Trans Fi Salvation direct rim drive turntable


Hi A'goners, I've just bought this turntable, confident it'll be my last upgrade. The rest of my system is a Tom Evans Groove Plus SRX phono stage, EMM Labs CDSA SE cd player, Hovland HP200 pre/Radia power amps, Zu Definitions Mk 4 loudspeakers, so a pretty good way to listen to vinyl.

Over the years, since 1995 I've progressed from a Roksan Xerxes/Artemiz/Shiraz, via a Michell Orbe/SME V/Transfiguration Orpheus, finally ending up last week with my new Trans Fi Salvation/Trans Fi T3Pro Terminator/Zu modded Denon 103.

This turntable (£2500 UK price, approx $4000-$5000 US) is the brainchild of Vic, a retired dentist, who, fed up with the shortcomings of belt drive and traditionally-pivoted tone arms, literally from the ground up devised first the Terminator air bearing linear tracking tone arm (now in T3Pro guise as on my system), and now the direct rim drive Salvation turntable, a technology in direct opposition to the hegemony of belt drive we've come to accept from the '70s.

In summary, he has developed a motor that directly rim drives an oversize platter. The magic is that vibrations are drained away from the platter and hence stylus. So minimal rumble is transmitted, the weakness of Garrards/Lencos in the past. This is mated to a substantial slate plinth which does a great job of isolating the whole rig from external vibrations.

Where this differs from direct drive is that the torque applied is high enough to counteract stylus drag, but it is strictly analogue controlled ie no digital feedback applying constant micro speed control. Speed is set correctly, torque is sufficient, and speed stability is like a rock.

This is combined with his air bearing linear tracking arm, discussed on other threads.

So technical description over, how about how it sounds? Well, years ago I always assumed the overhang in bass when playing lps on my previous belt drive/pivoted arm tts, apparent as a benign artifact, was all part of the 'romance' of vinyl, esp. when compared to the dry, clinical sound of early cd. But in 2007 I acquired the EMM cd, which had a natural analogue sound playing silver discs, but none of this bass colouration. On studying the growing reemergence of idler/direct drive, and their superiority in maintaining speed stability, I agreed that the belt speed instability might be introducing this.

Two years ago I came across Vic, and now I can report that eliminating the belt for high torque rim drive has taken this whole artifact out of the equation. Whole layers of previously masked information like rhythm guitars are now present, treble information has abundant naturalness and decay, and bass, which appears to be less in quantity compared to belt, is actually more accurate with a real start-stop quality, much more like digital, and the real thing. The other positives are more linked to the arm, including uncanny tracking across the whole record side; I'm really not exaggerating in saying that the last few grooves at the end of an lp side are as solidly reproduced as the first. Music with strong dynamic contrasts are really served well by the Salvation, and I am shocked at how good this all is after trepidation that the sound might be hyperdetailed but too assertive etc. In fact music is reproduced with a relaxed incision, and a welcoming detailed transparency.

The amazing thing is that all of this is not in anyway at the expense of the natural warmth and tonal dimensionality that still puts vinyl way ahead of any digital (imho).

The only thing, and Vic would like this to be known, is that his creation is a cottage industry, and he can only produce limited numbers to order.

I'm happy to answer qs on it, as I really want our community to know about a possible world beating product at real world prices. My tech knowledge will be limited, but no problem discussing sound quality issues.

I'm not affiliated in anyway to the product, just sold my Orbe on ebay and bought this. Regards to all
spiritofmusic

