Reed Muse 3C turntable


Has anyone had a chance to hear this table?
exlibris
..just wondering why one would buy into esoterica like this and expect solid customer support, and a fair price.
Stingray any turntable in this price range can be considered esoterica. I have heard the Reed Muse 3C turntable, albeit it was only for a few minutes. It was a wonderful experience. If I were to have that kind of money it would be on the top of my list together with Pluto turntables.

Also Reed is not a new player their tonearms are some of the best money can buy.
I contacted the company about the possibility of using my Air Tangent arm with their table and I can say that their customer support has been second to none. They even sent me a set of CAD drawings (to scale) and computer renderings showing exactly what the arm would look like on their table.
They've been around since 2007/08 and though that isn't a very long time, during that time I believe they have established a good reputation for their tonearms.
I can't speak to the issue of price. It certainly isn't a cheap table. Past experience tells me that you can sometimes get better value from companies that don't have large advertising costs etc. I'm not saying that that is the case here, however, I simply don't know. The table appears to be well-engineered, well-thought out, well-built, and according to reviews it sounds great. I don't know if the price is fair.
I bought it and I'm very happy with it and with the service I have received from the company.
The thing I question is the wall wart switching power supply for the 12VDC motor.
I've just ordered a linear power supply and I'll report on my system page if it makes any difference.
How much $$$ does it sell for?
Without knowing the price, it's very difficult for me personally to form an opinion.
I think it retails for 15,900 Euros.
The drive system seems to have a lot in common with the Kuzma Reference, if and when the Muse 3C is used as a belt-drive. I do see some benefits to the belt-drive configuration, as compared with more typical belt-drives, and I guess having the pressure of two rim drive wheels evenly applied on each side of the driven disc also has some benefits, if you use it as a rim drive. I also see why staggering the diameters of the idlers and the driven wheel is wise, but I wonder what happens to speed accuracy if and when there is wear on any of the elements of the drive system. And do two rim-drivers impart more noise into the platter than one? Also, does it seem a bit confusing to the potential buyer, receiving a mixed message about belt- vs rim-drive? What does the inventor want it to be?

Parenthetically, I own a Reed 2A tonearm and love it.
I've only ever listened to the table using the friction drive. My plan is switch over to the belt drive today. I'll report my experience here and on my system page. I too wonder about speed control as the two idler wheels start to wear so I'm going to order some spares.
Reed also sent me their 3p tonearm to try out . I listened to it for a couple of weeks while they were preparing a mounting plate for my airtangent arm. I loved the sound was getting from the Reed arm and table. The soundfield had a better foundation and better bass than I've ever heard in my room. When I put the AT in I heard something quite different. The midrange was incredible and the music had room-filling freedom. I was more in touch with the music emotionally as well. I miss the benefits of the 3p but I prefer the overall presentation of the AT.
One of the things that drew me to the Reed Muse 3C table was the fact that it had a rim-drive (idler drive; friction drive). In my old setup, I replaced the belt drive that came with my table with a Teres Verus rim drive and the sound was greatly improved. When I decided to upgrade my table I was looking for either an idler or direct drive, but had pretty much ruled out belt drives based on past experience and the experience of some folks whose ears I trust.

After listening to the Reed table for a few weeks now using the friction drive, I switched over to belt drive to see how it compared. The switch over was pretty easy and going back and forth between the two drive systems only takes about 5 minutes.

I’m not sure what to say other than; I much prefer the belt drive. Needless to say, I was very surprised by this. There is so much more tonal information with the belt. As notes decay you hear all the overtones and nuances of the instrument – everything just sounds so much more real and this is especially true of instruments made of wood. The belt drive is also more musical. One can follow the line of the music and get what the musicians were intending and feeling, with ease. The belt drive presents better separation between images and the images ‘pop’ with more weight and density. I was expecting a smooth, blended, and homogenous presentation with the belt but with this table (and my arm and cartridge) there is plenty of drive and specificity.

