Why will no other turntable beat the EMT 927?

Having owned many good turntables in my audiophile life I am still wondering why not one of the modern designs of the last 20 years is able to beat the sound qualities of an EMT 927.
New designs may offer some advantages like multiple armboards, more than one motor or additional vibration measurements etc. but regarding the sound quality the EMT is unbeatable!
What is the real reason behind this as the machine is nearly 60 years old, including the pre-versions like the R-80?
With all due respect, unless you have listened to all of the turntables in modern designs, it might be premature to make an absolute statement like this.
tell me a modern design you think it will surpass the sound qualities of the EMT 927? I will then tell you if I have not listened to it in all the private systems I was able to study and all the audio fairs I went to. In this case I am eager to learn and will try testing the design if possible.
I think you will find that Thuchan has listened to more of the modern designs (including owning one of the best...Continuum Criterion) as well as more of the 'Classic' designs.....than most people on this Forum.
And that includes Reviewers.
Dear Thuchan,
Can you please describe the 'qualities' of the EMT 927 that you hear....and how they differ from other high-end designs?
Is it purely an idler-drive distinctiveness or is there something else?
I think this is a perfectly valid question, as there is some precedent.

There is a loudspeaker that was made in the late 1950s that has probably been used by more designers to 'voice' amplifiers (and other speakers) than any other. Peter Walker's Quad electrostatic speaker. It still (60 years later) stands for many as the pinnacle of speaker design. For, what it did to the all-important midrange was, and some say still is, unimprovable.

If this is indeed so, then, by extension, it is possible that the EMT 927 is, as Thuchan states, the best turntable ever made. Of course, we have to believe that it's possible that there is something better, but evidence might not suggest this.

If the job of a given piece of audio equipment is to extract information from a source that has a finite amount of information to give - and to do no harm in the process - then there might be a 'fininite-ness' in the process. There is no absolute reason to think that progress is infinite. For emotional reasons one might wish it otherwise, but this is not necessarily true.
I think this is a perfectly valid question, as there is some precedent.

There is a loudspeaker that was made in the late 1950s that has probably been used by more designers to 'voice' amplifiers (and other speakers) than any other. Peter Walker's Quad electrostatic speaker. It still (60 years later) stands for many as the pinnacle of speaker design. For, what it did to the all-important midrange was, and some say still is, unimprovable.

If this is indeed so, then, by extension, it is possible that the EMT 927 is, as Thuchan states, the best turntable ever made. Of course, we have to believe that it's possible that there is something better, but evidence might not suggest this.

If the job of a given piece of audio equipment is to extract information from a source that has a finite amount of information to give - and to do no harm in the process - then there might be a 'fininite-ness' in the process. There is no absolute reason to think that progress is infinite. For emotional reasons one might wish it otherwise, but this is not necessarily true.

Dear Halcro,

"No voodoo is any turntable rest assured! plain facts. EMT927 was designed and built with no shortcuts, power/torque & size of motor, serious bearing, platter height, distance of motor fixation to arm, the list is long....just well done and that gives us what? Well? all we need! indeed stable speed, no rumble or wow, isolation...etc. In fact if you look at the claims marketed by TT marker of this day they are just telling us that EMT had nailed them all. Simple! EMT 927 & R80 users tend to listen to their records, keep quiet and enjoy, full stop. But to really get a grasp on what it is worth? You have to get one....and in that lies the issue no doubt?.

One has to accept the limitations of any choice and EMT is no exception! With the 927 forget the "playing with arm and carts game", you don't have to change any parameters when using the excellent TSD Tondosen. Or if you have the 139st onboard forget the "matching the impedance and dishing out big bucks on phono-stages" that both come sometimes with more questions than they answer? so "idler-drive distinctiveness or something else"....no idea, I just play that deck more and more and as this community knows I have no shortage of TT's...is that an answer?
Thuchan, It would help if you would list the turntables that you have actually compared to the EMT 927, in the "here and now" (as HP used to say). What I mean is not to rely on remote memory of how this or that turntable sounded.

I know you have the Caliburn and the big MS turntables. What else?
So you're really comparing a turntable/tonearm/cartridge/built-in phono stage system to a bunch of other turntables with other tonearms and cartridges. But can you say what turntables you have side by side with the EMT927, besides Caliburn and MS?