Showing 49 responses by lewm

"Re clamps, rings etc, there really is no need, the Reso Mat does away with the need for these."
In reality, the ResoMat represents a contrary opinion vs clamps and rings. Thus it does not "do away" with rings and clamps; it represents a 180 degree opposite hypothesis about how to get the most out of an LP, one that I tend to favor too, altho I never went so far as to raise the LP completely off the platter, a la the ResoMat. It's worth a try.
Spirit, I am interested to hear the Salvation. I am already convinced that the Terminator is a great audio bargain, if you can put up with the fussiness of any air-bearing tonearm. However, I would take issue with your hypothesis that whatever it is that you did not like about the GP Monaco (or any other modern high-end DD turntable) is due to audible distortion induced by the servo mechanism. The one in the GPM is truly space age and is working much too fast for you to perceive its action on such an elemental level. (Of course, it is equally presumptuous of me to say that as for you to have posited it.) I expect the "sound" of the GPM is more due to the materials chosen for its construction than anything else. (I have yet to hear a carbon fiber audio tool that I could love.) From what I have read about the GPM, I expect I would not care for it, either, but I am a big proponent of DD. There are good and bad servo mechanisms, but I would bet the GPM has a good one. If you've heard the NVS and did not care for it, you can't blame the servo; I don't think it uses a servo feedback system. The Beat may not, either. On the other hand, the SP10 Mk2 unmodified has a very faint "gray-ish" coloration that I always thought may be due to its servo mechanism in action. It's completely absent from the Mk3 and can be ameliorated in the Mk2 by various strategies.

These accolades for the Salvation/Terminator make me curious to hear a shoot-out between it and the Amadeus, which has a huge and adoring fangroup, with nary a dissenting voice. Retail cost of the two is similar, I think.
Re the Resomat. When I first saw the photo, I realized that the idea is not new; Transcriptors used it a few decades ago. But the Transcriptors platter that I could remember (because I owned one), with the raised pucks to support the LP off the platter surface, was quite different in appearance and execution from the Resomat. However, someone on Vinyl Asylum posted a photo a few days ago of a "low end" Transcriptors tt from days of yore, which I had never seen before. Its platter (the whole platter) IS a Resomat, a dead-ringer. Nothing new under the sun.

Search photos posted by "Waxxy".
Spirit, With all due respect, ANY decent turntable should readily reveal important differences in recording qualities among the wide variety of LPs you mention. If not, you've got a problem, but I would first blame it on tonearm/cartridge/phono stage/speakers.

As for Resomat, I've got no problem with the idea. I am one who has found consistently that I do not like the effect of heavy record weights or even peripheral ring clamps. (I have one of the latter, but I use it UNDER the lip of the LP so as to increase platter inertial mass without holding down the LP.) IME, record weights always tend to deaden the sound in ways that do not resemble real life. However, I agree that the trend is toward such devices and away from lifting the LP off the mat, a la Transcriptors and Resomat. I tend to like Boston Audio Mat1 or 2, or a good metal mat, both types used with no added rings or weights. This is on my DD or idler drive turntables. YMMV with belt-drives.
Bill, If you have been in the hobby that long AND you are a dealer, it is no wonder that you are crotchety.

Spirit, Readers should keep in mind that the benefits of the Terminator 3Pro are accessible to most without having to use the Salvation turntable in the bargain. It's the air-bearing tonearm I would buy, if I would buy one, but I shy away from pumps and moisture traps, etc. It's bad enough that I have a car battery in my living room to run my CDP.
Redglobe, The TT Weights turntables of which these guys are speaking ARE rim drive types, so their comments are not really OT. Plus, it ain't your thread. It might be interesting for someone in the know to dissect the differences between Salvation and TTW tts, because it seems there is a difference in the perception of their respective performance capabilities. Why would that be? Based only on photos it seems they are more alike than they are different.
Spirit, It is great to note your enthusiasm, and as Dave G knows, I share your admiration for the Terminator tonearm, but your technical explanations of why the Salvation is superior to other turntables, particularly belt driven ones, fall flat. I could cite in response a list of pseudo-technical reasons why, in principle, I don't care for the rim drive idea at all, but it would be unfair to do so, since I have never heard the Salvation or the TTW products. It's enough to say that we ought to be aware of the Salvation as an interesting alternative. I tend to respect the product despite my misgivings re rim drive, because the designer has already shown a lot of talent with respect to the Terminator.

