Da Vinci AAS Gabriel

I just saw a report from Jonathin Valin from TAS returning from DaVinci in Bern

http://www.avguide.com/blog/trip-switzerland-and-da-vinci-audio-labs

The stray magnetic field if unshielded could change VTF as the cartridge moves across the record closer to the spindle/ magnetic bearing. just try working on a cartridge with any screw driver.

A permanent magnet cannot induce hum. There is no need to test it.

Dgad,
yes - I did. About 18 years ago. First I was suspicious about this too. The big magnetic rings relatively close to the tiny magnets inside the cartridge,....hmmm.

However, - as the tests showed (and some measurements done at the technical high school Munich) the 2 magnetic rings are embedded inside two steel "rings" which do very effectively shield the magnetic field - at least from dispensing vertically towards the platter surface.
There was no detectable interaction with the magnets in cartridges nor did the test show any induced hum.
It performed flawless with a very wide range of cartridges from Ortofon MC-5000, Supex, Koetsu, FR, Grasshopper v.d.Hul, Dynavector,Kiseki, Ikeda EMPL, SPU and Miyabi.
The Verdier is a fairly "raw" concept and was from its very beginnings as a DIY-project introduced in the late 1970ies in the french L'Audiophile-magazine. It is however a smart design which gives - proper set-up - extremely good sonic results and has some very clever design features which all do work for the better in performance (if not in looks....).

The versions built prior to 1993 are sonically better to later production.
The versions with pure magnetic bearing in the horizontal plane - no added ball.
I am referring to the La Platine Verdier only.

Dertonarm,

Did you ever test the Verdier for stray magnetic fields above the platter that would in fact negatively impact a cartridges performance by interfering with the cartridges magnetics?

Axel, ...... back to the object of this thread: in terms of both - craftsmanship and tooling - I would go for the Raven (but I don't need to....).
Both - Raven (whatever incarnation) as well as Gabriel do both desperately need a working isolation to be able to show their merits.
Putting them "hard-coded" on any solid ground/shelf, rack means simply giving (rather throwing....) away 50% of the possible performance.

As for the RPM 9 with thread.
It needs some experience to get the right "feel" (if you don't have the right equipment) as far as the thread tension goes. Too much - pretty bad. Too less - pretty bad too...
"Right" tension - pretty amazing......

And yes - I would take the Verdier any time above the two contenders.
Preferably a Verdier made prior to 1993.

D.T.
y.s.:
>> If you want to go with a low platter weight - fine. <<

Not necessarily, in fact I have this suspicion from what I heard this far, there is once again some trade-of going on here.
I have heard the 'musical' mass-platters close to what you mention (alas not with loosish string), - and very 'fast' lower-mass-platters ~ 4.5kg, that can sound a bit 'restless' even nervous like.
So Thomas, where he sees it, seems a bit unclear to me, but since he likes to 'stir the pot' he may like AND dislike both, in the fashion of a true chilled out cynic?

In the case of a ~ mass-platter (of sorts), Transrotor Z3 with a jolly tense neoprene belt, it goes as much the route pretty of a Thorens 2010 arrangement.

Then we have the 'Platine Verdier' with yet heavier platter and a rather LONG, no-stretch Kevlar? string. (Tensioning and length is up to the user - like how long is your rack space?)

If I'd have to pick between the 3, I guess I'd be still looking at the 'Verdier' rather.
Then we have the SME system, fast, dynamic --- BUT not necessarily all what you'd call a: really dynamic low register, [or] "air" in the bass line, YMMV.

Now, so we wont loose the thread subject -- where do our 2 contenders, TW & Da Vinci, fall into the scheme of things?

Note: I once tried a no-stretch string in place of a square (stretchy belt) on a RPM 9 ----> result: Plain awful...
Greetings,

I know that this will lead to nothing but more questions, but nevertheless:
- operating the Verdier TT with a thread/string and minimal grip will minimize the requirements to the motor and maximize the benefit of the platters inertia to give excellent constant speed.
The one "key" to great results (very constant speed with literally no alternations) in high mass platters is "belt" (read: thread/string) drive with minimal grip/tension. The inertia does the job - and it does it better or the equal of the very best direct coupling/controller.
But it does so with the minimum vibration and literally no alternation in speed (due to motor/controller regulations, belt grip in conjunction with speed up and slow down due to belt inert velocity etc.).
There are 2 way to get good constant speed:
- low mass platter with low inertia driven by high quality and high torque motor/w controller (many examples - direct drive and idler drive and hybrid concepts by Denon, Sony, Luxman, EMT etc in the 1970ies/1980ies and later).
- high mass platter with high inertia and very low grip thread drive.