57s4me, I think your analogy is faulty but so is your premise. The Quad 57 is surely wonderful for reproducing midrange but it has some limitations in relation to bandwidth and power handling. The amplifier also must be very carefully chosen, so (at least) I don't think of the Quad 57 as an ultimate tool for evaluation of other components, especially amplifiers.
is that an answer?
Not really :-)
You are saying that the EMT sounds better because it basically IS better?
But for those of us who haven't heard one and are unlikely to........how does its presentation differ from say......your Micros or Continuum?
@Halcro, I have no doubt Thuchan has more experiences on TT than I do but it doesn't mean he has listened to all. Unless he have, I think making a strong absolute "the best" statement is kind of premature.

@Thuchan, No, I can't tell you that because my experience with the EMT was more than 30 years ago and I have never compared the EMT with another table side-by-side.
Dear Lewm,

I am comparing both, inbuilt and external phono stages. I have the chance to compare a 927 with an inbuilt phono stage as well as my R-80 in connection with the EMT JPA-66, Boulder 2008, Kondo M7 and Zanden 1200 MK II phono stages running carts on a Ortofon RMA-309 (TSD) or SME 3012 I -first series- (e.g. Atlas, Neumann DST, Denon ZU). I had some other very good turntables which all had its sunny sides, to mention some: Kelch Reference II, Goldmund Reference I, Garrard 501, Nakamichi 1000, Technics SP10 MK II. I used them in my phono lines extensively. Pretty sure the new owners are happy with these designs.
Nevertheless my experiences are not limited to the listed tables and lines :-) but just to give you an idea and a better understanding of the test field enabling you assessing for your own purposes.

Dear Halcro,

understand :-). To give you some words on the sound: The EMT provides a majestic soundstage, it is stable and dominant, musical, warm - just overwhelming. You will hear a difference to some other idlers which are sometimes too much on the bassy side. Currently I am running a TSD Anniversary in the Ortofon RMA 309 via a Western Electric 618B SUT to the EMT JPA-66 phono stage. This is my DreamLine!

The Caliburn and the Micros are wonderful machines, too. All are belt driven and comprise lots of armboard possibilities, even the Criterion with the TOHO external stand. I love switching between the three remaining tables in my room. Due to space problems I am reducing from 5 to 3 tables. I listened to some other new designs and was impressed of the Brinkmann Oasis with the Thales Simplicity arm on a HRS board, maybe together with the new Thales TTT-C table one of the convincing new designs. But they will not (and don't need ) reaching the EMT.
Implicit in your question is that the EMT is the best turntable available. I don't think anyone can realistically prove this one way or the other because no one or group of listeners has compared it to all other candidates in the same system with the same arm and cartridge and tone arm cable.

I don't think anyone can answer your question. We can hope, or believe, or think, or wish, but we can not know. It can make for interesting discussion though.

I would like to read how Thuchan describes the sound of this table (as isolated from cartridge, arm, cable) compared to at least two others that he has heard in identical environments. That could get this conversation started.
I remember (vaque)the review of 'the best 10 turntables' in
some Japanese Magazine in the 80is(?). To my surprice,
and that is why I remeber, one of the EMT got the first price.
Back then but also at present my 'technical judgment' was/is
'based' on the looks so I wondered how such an old-fashioned
and clumsy thing could win the first price? I see some of those
on the German ebay and always think that the seller made a typo
by the price. I don't believe that Thuchan would make me happy
by giving me his as present. So Thuchan I would prefer the
'Aussie one' while you can keep the best one.

Dear Peterayer,

I will try to describe the differences I have found with the same tonearm (SME 3012 I - first series, which I regard as one of the best arms ever built- in comparison to some of its direct successors) on the same MS board I have used on the MS tables as well as on my R-80.
Also I used the same cart (lyra Atlas) and same phono pre (EMT JPA-66 with its own SUT).

When you listen to Jimmy Smith organ interpretation the underlying energy from the EMT puts any other turntable to shame. This I guess is demonstrating that despite the wider grooves and resistance they represent the EMT drive just keeps it steady and going strong.