Dave, I never realized that moisture is not a problem for the Terminator. This tempers my aversion to trying one.
Dear Redglobe, I ask this question in all sincerity, not to be facetious. How could we imagine that the Resomat can "minimize transmission of noise to the stylus"? I guess it could do so by failing to transmit bearing and motor noise. On the other hand, energy put into the LP by the cartridge bumping around in the groove would tend to stay "in" the LP and could end up affecting the cartridge. It might be a trade-off. Most of the time, we are forced to choose among such trade-offs, so in the end it depends on the listener's preference. That is, pick your poison.

I was watching a snippet from Clockwork Orange the other night, as part of a biography of Stanley Kubrick. I had forgotten that there is a Transcriptors turntable prominently shown in the movie, actually seems to have been a prop for Kubrick to reveal character. That platter did not catch on for some reason. Definitely not ideal for even slightly warped LPs.
As I mentioned previously, I tend not to like clamps and rings. Like anything else, damping can be overdone at the expense of lifelike qualities.
Thekong has a good point. Here is where art and science intersect. Ideally, you want the LP to be completely inert and for all mechanical energy put into it by stylus motion to be drained away so as not to come back to the stylus tip after resonating around the LP. (I guess this is the case; one could argue the point.) But I think the art of music reproduction involves a dirty little secret: to some degree the distortions created by various components in the chain can serendipitously add to the sense of reality, of being in the presence of the musicians. Those distortions should be controlled but not entirely eliminated, if verisimilitude is the goal. The Resomat could in some cases enhance the sense of reality by the very fact that it impedes loss of mechanical energy from the LP into the platter.

Thekong, I am using a Boston Audio Mat1 on my slate Lenco. I am thinking about giving the Resomat a try. Thanks for your report. I would think that the Resomat might be especially effective on an idler, but maybe not.
Dear Dover, where can I buy a precision grinder for vinyl? I think your idea is great, only I would have used the other copy of each record. You could grind down each of the two LPs on opposite sides, then glue the one with the un-ground side A to the one with the unground side B so as to create a ~360-gm LP, in the case where you start with two 180-gm copies. Saves storage space, too.
Spirit, Most of us are in no position to join you in praise of the Salvation, because most of us, nearly all of us, have not seen or heard it, But I think we get the idea that you like it. However, you are correct to note that many of us, including me, have been straying OT. Sorry for that.

Keep in mind what I noted earlier in this thread, the Resomat is a duplicate to a platter used in a very early and budget level Transcriptors turntable. I don't recall the model name or number. Someone published a photo of the tt on Vinyl Asylum a week or two ago, and I was shocked, shocked I tell you, to see the spitting image of a Resomat serving as the entire platter. Very likely the Transcriptors "influenced" Vic's thinking, to say the least.
Spirit, I am confounded as to how you can know that the 2 or 3 very esoteric cdp's that you named can compete with vinyl where all others fail, in your view, including your own very well regarded and very expensive rig. Surely you are not willing to take the unvarnished opinion of some total stranger writing on the internet.
Dear Sal, I should hope there was NEVER any contact between "platter and plinth". You must mean "platter and bearing", as in the platter is magnetically suspended. But that only takes care of contact in the vertical plane. In the horizontal plane it is likely that the platter contacts the bearing physically.
Few of us here play at such lofty price points. I do own a highly tweaked Lenco L75 with a Dynavector tonearm and a Technics SP10 Mk3 in a slate and wood plinth of my own design, with a Reed 2A tonearm. The Lenco is divine, could easily live with it, but the Mk3 has the edge overall. If you categorize the Lenco as "rim drive", there is some remote relevance to your question. (Lenco idler drives the underside of the platter, not the rim.) The difference I hear is clearly in part due to the Reed vs the Dynavector, but there is a separate contribution from each of the respective turntables. None of the cartridges I am playing with at the moment is worth more than $1000, but most are "vintage" types.
For whatever it's worth, I have the 10.5-inch version of the same tonearm. I only meant to infer that there are differences between the two tonearms which in part account for my perception of the differences between two turntables. I like the Dynavector tonearm quite a lot, but I think the Reed may well be a bit superior. Impossible to compare them fairly when they are on two different turntables, so your testimony is more relevant.