If you want to go with a low platter weight - fine.
But that will get you nowhere close to what is possible, due to the inner resonance of the low mass platter introduced by the tracking process itself.
You can try to dampen that with mats etc. - thats why so many TT's do benefit from tuning mats to a high degree.
Still - you won't get really dynamic low register, no "air" in the bass line, no real speed and a rather muddy and "warm" upper bass.
But many do like that.

Well, it can be a endless discussion when you don't know what you hear. Most today "like" something or they read an "article/review" in a magazine, save 3-4 sentences from it and after a while they are transformed into "experience/knowledge".
Sometimes I wonder (no, wrong, I stopped that) how many Audiophiles think, what a Designer does is perfect. Ultimate. Lots are able to make enough money to buy expensive things (but only with a good discount of course/review "winner"), but on the other side they have absolutely no idea what these units are doing. And they are not seriously interested in that.
And even in the next life these discussions will go on...
One way to avoid it, is to try to visit audiophiles and listen to their Systems, sooner or later you will hear differences...the only decision you have to make then is:
- Do I "like" it or not...
- Is it right or wrong....
"In the kingdom of the blind, the one-eyed man is king"
You know, these 3 sentences...

Well,
1. Klasse or not. If I read the response it'd tell me that "Platine Verdier" can not work as a top tt should work, because it is at constant "war" with the -constant- bearing friction... hm,?!?

Hey, I guess I'm not ready for this engineering-101 type of analysis yet. Something tells me this is more opinion then knowledge based analysis :-)

One fact to be considered: motors (most? all?) in order to perform correctly/steadily - AC to make sure, since DC is all over the place due to other issues, need to operate AGAINST some sort of load, the more constant the better.

This would completely contradict this almost 'free-wheeling' notion that I seem to hear by Syntax.
Thomas, were did you obtain your engineering degree? In the 2. Klasse then?
Greetings,
Axel

Trying to "controll" a heavy platter in motion with 33 1/3 rpm by a "motor" is a nice try. You have a constant "war" between the inertia of the platter and the torque and regulation of the motor.
I am sure we will have several protagonists for this principle here on Audiogon and in the "audiophile" community.
But we will find no protagonists for this principle among technical engineers.
Why ?
Well - obvious reasons, once it is given a serious and undogmatic view.
Direct coupling with quartz or whatever controlled high torque and precise motor giving the "pace" will always work quite well with low mass (= low inertia) platter.
Never against inertia.
We would then look at constant "war" with lots of tiny speed changes and everything but really constant revolution.

Hi Axel,
before we go back to 1.class school:
Do you know what a motor has to do?
To fight a battle?

Hi DT...,
am I correct in assuming the 'Platine Verdier' does NOT use a motor controller, and therefore relying on belt slip/creep, platter mass, and controlled bearing friction to 'cancel' the effects of cogging?
Axel

Braa........ make your selection, choose the names you like - look around on A'gon and the magazines. Giving names here would just mean taking position and raising new potential for dispute.
But - to give just one idea.... - J.C.Verdier does offer 2 TT's in the price range of the TW Raven AC1 and AC3.
You'll find more.....

Have fun,
D.

Dert

you give a very vague answer when you state ..."or give a listen to a TT with a different concept. In other words - do audition a TT with comparable platter size and mass, but with a working low frequency suspension. The difference in low level resolution, bass speed, authority and "air" and the sudden lack of "grain" may give a completely new perspective on the performance and requirements of TTs.
name names, what manufacturer employs these concepts? which might I add are at or near the price point of the TW Raven?

guys enjoy the music tolerate the equipment

braab

...... or give a listen to a TT with a different concept. In other words - do audition a TT with comparable platter size and mass, but with a working low frequency suspension. The difference in low level resolution, bass speed, authority and "air" and the sudden lack of "grain" may give a completely new perspective on the performance and requirements of TTs.
Have fun on the journey!

Back to the original question...You would be improving little and only in certain areas while sacrificing in others...You have one of the top tier tt's now...Save your money for other things, or at least other areas of your system.

Regards...