The decay of piano notes on a Bill Evans record (originals and AP 45 reissues) just seem to last forever with the EMT even under the notes being played, my belt drives have a tendency to come short in this arena.

On the other hand the Micro Seiki SX II (double vaccum) has some other advantages which will bring it very close to the EMT, maybe the best belt drive design ever built and regarding rock music my absolut favourite with a FR-66 mounted.
For readers who are unfamiliar with the build of the EMT 927, this article is a great read. There are very few turntables that approach the engineering & build quality of this deck, it makes many modern "superdecks" look like toys..
how do the other EMT tt's compare to the 927? such as the 948, for instance?

i know the 927 is an idler, while the 948 is direct drive. i owned a Garrard 301 for a few years and did enjoy it's 'meaty' presentation on certain music, but in the end i preferred higher resolution, more nuanced approaches as my everyday musical diet.

Dear all,

I posted since 36 hours but my two posts are not published yet.
I have to admit that with this kind of moderation I cannot communicate timely. I have to apoligize for this unprofessional forum management by the moderator. It is not my fault and I feel not treated well in my own thread.

I believe the secret of the 927 may actually be simple. It works using brute force in a way that no one has ever tried to mimic in an idler type because of the difficulty of obtaining such a powerful and smooth running motor. EMT built that motor in house, but they used it on no other EMT turntable. There are also some construction nuances of the turntable that have been overlooked by other turntable manufacturers.

I have often wondered where my turntable would fall in a comparison. Would be better, as good, almost as good, no where near as good? Maybe I'll find out one day.
Thank you Thuchan for bringing up this amazing topic which is far less discussed on this forum than typical modern products. I have been researching on the EMT tables off late. It is really nice to see someone with so much analog experience still not being able to get over the big EMT. Can you please help me answer two things:

1. How does the 927 compared to 930 which is also an Idler drive ? Or for that matter how is the 950 in comparison ? Is there big gap between 927 and all other EMTs ?

2. Have you ever heard a nicely setup Platine Verdier ? It is not a modern design but is a classic belt drive. How does it compare to the EMT sound ?

Thank you Thuchan,
Very well explained......
Now......if only I can hear one myself?

Thuchan, I have only once heard an EMT927 and even that was with no comparison to anything else. I love vinyl but find it very inconvenient also. I am soon to get an idler wheel Lenco based tt.

I doubt if the EMT927 has never been surpassed, but hey that is not the issue. I think it could be built today except for the fact that the price would be much greater and perhaps even prohibitive. I know full well that there are better bearings, plinth materials, vibration isolation, platter materials, phono stage designs and parts, etc. What would a current version of the EMT with use of all this new information sound like?

I also know of the Seiko Epson turntable by Mr. Teragaki Takeshi and how revered and sought after it is. Is it the equal of the EMT.

I'm sure you enjoy your EMT 927. I have once turndown one and would not change my mind were I offered another today.
1. How does the 927 compared to 930 which is also an Idler drive ? Or for that matter how is the 950 in comparison ? Is there big gap between 927 and all other EMTs ?

Pani, owing a 930, I've been asking myself the same question.
Here is +/- only concrete info I could get on the subject:

Hi Thuchan –
are you familiar with the Jean Nantais Lenco L75 - EMT927
shootout that took place in Athens, Greece ?

EMT 927

Recognizing the links are from JN’s site here ......

In your opinion was this a fair shootout ?

Ct0517, It is the Reference which I'm getting. I had heard about this, but had not seen a citation of it.
are you familiar with the Jean Nantais Lenco L75 - EMT927

Haha! The guy sounds like a typical megalomaniac. He claims his Lencos outerformed this ot that TT without any concrete evidence: in what areas and how exactly outperformed, what was the rest of the system, what was the material played, how many listeners and with what background, etc etc. Without such a precise data, inevitable if one challenges a reference, this is just a pure megalomany
Thanks bydlo.
I have not heard all EMTs but a Verdier. A good friend of mine was able comparing the EMTs. He had heard 930 vs 927 same room same system, etc....the 930 does not have the solid base presence of the 927 and on complex musical passages (a lot of instruments dynamic etc...) the 930 gets confused, dynamics of the 927 shine vs the 930.
EMT 950 = yes heard but perhaps the torque and power of drive is better than the 927 (that is what EMT said???), the problem is that the 950 is fully integrated with onboard solid state phono stage. I think the 950 is great if only it was not all solid state it would be in my room...
Verdier = Micro Seiki, maybe Verdier a bit better as motor is stronger but then the string transmission is still the same and needs to be carefully implemented or improved.
This is why I always recommend using different PS and steering devices for the big Micros.