I’d have to go back to the idler wheels to see if there is anything at all I like better about what I hear when they are in the system. Maybe there is greater drive and authority at the absolute bottom end, maybe? As I play with different tonearm and cartridge combinations I will be sure to keep trying the belt vs. friction drive in the table.
Exlibris, Thanks for the candid nature of your post. I suspected that in this design, the belt drive might actually be superior to the rim drive mode. (I think of "rim drive" as the situation where the motor direct drives a wheel which is directly driving the outer rim of the platter, a la the Verus. Whereas "idler drive" describes a situation where the motor drives a shaft that drives a wheel that drives usually the inner rim of the platter, a la Garrard 301/401. The Thorens TD124 is both fish and fowl, the motor drives a belt that drives the idler.) Anyway, I have always thought that if I were ever to go back to belt-drive, the Kuzma Reference would be one of my top contenders, along with one or two others that take care with regard to belt creep and other ills associated with belts. The Muse in BD mode seems a lot like the Reference.
Lewm,
It just proves that there is really no substitute for trying something out and judging for yourself.
I was just looking at your system page. Very nice. I used to have A-1s and MA-2s so I think I have an idea of what it must sound like.
I'd like to hear more about why you like the vintage cartridges over the contemporary MCs. If I look through the thread on your system page do you talk about that there? The reason I'm curious is because after using a few MC cartridges (Dynavector, Kondo, ZYX) I have gravitated to two non-MC cartridges and I actually prefer these. I wonder if the elimination of the step-up transformer is playing a significant role here?
I've started running the turntable off a 12V battery. What prompted me to do this is the bad AC in my building.
When things are really bad you can hear speed fluctuations and the table sounds slow. You can also see the fluctuations in the built-in strobe.

Here are a couple of videos that I shot:

Unlistenable:
http://youtu.be/mpvtv7ZaEUM

3am (You'll notice the huge difference in speed control):
http://youtu.be/21TV89xkefE

To combat this I first bought a linear power supply from MCRU. It didn't make a big difference in sound generally but it did do a good job in that the stereo was never unlistenable because of bad AC.

Still, I wanted to see if I could push the performance further so I acquired the 12V battery. The difference is significant.
It puts the performers out into the room and lets the music flow out and fill the room. Everything has a better sense of ease and freedom. Everything is more real, more human and more emotionally satisfying. The presentation is more three-dimensional and immersive. Images that used to "stick" to the speakers or to the speaker plane are now freely hanging in space and they have moved a way from a somewhat flat 2D plane and into a holographic space.

The battery is also measures better than the linear power supply. I downloaded a free app called "platterspeed". You play any test record with a 3150Hz signal and it tells you how much the turntable deviates from that frequency.

With the linear power supply, over a 3 minute period:
mean frequency: 3149.8Hz
max deviation (raw): -0.22% / +0.20%
max deviation (notch): -0.23% / +0.25%

With the battery power supply, over a 3 minute period:
mean frequency: 3150.1Hz
max deviation (raw): -0.19% / +0.16%
max deviation (notch): -0.21% / +0.17%

When doing the recording of the 3150Hz singal you see a read-out of the RPMs. With the linear power supply you see it quickly jumping around with a different number flashing every second but with the battery you see it holding a given RPM for much, much longer and the numbers calmly changing.
I was the first customer by the Reed. I needed an second tonearm
for my Kuzma Stabi Reference but the only way to do this
with Kuzma was with the help of an arm-pod and 12" tonearm.
That is how I got acquainted with Vidmantas the owner and
designer by Reed. But back then he startethe company with a friend who designed and made turntables while Vidmanatas
designed and made tonearms. Alas the 'TT division' was not
very successful so they parted as companion. The tonearm
'division' was/is pretty successful and if I remember well
Vidmatas designed and produced about 4 different tonearms.
Even an experimental 'magnetic version' which was offered to me but I preferred the 3P. With such a past one need not only the innovative mind but also to be brave to start production of the turntables. In contradistinction to Lew
I am obsessed with carts while Lew is obsessed with both: TT's and carts. To my big surprice I see that he admires
Kuzma but not P. Lurne. However the Kuzma Stabi Reference is a kind of copy of Lurne's Audiomeca J1/4. I owned the
J1. Both use the acrylic as the primary material, both platters are 8 kgr and both are with inverted bearing. Both
have ,uh, similar drive. Lurne used one motor and a pulley
on the opposite side such that the belt touches only the
side edges of the platter. Kuzma uses two motors with one
belt with the same result. Aka driving the platter on its
'side edges'. If I remember well Lew owns about 5 turntables but not a single one with belt drive? I am glad
to see that he admits that those are ok provided that the
TT is made by Kuzma (grin).
I was the first customer by the Reed. I needed an second tonearm
for my Kuzma Stabi Reference but the only way to do this
with Kuzma was with the help of an arm-pod and 12" tonearm.
That is how I got acquainted with Vidmantas the owner and
designer by Reed. But back then he started the company with
a friend who designed and made turntables while Vidmanatas
designed and made tonearms. Alas the 'TT division' was not
very successful so they parted as companion. The tonearm
'division' was/is pretty successful and if I remember well
Vidmatas designed and produced about 4 different tonearms.
Even an experimental 'magnetic version' which was offered
to me but I preferred the 3P. With such a past one need not
only the innovative mind but also the bravery to start the
production of the turntables. In contradistinction to Lew
I am obsessed with carts while Lew is obsessed with both:
TT's and carts. To my big surprice I see that he admires
Kuzma but not P. Lurne. However the Kuzma Stabi Reference
is a kind of copy of Lurne's Audiomeca J1/4. I owned the
J1. Both use the acrylic as the primary material, both
platters are 8 kgr and both are with inverted bearing. Both
have ,uh, similar drive. Lurne used one motor and a pulley
on the opposite side such that the belt touches only the
side edges of the platter. Kuzma uses two motors with one
belt with the same result. Aka driving the platter on its
'side edges'. If I remember well Lew owns about 5 turntables
but not a single one with belt drive? I am glad
to see that he admits that those are ok provided that the
TT is made by Kuzma (grin).
Exlibris, please, tell us what was de Battery solution you has purshase ?
I didn't buy an expensive battery-based system like the ones offered by Clearaudio or Dr. Feickert. Instead, I simply purchased a standard 12V, 18amp hour battery, a battery recharger, and a cable to hook up the battery to the turntable. The whole thing cost me less than $100.
Exlibris, I have the possibility of hearing the Muse 3C in the UK soon.
Any further updates on SQ, esp w/batt psu, and esp belt v friction presentations?