Dgad, sorry again - Stillpoints, Spikes and other direct (or via one or several hard components...) coupling devices have nothing to do with isolation from periphery vibration. You just have a different "coupling" to the underground, but the vibration of the underground nevertheless does enter your components and its cabinet.

Static vibration vs. dynamic vibration ? You mean ONE frequency of vibration with constant amplitude versus a multiple of frequencies with alternating amplitudes ?
An isolation from vibration worth the name has to take care of all of this.
Thats why high priced isolation platforms (bench-tops and complex frames alike) are either active pressure supplied (Vibraplane et al) or very complex (Minus-K).

Some Stillpoints under your CDP will of course make a difference due to the relatively low weight and not very rigid cabinet.
The Stillpoint due dampen the groundplate of the cabinet and do - due to their extreme hardness - kind of speed-up the component-born vibrations to leave the cabinet.

But it does in no way isolate from outside vibrations.

Putting your CDP between two fairly heavy blocks of slate will most likely improve the sound even more, since now the cabinet can't resonate that easy any more and if, then with much lower amplitude and much lower frequency due to the vastly increased weight and direct large surface dampening of it top and ground plate.

If possible - give it a try.
I yet have to see the CDP which does NOT benefit from that particular method of large surface dampening.

Dgad,
if you are not using any vibration platform you may also go for better motors like Faulhaber or Maxon motors. If you supply the Faulhaber motors by Sorbothane you might really hear a difference to the motors now running.
This is not theory but approved by a Raven owner.

Dertonarm,

We are dealing w. both static & dynamic forms of isolation. I think both needs to be approached independently. But then there are active isolation systems that might handle all. In the end, for my system, I find that a low resonant frequency is a sonic ideal and as stated before one of the biggest sonic upgrades for the $ I have ever done. The other being my room (speaker position etc.). I have also stated here on the forum that even with isolation I found stillpoints to be a benefit. That also says something. But what I don't know (and I do wonder). It was immediately audible. I would imagine Stillpoints provide isolation in a horizontal plain vs a vertical one. Then again Stillpoints under my CDP in combination with springs is also a major upgrade and not expensive.

Dgad, any isolation platform deals with mechanical vibrations only - airborne pressure (loudspeaker etc.) do of course need different measures.
A isolation platform with a resonance frequency below 1 Hz however does deal with microvibrations as well as footfalls.

Ducati Rider,

Black Night get close and the fact that the motors are next to each other & contacting the belt almost at one point should be the best of all worlds. Syncronization would never be a problem in such a design.

Dertonarm,

I never said what I like better in these forums between multiple motors or not. Only in private, as my conclusions are not 100% verified. Further 3 motors in theory, can compensate for error as well. They would average the error of any one motor. Again, I am back to the argument there are no absolutes/

As for electron Microscopes and tonearms etc. I think we have to take into account 2 types of vibration. One would be "micro vibrations" and one would be Macro. There can be no one solution that is perfect for all scenarios. Imagine a sprung wood floor. A different isolation option would be needed for isolating footfalls as compared to airborne noise.

Dgad, suspension in cars and isolation from periphery vibrating ground (shelves, floor, wall) has very little to do with each other.

While your thoughts do indeed reflect some popular high-end audio "theories", they are not on a solid physical basis and are not hitting the topic.

In resonance frequency and the isolation from parasite vibration "we" are - should..... - seek a resonance frequency below 1 Hz.
Check the website of Minus-K and other companies dealing and specializing in this to get some insight into this topic.

3 motors will introduce - as they can hardly be synchrozised - 3 sources of error into a rotating system.
To this just add the belts which do elastically speed up and slow down - i.e. introducing wow and flutter - the platter and you have a rotating system which is the very opposite of constant unaltered speed.

You don't hear that the TT sounds worse with multiple motors?
Most likely because the bearing is now force free if the motors are situated in a manner that the bearing is horizontal free of force or close to that.
As this will "better" the sound, most will credit this improvement to the multiple motor situation.
However - using only 1 motor and 2 counter-bearings in the positions of the other "motors" instead will further improve the sonic presentation.

Multiple motors is the very same conceptional error as with multi-tubes or multi-transistors output-stages. As the individual tube/transistor/motor is always NOT identical in all parameters to its "comrades" the resulting "signal" is itself not homogenous but "wobbling".
This is something to think about before telling me how wrong I am.