There are two many people asking the same question....and there is only one way you can answer it....try yourself!
Good Halcro!
If you cannot do that then just live happy with what you have got.
Also too many of us never mention records, and that is the most important part of it all.
Now if the idea is to play poorly recorded or post 70's thin vinyl our whole debate is pointless.
I like to add this contradicting myself a little but maybe it is helpful.

BTW I posted these words two days ago, told it Audiogon and do it again now.
Always a lot of discussion about speed and speed control. I'm no expert and do not claim to be an authority here. I'm just not convinced that the differences in how these turntables sound is due largely to speed control. I believe that the majority of our hifi turntables have speed and speed control nailed down very well. The key is having the right tools to accurately dial in the correct speed, but our tt's have the motors and control circuits to hold speed as required. We have discussed this in other forums. Most tables are capable to hold speed within +/-0.05%. This is as good as the master reel to reel tapes that the records were made from.
I believe the majority of the sound differences can be attributed to both isolation of the record and stylus and the dampening or sinking of the vibrations generated by the stylus (internal born) as well as external vibrations (feed back from the speaker output). The platter must be acoustically black. ie. no response to the stylus vibrations can be allowed to be fed back to the cartridge. The platter bearing, tonearm bearing and tonearm mount must be acoustically black. Any reflections back to the cartridge is going to muddy the sound, smear images and reduce detail. Looking at pictures of the EMT turntable convinces me that its massive chassis, platter and bearing probably makes this tt incomparable among tt's to asorbing vibrations and eliminating reflections back to the cartridge.
I don't think drive type matters that much either as long as vibrations are isolated and absorbed. Some of the advatages of rim drive might simply be the rim pulley sinking vibrations from the platter. Belts have their own way of isolating vibrations. I think DD is the biggest challenge for isolation and sinking of vibrations. These are just opinions on my part and I would like Halcro and Thucan to weigh in with their much more vast experience.
I've heard a number of idler drive tables-927, 301, Thorens, etc. and they do share an appealing quality--a bold, dynamic, prick-up-your-ears quality. I have also heard a belt drive table that had that same kind of sound--the monster Audionote table with three 2 hp motors. A common element seems to be pretty high torque motors.

Not having heard many tables in side-by-side comparisons, I could not even begin to speculate on "best." Even if one heard direct comparisons, one could only pick a personal favorite for that particular system. The very notion of a universal "best" is not worth debating.

There a plenty of great sounding vinyl systems that I've heard built around a vastly different set of tables--Audionote, Garrard, Gabriel, Verdier, Basis, Kuzma, to name just a few.

In my own system, I enjoy a Basis Debut with vacuum clamp and motor control. I have no idea how it compares with other tables in my system because I don't switch tables at all (WAY too much trouble)--I just know that I like the sound.
Tonywinsc, I've been following the thread with great interest, and I have to agree with your assessment wholeheartedly.
One would think there comes a point where the drive mechanism might sink into unimportance; after a certain level of (to use your term) blackness has been reached, then there is no significant gain to be made from larger motors or more massive platters etc.
This question of reflections (again to use your term) is the one that fascinates me. I recently had some (for me) shocking experiences with an arm of such little mass and friction - arguably one that could not have been much improved in these ways - that I am forced to question the whole subject of turntable and arm design.