So you are favoring the TT101 vs my L07D?
Thanks, Steve. Most of all, I am glad you like the L07D. I would not be without one; I just did not need two. In the case of the L07D, its stainless steel mat seems to be so well integrated to give a very neutral sound that I would be loathe to substitute something else. But one might try the fancy metal mat from TT Weights that has a black composite surface over a brass base (I think, too lazy to look it up). That one weighs nearly the same as the stainless platter mat on the Kenwood and so would not upset the servo, but it might have a slightly different sonic flavor.
Dear Larry, I have nothing for sale. I had two L07Ds, about 2-3 years ago, and sold one to Radicalsteve (aka Steve) more than a year ago. I hadn't heard from him since, so I am happy to learn that he is happy. I would not part with my one remaining L07D; it ain't for sale. In fact, based on current market value, if you can find one, I would posit that the L07D is one of the best bargains in audio.
Spirit, I'm glad you used the word "promote". Because that is exactly what you've been doing. I have no beef with that, but let's not pretend that you've been leading a highly informative audio discussion here. The thread is BOR-ING, so the topic tends to wander around. Sorry about that. The thread would have been long dead were it not for your nearly daily repetitive posts stating how much you love the Trans Fi. If you want others to stick to your topic, you'd better re-invent your topic and make it interesting.
Dear Spirit, In retrospect I fear I was too harsh in my response. But the basic idea I wanted to convey is still my position. Most long-lasting threads have either asked a question or posited a general issue that many of us have had some direct experience confronting. Here, you are the one of us who owns the Salvation turntable. So there's not much for any of us to say about.... the Salvation turntable. So the thread has drifted toward the discussion of other turntables that have a remote resemblance to the Salvation, but only a remote one for sure. I do say and have said that I am a big fan of the Terminator tonearm and of Vic as a person. I am quite sure he put a large portion of his considerable wits into the design of his turntable, as well. It might be more engaging if you could find a flaw and talk about that.
What is the cost of the Salvation with all these upgrades? 15X that amount is probably some considerable stack of greenbacks, like must be well over $30K, maybe $50K or more. I've never heard any turntable at that price point, let alone in my own system where I could judge it.

I am not here to knock the Salvation but worshiping it is another matter. For rim drive, I would imagine that the contact between the drive wheel and the platter is potentially a far greater source of noise than is any really well designed bearing, or at least it would be similarly problematic. That said, I see that the Salvation is well designed to minimize both.
All I can say is that I will surely have a listen to the Salvation, if the opportunity arises. I would guess that leveling is an issue related to the Terminator, rather than to the Salvation per se. So far as I can tell, there is nothing about the Salvation that would make it more fussy than other turntables in that regard. Isolating it from footfalls would likewise be similar to isolating any suspension-less turntable. Yes?
Dear Harold, Were you quoting the Salvation literature? If so, don't you think they misspoke? The platter never contacts the plinth in any turntable ever made. So I assume he just meant to say that there is no contact between bearing surfaces, but this can only easily be achieved in the vertical plane. That's been done before by many other manufacturers, to good effect. But it is quite another matter to use magnets to prevent contact between bearing surfaces in the lateral (horizontal) plane. If Salvation now does that, my hat is off to them. But I doubt it. That would require some MAJOR amounts of Gauss and it cannot be wobbly. This is not meant to disrespect Salvation, only to keep the facts straight.
But look at that huge platter and magnets and look at the base (granito or no granito, but thanks for the reminder about granito). To me it cries out for more mass in the base; I would think you want the center of gravity to be well below the platter.
Spirit, Do you mean to say that the Salvation with all the upgrades PLUS the Terminator are sold for a total of $5k to $6K? That truly does sound like a bargain. Also, Harold or Spirit, you now make it sound as though the magnetic field DOES operate in the horizontal (lateral) plane, as well as in the vertical. What's the story? That would be truly novel. Even the Verdier magnetic bearing works by metal to metal contact in the lateral plane.