It has to do with strict logic and theoretical model without prejudice.
We should have some members here who do enjoy exactly these ...........

That's an interesting thought Dgad. I wonder if Thomas thought of using one motor and 2 passive pulleys. Arthur K from Funk Firm uses such a scheme and calls it Vector Drive.

I still stand by any isolation system that isolates the motors and the turntable in 2 separate domains (2 separate isolation devices) will in fact induce wow & flutter as the turntable & motor will vibrate independent of each other. This in itself must be considered. So, then we can postulate the best isolation will be a wall mounted stand with the motor suspended apart from the turntable. Unfortunately not a possibility for me and for most.

So back to basics, it is important in the design of any turntable that the motor has as little vibration as possible. This can be measured but in fact no currently published magazines in the US ever do such a measurement. Neither do they measure speed accuracy. But if I remember correctly there are some magazines in Europe which do such measurements. I wonder what motors measured best in terms of speed stability (at the platter, not motor) and in terms of vibration at the motor directly and finally how much vibration is transmitted to the platter/LP from the motor. All good questions. So now, I will also suggest a good isolation system or stand will in fact absorb vibration from the motor and also keep it away from the all important stylus/LP interface.

Now, on to the theory behind more motors. I have thought extensively about this. I am by no means an expert but put forward the following points.

Syncronizing multiple motors does have its challenges and might lead to the less is more philosophy from this perspective.

While a motor pulls the belt on one side of the pully, it in fact pushes the belt & creates slack on the other side of the pully

Using 3 motors will have a "take up motor" that will pull the belt and reduce the slack amount of belt being pushed.

Also 3 motors allows for less contact area between the platter and belt. This results in less surface resistance and less induced vibration from the motor through the belt to the platter. But also, this results in less realized torque at the platter, as there is less contact between the belt and platter. Again 2 items in conflict with each other. Ultimately you will need to let your ears be the judge. I know I have, and have spoken privately about my conclusions with my audio friends.

Back to isolation, I am in agreement that more weight on top of a stand will give you a lower resonant frequency but I think there must be some way to come to an ideal number. I forget my physics as it is over 20 years ago but for anything to isolate it must vibrate. If it is too stiff it won't work. Just think of the difference between a Cadillac suspension compared to a sports car or BMW/Audi for the Germans. One is softer on your but while the other wobbles more. Ultimately I find the stiff suspension of a car better, but ask my father and he would say to opposite.

I am using springs for my stand as many have seen. I wonder if reducing the # of springs will improve isolation. I know reducing the mass on top of the stand sounded worse as the resonant frequency rose too high. But then I might as well use less springs. I wish I remembered my spring constants etc.

downunder,
why do you don´t proof my suggestion on reality? Did you talk to Mike already? Who did tell you that you cannot bring your Raven motors "under vibration control". Are you living in the middle ages believing what some spiritual voice is telling you? I really don`t get it. But if you wanna stay in this status why are you discussing improvements or are you just defending your status quo? If this is the case pls. just tell me.

Sorry Downunder, but NO motor in high-end audio TT's is anywhere close to what is possible regarding quality and quiet regarding vibration.
It gives a really nice insight into the subject of micro-vibrations if one gives a close look into electron-microscope techniques.
They do require exactly the very same surround conditions as a high-end TT justifying the name.
But if you or others believe their motors are quiet and literally free from vibration - well this is of course fine with me.
And of course fine with the manufacturers of your TT's as they see that their marketing is successful.
Everything looks fine from the distance - and may display nasty details if looked at too close. Its like giving the skin of a beautiful girl a close look with a magnifier - it really can spoil the whole illusion......

You can do the pencil Test:
Record on the Table-no move-with the stylus into the lead out groove- all amps activated- Volume up to 50% or higher !!:
Struck with a pencil
-at the rack
-at the platform where your TT sits on it
-at the TT Chassis outside
-at the chassis near the platter
-onto the platter
-near the needle (1 inch)
and check what you will hear through your speakers.

Real good designs will let you hear close to nothing, others will hurt your ears.
The Vibraplane is quite good, normally used for electron microscopes. They are too cheap in my opinion, normally for use in Hospitals/Labors. Cheaper than a cable...I guess when it would be "made " for High End it would cost 12.000 instead of 2000. Anyone see High End equipment in Hospitals? HRS/SRA etc. racks for life saving electronics?
No?
Any idea why?
Or you can do comparisons with Belts. Could be possible you will get better results with 1 really good Belt (Specs!) and 1 motor than with a regular belt and multi Motors. Or 1 good motor can be better than multiple average motors...
A good belt is available for 80,-- And that's High End price.