Given the dynamic range of vinyl, could it be that the very lowest level of information retrieval is what we are seeking, and it is this ultra low level information that has the most effect on staging and holographic imaging? My guess is that this micro-information is the first casualty in losses due to 'reflections' at the arm/cartridge interface.
In fact, if I were to speculate wildly I would argue that almost all turntable design starts with an admission of a battle lost: since arms, by current thinking, have to have length and mass then we are already losing micro-information due to reflections. The conventional answer is to make motors and platters more massive. But, once the information has been lost or just muddied there is no way to bring it back. Fighting the wrong battle?
Ivor Tiefenbrun of Linn had a theory: his argument was that if you make the platter and bearing correctly, then after you get the arm correct it doesn't matter hugely what cartridge you use. Was he only partially correct? There are a large number of beautifully made tables and cartridges out there, and I think that we've reached a sort of a null in this matter: choosing a cartridge can be a simple as choosing a loudspeaker, in theory. It might simply be the interface between the arm and stylus that makes the all-important difference.
Could it be this that Thuchan is responding to?
Not modern, but superior.
Ct, I have to agree with Bydlo. I read that "review" back when Jean published it on his lengthy Audiogon thread. There was not much in the way of objectivity. Good as Jean's Lenco turntables are, it is a stretch to say his comparison to the EMT 927 proves anything. At this juncture, I am not sure I would even agree that Jean makes the best Lenco, let alone the best idler in the world. But don't misconstrue this as dismissal of the Nantais Lenco's. They are excellent. I have owned one of his and now own one of my own concocting that uses a slate plinth, Reinder PTP, aftermarket massive bearing, treated platter. The idler has a certain unique quality that does indeed make me wonder about the 927, from a distance.
Lewm - There was not much in the way of objectivity

That is why I put a qualifier in my post.

Recognizing the links are from JN’s site here ......

My post was - imo - relevant thread information based on the OP. I like to see public chat threads that are informative, entertaining, and generate good debate.

IMO - No one is going to buy anyone of these tables based on what is said here. Not without listening to them first - unless they are a collector, or it represents chump change for them and they will just resell it if it doesnt work out. just my opinion.
I must amend what I wrote about the Lenco vs 927 "shootout". Jean had nothing to do with it and candidly admitted that he was not even present. I think Jean had compared one of his creations to some other model of EMT, maybe a 930. (I found this information in an old thread on EMT, wherein Jean contributed.) Sorry, Jean, if you're out there.
The reality is once again that there is no consensus on anything in audio. I have a Nantais Lenco Reference on order and will use it with Ikeda 407 tone arm and 9TT cartridge. I have found Jean not pompous but rather justifiably proud of his achievement in elevating greatly the Lenco. Some have said that other Lenco updates are perhaps better, but I doubt it.
Dear 57s4me: IMHO the first and main factor/characteristic/target on analog is: that the stylus tip ( at microscopic level. ) be always in touch with the grooves and I mean always with out any tiny deviation from there and this depends mainly in the whole cartridge design and not on the TT quality or even in the tonearm one.

Cartridge tracking habilities depends mainly on the cartridge it self, I'm not saying that we don't need at least a decent tonearm design because we need it but not at the level everyone could think.

I tested hundred of cartridges ( from LOMC to MM/MI ones. Vintage and today ones. ) in several different tonearms with different effective mass and effective length and build materials and my first hand experiences tell me that if the cartridge has high tracking habilities it will showed always it does not matters that even the resonance frequency with the tonearm be way out of the ideal range, example a heavy mass tonearm with a high compliance/low weight cartridge.

It is so " curious " ( I mean curious because is unknow for me the precise whys. ) that the same cartridge body on a MM cartridge when I tested with three different stylus original replacements where the only change was the stylus tip shape and even that shares the same whole design on suspension and the like there are differences on each one tracking habilities and sound quality level.

I agree with you that if you already losed groove information you just can't recovery and then the main target down there is to recovery all the recorded information in the grooves and this can do it " only " by the cartridge and from here all what you want: from TT mat to tonearm board passing for different steps to damp everywhere the analog rig stopping that feedback Tonywinsc and you touched.

IMHO a massive TT design as could be the 927 not warranty that non-feedback because we have to remember that a massive item don't stop per se that feedback but even could be worst and easyly perceived by that extremely sensitive " microphone " name it cartridge. The only way to be sure any TT design ( including the 927. ) is doing its job on the subject is making measuring taking in count the lowest " level " any cartridge can be disturbed. With out those measurements real tests all what we have to say on the whole subject is subjective and its validity is valid around those " ears " and the accuracy and distortion level of the audio system.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Thanks Thuchan for the description. Just to add more information, J.C Verdier is now making an even bigger TT called the Verdier Magnum. It is massive and is made to order only. You can read about it here:
Verdier = Micro Seiki


Thuchan - do the Micro Seiki designs have braking built into the platter design to deal with the behavior of a vinyl record - like the Verdier Platine ?

