

No doubt a remote vacuum release system on the SAT turntable might push the price to $0.5M. That might impact sales. Better to offer it as an upgrade option later after the owner has laid down the cabbage.

 

[PeterA]

Interesting review. Thank you for posting it. I wonder what the next super table is that Fremer hints at near the end.

I was disappointed that there was no comparison of the vacuum hold down on and off. Perhaps the other platter is optimized for sonics with no vacuum and such a comparison can not be made using the same platter. It seems curious.

I found the technical section for the first part of the article to be very confusing. I just could not understand what was being described or the language used. It is clear that Fremer really likes the turntable. Perhaps it will replace his reference. I do like the small footprint and form factor. I would have liked to see a photo with the connected cables to see what happens to the elegant shape in the real world use. It's like Wilson speaker installation photos with no speaker cables.

Finally, the last sentence of this paragraph kind of sums it up for me, along with Fremer's descriptions of "black backgrounds". Is this the way we hear real music live? Or is this table a tool to get to what is on the recording? Both approaches seem valid to me. Ron even started a thread on the subject. One seems an appreciation for, even celebration of, the whole or gestalt of the music and its message, the other seems a diagnostic analysis of its many parts. Two different approaches leading to two different sounds.

Fremer:

"Through the Continuum, the pizzicato strings were softer and the triangle more velvety than metallic, with the individual strikes blending together. The oboe, too, was softer, and it lacked definition and presence. All this is in comparison, using a sonic magnifying glass."

 

[Mike Lavigne]

I agree with Mike that one of the first things that went through my mind was the contribution of the minusK platform to the whole of the sound that Fremer describes and may have unwittingly ascribed solely to the SAT. Having the MinusK built in to my Dohmann Helix 1 is surely a great contribution to that table's sound. But there is no experiment that can be done to test the hypothesis of the precise contribution of the MinusK. The experiment Mike proposes might, and I can think of nobody better to perform that test than Mike! To quote the famous opening lines from Mission Impossible:

"Your mission, Mike, should you choose/decide to accept it, ... As always, should you or any of your TT Compare Force get a hernia from lifting the gear or mesmerized from drooling in your shoe during the assignment, the Secretary will disavow any knowledge of your actions".

certainly i would be game to try it, but seriously doubt it would ever happen as what would SAT have to gain from it?

i wonder did Fremer do an SAT 96/24 file with and without the Minusk? he does not mention it.

 

[ALF]

Interesting review. Thank you for posting it. I wonder what the next super table is that Fremer hints at near the end.

I was disappointed that there was no comparison of the vacuum hold down on and off. Perhaps the other platter is optimized for sonics with no vacuum and such a comparison can not be made using the same platter. It seems curious.

I found the technical section for the first part of the article to be very confusing. I just could not understand what was being described or the language used. It is clear that Fremer really likes the turntable. Perhaps it will replace his reference. I do like the small footprint and form factor. I would have liked to see a photo with the connected cables to see what happens to the elegant shape in the real world use. It's like Wilson speaker installation photos with no speaker cables.

Finally, the last sentence of this paragraph kind of sums it up for me, along with Fremer's descriptions of "black backgrounds". Is this the way we hear real music live? Or is this table a tool to get to what is on the recording? Both approaches seem valid to me. Ron even started a thread on the subject. One seems an appreciation for, even celebration of, the whole or gestalt of the music and its message, the other seems a diagnostic analysis of its many parts. Two different approaches leading to two different sounds.

Fremer:

"Through the Continuum, the pizzicato strings were softer and the triangle more velvety than metallic, with the individual strikes blending together. The oboe, too, was softer, and it lacked definition and presence. All this is in comparison, using a sonic magnifying glass."

...the unassuming Zero...

 

[ALF]

certainly i would be game to try it, but seriously doubt it would ever happen as what would SAT have to gain from it?


....absolutely nothing

vbw,
a

 

[bonzo75]

All this is in comparison, using a sonic magnifying glass."

Fremer has done a very positive review of the OMA technics which is much cheaper (relatively). So for those interested in trying out a DD, but if SAT is out of reach, this might be interesting

"
"The power supply of my Con- tinuum Audio Labs Caliburn turntable is starting to fail, and its oil pump has
a very slow leak. Should that $150,000 system (the price includes Con- tinuum’s Cobra tonearm, no longer in use) give up the ghost after 13 years of dependable, trouble-free use and abuse from me, I could definitely live happily with the ca-$20,000 combo of Technics SP-10R and OMA SP10 plinth with OMA graphite mat (though I’d sorely miss the Caliburn’s vacuum hold- down) — and, of course, that replace- ment system would have to include a SAT CF1 arm. I don’t think I’ve written that about any other turntable that’s been here since the summer of 2005."

https://www.oswaldsmillaudio.com/img/press/STRP_190200_ANALOG.pdf

 

[Direct Drive]

I find this review interesting. MF has certainly changed his mind over time insofar when the first press release was released he commented on how SAT could possibly say the Technics was the best DD. His view was they couldn't have tested them all.
I'm afraid I do think little is done to the motor and control unit other than casing. I don't doubt it sounds superb, but pricing ?

I have a prototype direct drive, small footprint, can take 3 arms etc etc. A motor like none on the market. At a demo while sorting the PSU out it floored a Clearaudio Statement thing (large tower which looked like a wedding cake with linear tracker and cyborg looking cartridge -I think fancied our TT because it kept flashing at it.

Speaking to a well-known UK HiFi journalist he asked our target pricing.... Sub £10k, ideally £7ish if direct sale. He laughed and said it will fail as it won't be taken seriously at that price though it is one of the best he has heard. His suggestion is £75k at a minimum through dealers.

The cost is no where near that. To me that would be immoral if not criminal. We could of course buy some space dust to impregnate the plater. And I would a least use a Presta (gunmetal & silver plated of course) valve so there is no chance of loosing it on the optimal vacuum disk.

Have these turntables started to move away from being tools and become status symbols? Like Rolex, once a tool watch ( when I was a commercial diver in the gulf -ubiquitous) now shiny baubles which are anything but a tool, all status ( says a man with a few older ones...so guilty).

Anyway enough from me.....I'm going to buy my first belt drive TT in 35 years.....ironic!

 

[bonzo75]

Even if you order the vacuum option, I bet most will get lazy and stop using it. I cant imagine the extra steps to play a side, stop release vacuum, re tighten torx screw, declamp, flip side, apply vacuum, reclamp, start, drop needle. The process would get to me. If I could afford a techdas I would go that route.

Look at the bright side, you will at least listen to an entire side and not want to change it mid way