Incidentally, the L07D has a partially magnetic levitation in the horizontal.
Kind of a moot point, since the Final Audio is no longer available, the Mk3 has gotten very expensive, and the L07D is rare to find. Plus the latter two are now very old and typically have maintenance issues. Meantime, the Salvation is available any day to one and all for a relatively modest price, brand new with no need for restoration or worries about NLA parts.
I for one would not hold Spirit to the letter of his "15X" statement, just to its "spirit". This is coming from a cynic who does not believe there is much to be gained by spending any more than $30K on a turntable, and I would never spend even that much. Above approximate that price point, lets say up to $40,000, you are paying for bells, whistles, chrome plating, acrylic doodads, and beautiful hardwood.
Dear Spirit, the bits about torque and feedback and all that stuff in your most recent long post are not logical. A high torque motor does not obviate the need for feedback. In fact, it may increase the need for feedback, because the motor is "in control" of the platter, moreso than in a low-torque/high-mass platter design, and there may need to be a mechanism to signal the motor that the platter is spinning too fast or too slow. Conversely, low torque per se does not increase the need for feedback. The belt-drive tt's that use low torque motors typically coupled with a high mass platter can get away with no servo on the premise that the inertial mass of the platter is "in control" of maintaining constant speed. No tt I know of has a higher torque motor than does the Technics SP10 Mk3, yet it certainly uses stringent feedback and a servo to maintain exact speed. It also has the heaviest platter of any DD tt. On the other hand, the L07D has a lower torque motor (but maybe not "low torque", if we were to define that term) and uses a rather "loose" servo feedback mechanism. Also, keep in mind that the inherent issues in DD, belt-drive, and rim-drive applications are different. Each tt is designed from the ground up by an engineer or a group of engineers (in the good old days) to do the job of spinning an LP. It is well enough to say that you are pleased with what you've got.

Harold, The L07D has a very "effortless" sound. Quiet and smooth, like butter. It gets there with a platter that is relatively high mass for a DD (can't recall the weight but between 12 and 20 lbs with optional peripheral ring), but is not high mass compared to the SP10 Mk3 (21 lbs), a coreless motor, a magnetically suspended bearing (in the vertical), and an incredibly conceived and executed plinth and tonearm mount which rigidly links the tonearm pivot to the bearing assembly using a large girder of stainless steel or alu to do so. Everything was attended to in its design in the sense that it is a complete unit right out to and including the specially designed headshell, unlike almost all other DD tt's that really consist of a motor/chassis which the end-user must mate with a plinth and tonearm of his further choice, with no particular attention paid to linkage. In fact, that latter unified design aspect is probably also of functional benefit in the Salvation/Terminator combo. The two were designed to go together.
Yes, I was aware of the fact that the magnetic suspension serves to take some of the load off the bearing, but there is still some load. I was not aware of the mechanism, however. Thanks.

When I first got my L07D, before I had installed the platter, I was concerned that the bearing was "frozen", because the spindle could not be rotated by hand. I subsequently learned that the magnets push the spindle assembly full up against its stops, with no platter. The weight of the platter then forces the spindle/bearing assembly to "relax".
The motor itself, of course, is a copy of the Dual coreless motor that preceded it. I think we've discussed this before. You or someone else offered that Kenwood had to change the design of the motor stators so as to avoid violation of the Dual patent, in their last several tt's. But sorry. This is OT, as it does not relate to the Transfi, another apparently excellent tt.
One more OT comment: I've played around with the Verdier tt, the grand-daddy of tt's with fully magnetic vertical suspensions. The magnets used are quite huge, as anyone can see by inspection. If you push down on the platter surface, there is quite a lot of resistance to depression. I doubt that a force sufficient to cause deflection of the platter is ever seen during actual use. And of course the horizontal bearing is a standard mechanical type and is quite massive. BUT some who are critics of the Verdier have cited deflection as an issue. We certainly don't want bouncing platters.
Harold, I don't remember for sure where we were with the Salvation; does it use magnetics in both the vertical and horizontal plane, or not? If yes, do you mean to say that the spindle or vertical shaft from the center of the platter touches nothing? I just cannot imagine that that could work well, but especially with a rim-drive, where there is a force applied in the horizontal plane that would make the platter want to move in the direction of the drive wheel. So, I must not understand how it works. Can I find out more on the website???