You flatter me :-)
I don't believe that I have more experience than many folk here?
What I do have through my architectural profession......is a working knowledge of structural engineering, building materials, construction techniques and building acoustics.
I am convinced that the fundamental enemy of the 'turntable system'.....is Structure-Bourne Feedback.
Many people assume that Air-Bourne Feedback is the issue as they perceive an increase in feedback when they increase the volume from the speakers.....whereas the increased volume is merely highlighting the Structure-Bourne feedback.
Every suspended timber-framed floor is wracked with Structure-Bourne feedback due to structural deflections....and surprisingly......every suspended reinforced concrete slab is also wracked with similar Structure-Bourne Feedback due to the same structural deflections.
Only a steel reinforced concrete slab on the ground can be relatively free of this form of feedback.
The stresses caused by these structural deflections result in 'movement' and continuous low-frequency energy within the floor system.
All the expensive stands, isolation platforms and turntable suspension systems are designed primarily to isolate the plinth and platter from this Structure-Bourne Feedback but very few are 100% effective because of the severe low-frequency of the feedback and because of the movements induced.
Once you have heard a turntable system.....any turntable system......totally free of this Structure-Bourne Feedback......you will realise the singular importance of this principle.
You will also notice when this is achieved.....that tonearms and cartridges are generally liberated to perform their tasks as designed?
So I agree with you.......the type of drive system implemented and the absolute accuracy of speed maintenance is not as significant IMHO?
Halcro, I think you are entirely right about structural borne vibrations but turntables have many equally difficult problems all of which rob the music of its magic.

About two years ago I discovered the new StillPoints isolation feet, component stands, and racks. They are intended to absorb the internal vibrations as well as the structural vibrations. They have replace the Halcyonic active isolation platforms that I had used, especially under my turntables. But there are also: speed accuracy, resistance to the impact of the music on the speed, slap echo of ribbons used to drive tables, pulse of ac motors, vibrations through the bearing, etc. Gradually, I have come to the conclusion that the idler wheel turntable, especially the Lenco, have the greatest realism, so I am moving that way.

I think many are selling vinyl short, but no totally optimizing their turntable, arm, cartridges. My new table will also allow me to have two tonearms with one having a mono cartridge. Long ago I realized that while I liked the soundstage of most stereo records, monos often are the most real.
Dear Thuchan, I remember the most of your pictures about the building of your dedicated listening, uh, space. I don't however rememer to have seen any 'steel reinvorced slabs' anywhere while non of your components is 'hanged' on the walls. My apartment is on the 11e floor so if there were no 'steel reinvorced slabs' under my foot or my gear I would be no more among us. Thanks Henry for your explanation why I am still a live. I wrongly thought that Lew or Fleib would explain this 'wonder' to me considering the fact that I smoke longer than 50 years. As some old chess master stated: 'the human understanding is limited but human stupidity is without bondaries'.

Tbg, That is interesting that you replaced the Halcyonics with the StillPoints. Before doing so, did you try the StillPoints between the turntable and the Halcyonics? Could you please describe how the sound changed?

I met the designer of the StillPoints last weekend at the NYC Audio Show. He indeed explained to my friend and me that the SP are designed to drain internal vibrations down from the component as well as isolate it from structural born vibrations coming from below the component. He also explained to us that his products make the most difference when placed under speakers, then electronics and finally under source components like turntables.

Have you tried placing some StillPoints on the plinth of your turntable, assuming there is room?
Peterayer, I had two Halcyonics unit with one under the turntable and one under the amp most of the time. I had thought to buy more Halcyonics but the price got outrageous. Really it was the StillPoints Rack that came along first. When I put everything on the SP Rack it was better than my previous sound. I longed for the possibility to have all Halcyonics but could not afford that. Ultimately the guy who bought my Shindo turntable wanted the Halcyonic unit so I sold both. The second Halcyonic went shortly thereafter.