I really love this table.  I haven't gone back to try the friction drive after moving from friction to belt but at some point I will and I will post my impressions.  
I love the battery power supply.  It is measurably (platterspeed app.) better than the stock ps and an expensive after-market ps and, more importantly, it sounds great.  
I've removed the rubber caps from the feet of the table and now have the three metal feet sitting on Stein Super Naturals Signature (wood and ceramic) which couple to a 9mm thick plank of maple (note: my system picture still shows the table on the Minus K isolation platform).  To my ears, this table really wants a solid footing and one should avoid any sort of suspended platform if at all possible.  A sold base really shows the drive of this table.  In a German review the writer said the table basically pushed him through his chair and the back wall, into the next room.
I would very much like to hear the Muse, not much chance in the UK at present.
Interested to hear the belt beats the idler.
W/so many good belt drives out there, this somewhat puts me off considering it.
W/so few idlers about, esp all-new ones, I was keeping my fingers x'd it would be stellar on idler.
Maybe you could go back to idler, and make a more current comparison, esp now w/batt pwr.
Thanx in advance.

Ok; I'll switch it back to the idler and comment on this thread.  I too bought it for the idler so I hope that the many other changes I've made since the switch to the belt make a big improvement to the sound with the idler.  I once read a short review where a group of about a dozen Europeans listened to the table and all but two preferred the idler over the belt.

I switched back to the idler/friction drive last night.
I immediately noticed that the bass tightened up and there was better definition in the bottom end.  I could more easily follow bass lines.  Because the bass was less dominant and bloated, more information from other frequencies came through.  It was as if the soundfield was 'cleaned' and each image had more room to breathe.  Pitch definition and was much better - especially noticeable on piano.  All of these improvements led to a much more natural sense of space and timing.  
So, was anything lost by going away from the belt?  Well, the belt is more 'romantic' sounding.  The pace is more languid and notes hang around and take longer to decay.  The midrange is warmer and the overall soundscape is darker.  With the idler everything is simply more there and matter-of-fact -- there is less editorializing.  
It's nice to have the choice between the two but for now I'll be going back to the idler wheels.
Why did I prefer the belt to the idler before but now I prefer the idler to the belt?  Who the hell knows in this crazy hobby.

At its best, DD is the happy medium .
I've found out why the idler wheels sound so much better this time than they did the first time I had them in: they were in the wrong position the first time.  The two wheels are of slightly different diameters and the big one has to go on the left motor.
I’m very happy with the 12v battery that I’m using as a power supply but I do find that the speed fluctuates when the battery gets very low (after 6 hours of listening). I intend on buying a bigger battery (more amp hours) but I’m wondering if there are other parameters that I should be looking at when selecting a battery. Ideally the battery would deliver a high quality 12v at any point in its discharge cycle. Perhaps there is a battery brand that is the gold standard in terms of consistent power delivery?
exlibris, have you considered Lithium Polymer or Lithium Ion (Li-po / Li-ion)? I don't recall you mentioned battery tech of your existing 12v. Perhaps 2 batteries, one on charge when the other is in use?
Thank you for the recommendations I will investigate.  Details on the battery I have can be found by clicking the link in the message I posted above on 08/28/2015.
I looked into the various lithium-based batteries and they appear to be an excellent option.
The only hesitation I have is the protection circuitry that they contain.  
"They require protection from being over charged and discharged too far. In addition to this, they need to have the current maintained within safe limits. Accordingly one lithium ion battery disadvantage is that they require protection circuitry incorporated to ensure they are kept within their safe operating limits."
I'm just wondering if any of this circuitry can produce noise which could lead to speed fluctuations in the turntable(?)