Reed Muse 3C turntable

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).