Anyway, a VP is better than nothing (worst is glass or stone)

Thuchan, Dertonarm - it seems neither of you have any idea of any current platform that isolates the TW AC3 and its 3 individual motors. Are you living in fairy land?

Of course if it is a problem at all, which I doubt as the motors are very quiet

Downunder you would need a customized platform - or you increase the distance of the motors (a friend of mine did so with his AC-2 on a vibraplane with great results).
Minus-K does have fairly small sized isolation platforms.
As for the motors - they all vibrate.
As for the weight - the Raven AC3 is still TOO light to work on the smallest Vibraplane with anything near optimum results.
I would suggest putting a good solid granite or slade plate on the Vibraplane first and then the Raven on top.
The Vibraplane - as any isolation platform - does work best close to its maximum load. Only there the resonance frequency gets really low and thats what physics want.
All these do apply to the AAS Gabriel too.

Downunder,
you may place motors and the Raven plinth on separate platforms of one big isolation base with different and separated platforms on the top layer of the isolation base. Ask Mike from HRS, he can do it for you - I am pretty shure.

Dgad, are you thinking of Silent Running? I beleive Kevin Tellekamp (sp?) has been working with TW to create a solution.

The Raven Motors are fairly free from vibration. I have seen motors on $10K plus turntables that really do vibrate. There is a dedicated isolation platform for the Raven 3. It has cutouts for the motors. I forget who makes it. Looks great & I have a picture somewhere. For a Raven one since you have more space you might be able to just isolate the turntable but will need to elevate to motor to compensate for the height of the isolation stand, but IMO & correct me if I am wrong any vibration from the motor (if it really vibrates???) would be transmitted by the belt somewhat. But honestly, my homemade stand and setup works wonders. I will qualify it as such, it is close to the equivalent of adding room treatments if you have gone there.

On a different note, the Vibraplane might not be able to sustain the weight if you have multiple arms. I know my cousin's vibraplane got a "flat". But I might be wrong. Check carefully into it. Also, I wouldn't want an isolation platform "vibrating" (since this is how is isolates) separately from the motor. This would introduce speed instability. Hence based on some suggestions here you would need to isolation platforms, one for the motor & one for the turntable. They need to be tuned to the same resonant frequency since different weights will be placed on them. Or you can just simplify and get one large single isolation platform. Complicated it gets if we let.

Dertonarm

How would you actually be able to place the Raven AC turntable on a vibraplane (or any isolation platform) and place the 3 motors not on the isolation platform?. Considering each motor is a matter of 5 mm's away from the table and inside the curved raven plinth.

I see many people owning a Raven improving the TT by motor gear, isolation platforms etc. So it should make sense. I have tested HRS platforms at the Munich High-End show and in my room. Maybe even better. And you may split two seperate platforms, one for the motor (or two) and a big one for the TT.

Definitely a serious improvement. 3 weeks ago I did visit a Multi Motor Raven on a Vibraplane, the owner told me, it was a HUGE improvement, even when all motors on the VP. Minus K is also interesting but take care with the weight.
But you can check it easily without spending much money. Try it with a tube from a Bicycle. Next cheap step above is not using the delivered Mat from Millennium. It is like a LP12, you can do a lot to improve it. You can also try a record clamp...

Alectiong, you are right. I strongly suggest having a look at both - the Vibraplane and the Minus-K.
They are different - in function, resonance frequency and price - and you will have do decide which to use.
In any case - make sure that the motors of the Raven AC3 are NOT placed on the isolation platform together with the AC3.
You would ruin 40 - 70% of the result.
Rgds,
D.

Dre_j and all,
Thanks for your comments. I more I read, the more I think what i need most is a vibration isolation platform underneath my Raven TT, and not a switch to the Davinci. Probably the platform will provide more meaningful sonic improvement the much more costly AAS Gabriel may bring.
Rgds

Alectiong,

I have had extensive time with both tables in the same system. While my comments and opinions are my own, I will say that both tables are very respectable. However, since you have the Da Vinci Arm and the Da Vinci Cartridge (both are excellent performers if I may say so myself) it is worth it to listen to the Da Vinci AAS Gabriel or Unison and decide for yourself if the different presentation is worth the switch from the AC3.