Ummm... Have you been drinking the same Kool-Aid as Spirit, when you liken a turntable, any turntable, to the Theory of Relativity? But I see you winked. Good.
I just went to the website where there is a crystal clear drawing showing how the maglev works. There are also photos to show step by step how to convert an older Salvation to maglev. Without question, the maglev works "only" in the vertical plane. The horizontal plane is maintained by a long heavy duty inverted sleeve bearing, which is oiled, not too different from the Verdier, if memory serves. I gotta say I am becoming more and more impressed myself with this tt, mainly due to the quality of construction and engineering at the given price point. I was already an admirer from afar of the Terminator tonearm. In theory, I do not care for rim drive, but again Vic looks to have dealt with most of the major issues. We should all buy one. Very cool.
Peter, the magnets are situated at the base of the 2 to 3-inch vertical shaft upon which the platter rides, and they are in the form of a collar around the vertical shaft that looks to be less than an inch in distance from inner to outer boundary of the collar (like a large fender washer). I suggest you look at the excellent photos on the website. Anyway, the magnetic forces are in play way below the surface platter (at least 3 inches, at a guess) and only in the immediate vicinity of the spindle, i.e., under the LP label but not extending out under the playing surface.
Interesting, what you say about the Verdier. I do know there are two completely different models, La Platine, and La Nouvelle Platine. I just read the assembly instructions for La Platine. They do apparently supply a "steel ball" which is installed in a well at the top of the vertical rod that accepts the platter, but then the manual says the ball is optional and recommends using no ball. This sure suggests the platter floats on the magnets, but I agree it's ambiguous. Apparently the ball is available for security. He does not say exactly why bother at all with the ball. Verdier is known to be a bit obscure, but I think the La Platine platter does float or can float.
As regards one's subjective impression of the L07D, some have also observed that there is substantial benefit to be had by installing some shielding between the motor and the LP. I am one of those. In addition, an Achilles' heel of the design (but not nearly as fatal as was Achilles' heel to Achilles) is the tonearm wiring. The huge pins of the DIN-type connector are really not optimal for signal transfer, and the internal wiring is Litz type, love it or not, and I don't. Also, the RCA connectors at the ends of the wiring are not nearly up to modern TOTL RCAs. I changed mine to silver Eichmann Bullet connectors. But I would really like to bypass the connector at the other end, between the tonearm and the Kenwood interconnects. The tonearm itself, I think, is quite fine if these other items were attended to.
No opinion on Final Audio, but I cannot help but remark that I have a lot of experience with the Verdier, altho not in my home system, and I definitely would choose/have chosen the L07D over the Verdier sound, which is very open, very nice, but not as coherent, or I hate to say it, well-timed, as with the L07D. Yet the L07D gives up nothing in the sense of open-ness and musicality. This is my L07D, with a EMI shield interposed between the motor and the platter sheet. (My sense is the same for my SP10 Mk3 vs Verdier.) This shows that Dover and I have different systems and different versions of audio Nirvana.
Re your criticism of the Verdier: That's what I have heard too, from users. The platter and magnets are a bit too massive for the "plinth", which is really just a flat piece of either MDF or granite. (I thought granite, but you've got one so you should know.) That coupled with the spongy feet causes the structure to be unstable; it wants to tip to one side or another and the rotation of the massive platter acts like a gyroscope. This should have been an easy issue to correct; substitute spongy feet for solid feet or pneumatic ones with a low resonant frequency and increase the mass of the lower structure to move the center of gravity closer to the shelf. But Mr Verdier is a traditionalist, to say the least.
I have no direct experience with TT Weights tt's, and therefore no opinion on the matter, but there are 2 or 3 owners who have complained repeatedly on this forum about speed instability problems. We are not seeing such reports from owners of the Salvation, or from owners of L07Ds for that matter.