I did try various feet between the Halcyonic and the Shindo but they did little.

I think Paul is wrong about where the greatest benefits of the SP Ultra SSs or Ultra Fives are. On my amps SP Ultra Five on SP Component stands are just outstanding. Once I got rid of the acrylic shelves on the SP Rack, the Ultra SSs and Ultra Minis are also outstanding. The SP Ultra Fives are outstanding under speakers, but four are needed, not just three. In all cases four are better than three, but you have to keep all four in contact with the component.

Most vertical vibration is turned into horizontal vibration which can nowhere and thus is converted into heat.

No my present turntable is a Bergmann Sindre with no real suspension. It is on SP Ultra Fives which are also mounted on a SP Component stand. Initially, I am just going to put the Nantais Lenco Reference where the Bergman is now. The hundred pound weight of the Reference will mean something other than the Mana Stands glass shelf.
Tbg, Could you please describe the sonic difference between the Halcyonics and the StillPoints? Did you ever try the same turntable on both devices? Thanks.
Norm; a followup to Peterayer's question....

when you did (or if you did) compare the Halcyonics to the Stillpoints under the turntable, was the Halcyonics on a totally grounded rack with no de-coupling? in other words, was the Halcyonics optimized? was the floor beneath the rack concrete with the rack spiked into it?

Peterayer, I compared the SP Rack not the later Ultra SS and Ultra Five feet. The Rack did use the new "technology" of StillPoint but had the liability, since removed, of having acrylic shelves. Again, however I could put everything on the SP Rack but only two components on Halcyonics. The top end was cleaner and quicker and I had, if I recall correctly, more sense of a sound stage.

Only in the case of my amplifier did I do a comparison in this case with the StillPoints component stand with the "technology" in its feet alone under the amp versus the Halcyonics on the Acapella Fondato Silenzio base with their little pucks between the base and the Halcyonics. In this case I thought the SP Component Stand had clearly better base.

The comparison under the turntable was with both on a Reference Mana stand. The Mana stands have points to the floor and below each shelf. It had been my plan to put the turntable on the StillPoints Rack, but I so quickly filled up the six shelves, that I never tried that.

With the turntable I don't remember hearing much difference with my Shindo turntable and as I said the guy who bought the Shindo also bought the Halcyonic on which it was placed.

Overall, I should stress that I only had two Halcyonics units and was able to put everything on either the SP Rack or SP Component Stands. The StillPoints sound had quicker attack and cleaner top end, where the Halcyonic did nothing.

I should also note that since that time, StillPoints technology has added improved technology in the Rack, in the new Ultra feet, and record puck. Overall, this has revealed more detail giving a very nice sound stage precision in knowing where the performers are.

Mike, by no means was the Halcyonic optimized. My listening room is on the second floor. Both Halcyonics units were used on Mana stands as I explained above.
Ironically, on my old thread, "Halcyonics under my tt. Wow" a guy just today tells of his use of SP Ultras on a Halcyonics.
Tbg, interesting!

you said;
I have a Nantais Lenco Reference on order. Some have said that other Lenco updates are perhaps better, but I doubt it.

Congrats on your new pce but the other comment made above how would you know this if you haven't actually owned from both sources and compared.

SP Ultra 5's;

I also have 4 under each of my speakers and to date are my preference and have heard numerous others trying under their tables with great success, I know of one manufacture also utilizing such as a standard when selling his "Steve D" Kodo The Beat table latest version.

With your speakers are you utilizing and connecting with the threaded nipples, do you have them snugged right up tight or do you have them backed off a few turns.
Ct0517, just comparing the similarities not the differences :-)

Tbg, I am using Stillpoints as feet under my Copulare racks. what a diffence! I wouldn't use the original feet.

Halcro, agree with structural airborne issues. You may completely solve this problem by anchoring the racks with the concrete floor. In my case I used the Stillpoints under the racks. This improved a lot. Nevertheless you need to implement anti-vibration issues for the drive, motors, tonearm stands etc.

It might be also very crucial putting the speakers and subs far away from electronics and analog units.