Hope this helps,
Dre

BTW - I still do not believe that this exchange of sidekicks is in any way of any use for anyone. It is a waste of time.
Syntax has provided some personal experience and remarks.
Some didn't like those remarks.
Fine.
Just put some experience of your own against it - instead of concentrating on Syntax's remarks.
Those who do so should - from past experiences - know only too well how much Syntax does enjoy their fury and futile attempts.

Any chance we get back to the topic ?
Let me try.......
I had a close look at both the DaVinci as well as sampleTT on display there was big and certainly an eye-catcher.
As both - the DaVinci as well as the AC3 or Black Night are fairly simple belt driven TT's without any isolation from vibration they both are quite easy to compare. The TW TT does certainly do feature the better finish and more precise tooling.
In the current state the DaVinci has some charme, but I think Mr. Brehm will add some finishing touches soon.
Both TT's do NEED an isolation from vibration desperately to perform anywhere near the possible state of the art.

Great Audiosix !
You graced this community with yet another post packed with invaluable technical input and strictly on topic - as usual.

Have a close look at Jasperts comment. Think he identified the "bad virus".

Thank you very much - Audiosix gives a fine example what I meant in my earlier post......
Indeed the bad virus from AAA.
As always - off topic.

It sounds like a bit of bad blood spilling over from AAA.

It appears a few from this small Munich group has the penchance to slag off their own countrymen here on a repeated basis. Syntax with his frequent snide remark about TW and Dertonarm's put down of Frank Schroeder, Thomas Schick. What's up?

Hey dertonarm,

if you like a forum with selected users, please make your own.

....well, this is not the AAA.....(german audio forum compared to which Audiogon is kind of cultural paradise....).
And I hope it is not developing in that direction.
It would be a real shame and pity.
Several german audiophiles already left that forum for good reason and the last thing we need is getting virulent imports.....
So - on topic please.
Anyone having any further first-hand experiences with the AAS Gabriel vs. the Raven AC3/Black Knight ???

It would be very helpful, when you will show us that you are a German Designer who is specialized in Electronic repairs and that you know all kind of amps, preamps and that you repaired them all.

Why do you think my daily work is of any interest here?

BTW, Lamm and many others are serving me with spare parts.

Audiosix, thank you for your valuable information. It is good, when you support those, who can't read 1 or 2 sentences properly. It would be very helpful, when you will show us that you are a German Designer who is specialized in Electronic repairs and that you know all kind of amps, preamps and that you repaired them all.
Not with original parts, but who cares. Btw. are there more here from overseas who will continue pickin' on me without any information for the thread?

Dgad, I know some people might call me an extremist having some tables and a few tonearms. And indeed in some respect I am one - maybe you too, being enganged in writings like this. I did not walk into a shop and bought them all, I collected over the years, especially the vintage ones and did repair and restore some of them. It is really a lot of fun playing with phono-preamps, tonearms, cartridges etc. But I do not sell and buy all the time - I do collect (maybe too much!!).

It is hard to judge which TT is the best sounding in my ears. Some people having visited me were overwhelmed by the many differences in the sound they could hear. Currently I am working with the Nakamichi and the Micro.

But back to our question. I know both producers very well, Thomas Woschnick and Peter Brem. I got in contact with them when both "developers took off". In the beginning they worked together and I was able to audition a Raven with a Grandezza tonearm. I liked this sound so much that I bought the Grandezza tonearm from Thomas (!). Now both people have quite a success and this is wonderful, isn`t it? despite they are running on separate ways. Both produce excellent pieces of audio-gear and do have their community - which is fine.

I don´t think there is any reason that we as consumers or afficinados continue the developer struggle for the final victory. Nevertheless we are allowed to judge the products like we perceive the products in our chains or at audition locations - and we should write in this forum about it.

I did hear the Black Raven at the Munich High-End show, but as I said it to Thomas this was not a good chain to judge the qualities of his new table. By the way it looks fantastic. The big DaVinci, which is a continous improvement project maybe reaching its final stage I heard twice and it is one of the modern masterpieces in my opinion.

I will not buy Thomas new black tiger nor Peters red italian horse due to the reason that my space is getting a little short. I hope you understand...

So far only Syntax did provide what was asked for.

And a "little" bit more.