Onkyo PXM100 is a pretty neat turntable, but $20,000 seems an unlikely price to have to pay for one, when SP10 Mk3's in fully restored condition go for about $12K to $15K. Not that the cost matters.
Thekong, The OEM Kenwood phono ICs are terminated on the tonearm side with a plug that in its design resembles the standard DIN, but the female receptors are each about 2-3 mm in diameter, as compared to a standard DIN plug, where they are about 1 mm in diameter. This plug screws on to the base of the vertical shaft of the tonearm, for further security. The male pins housed within the vertical shaft are likewise sized to fit the female receptors. Everything is gold plated. I am sure that the intent was to create a large contact area and to provide a secure connection via the screw mount. However, IMO, skinny pins sound better. No pins, i.e., a straight wire from the headshell to the phono stage sounds best of all, IMO. The wiring in the cable and in the tonearm is Litz type, which was very much in vogue back in the early 80s. This is no reason at all not to jump on an L07D if you can find one that is in good order. None of these issues are beyond fixing pretty easily.
And in what ways does would it sonically resemble a slate-based Lenco? For all I know you may be correct, but what is the basis for your comparison between these two? One is slate, the other machined brass and steel or alu. One drives the platter via an idler wheel placed in the vertical position, the other drives the platter via a tiny diameter wheel at the rim. One uses an inverted magnetic bearing, the other uses any of several types of conventional bearing. Etc. Otherwise, they are exactly alike.

I do love my Lenco, by the way.
Thank you, Thekong, for one of the most informative posts on this thread. I had no idea that you had such a depth of experience with the tt's we've been discussing. I have a question. You wrote above, "However, in areas such as background blackness, instrument layering within the sound stage, micro dynamics, and finesse, it lags slightly behind the TTs mentioned above." Did you mean ALL the tt's you had previously mentioned, including the Lenco, or did you mean to exclude the Lenco from that generalization? Oddly enough, I have a slate/PTP/Lenco with the Jeremy Superbearing and accessory bearing clamp. So I know whereof you speak when it comes to the sound of that tt. Makes me wonder who is your friend with a tt exactly like mine, albeit I don't own a Terminator tonearm. I use a Dynavector DV505 on my Lenco. However, your having heard the Terminator on the Lenco allows you to dissect the "sound" of the Salvation from that of the Terminator on the Salvation.
Thekong,
Truthfully, it has now been so long since I heard the Lenco and either the L07D or the Mk3 in the same system, that I have no basis to compare, but I do have to say that I don't sense any smearing with my Lenco. For the past several months, the Lenco has been in my basement system, serving as a source for my Beveridge 2SW spkrs. The other two are upstairs where that system has been inoperative for many months while I try to solve an issue with one of the amplifiers. (We DIY guys are stubborn about asking for help.) I am so pleased with the Bevs that I frankly do not miss the other system very much, though it is at least just as good. Prior to the split into two systems, I might have said that Lenco is best bang for the buck, could live with it alone, but that both the L07D and the Mk3 are "better" yet different from each other. L07D is closest to the Lenco in character. Mk3 is very "disciplined", like Sgt Joe Friday in Dragnet: Just the facts, ma'am.

So many other things affect one's perception of a tt (cartridge, tonearm, wiring, phono stage, etc), when it comes to an adjective like "smearing", that I would not know where to start.

I know David from LH but also because he has helped me out personally a couple of times as I got the Lenco to where I wanted it. He's a great guy. Best regards to him.
The problem for me is that in extolling the virtue of every new tweak, it can sound as if the prior iteration was not so great, as in "massive elimination of bass smear/euphonic colouration". This makes me wonder what the tt might have sounded like prior to the new footers. Yet, we were told it was just about flawless last year, even. It would be better to keep things in proportion. This is, after all, a turntable, not a thing that is amenable to perfecting, and it plays LPs, which are definitely not perfect things either. I don't mean to be a Debbie Downer; I applaud your unending enthusiasm, in fact.