Most likely by a pure coincident, if you believe such thing exists, a few things analogue related happened within one week period, important things I must add. First, on Tuesday, I received the latest issue of Hi-Fi News & Record Reviews magazine, with TechDAS Air Force Two on its cover, and with a review of this turntable inside. Later same day I read in The Absolute Sound a "personal remembrance" of the late great sound and mastering engineer Doug Sax who passed on April 2nd (see HERE).
He played a huge role in the world of music mastering numerous albums. As Robert Harley mentioned he started with The Doors debut album in 1967, and his last work was Bob Dylan's Shadows in the Night released in 2015. Doug Sax is the father of the modern direct-to-disc recording, and also of stereo direct-to-disc recording. His most important works were done for Sheffield Lab.
To honor this remarkable character I visited EBay with intention of purchasing one of the album of his doing. I can't say that I am able to fully enjoy all releases of such small, specialized labels, but this was a particular occasion and I was ready to compromise. It turned out I didn't have to. By pure luck I came across a very special album, mentioned by TAS chief editor: The Name is Makowicz by Adam Makowicz. It took me a while to realize it was the album mentioned by Robert Harley as he got the name (and thus also album's title) of this Polish musician wrong: The Name is Macowicz by pianist Adam Macowicz.
I found it, brand new, still unopened. I contacted Piotr from Audiofast and we found also a copy for him, this time a special, pre-release version, that was prepared for CES, and this copy was also in near-mint shape. Just a day later the TechDAS Air Force Two landed on my Finite Elemente Pagode Edition rack for a review.
Some of you probably read my review of Air Force One, some didn't. If you're interested go ahead and read it. The first product of TechDAS threw me to my knees—never before and never after that test have I heard this level of performance in my room, nor anywhere else. I fell in love with this device like for ever. And please don't tell me that long distance relationships don't work—for me nothing has changed, I still want to have it and spend my life with it!
Mr Hideaki Nishikawa, the designer of this deck, was very understanding when I told him about how I felt during High End show in 2014 (you might find a coverage of the show HERE, and you will also find Hideaki-san on a photo there). His good manners and truly Japanese reserve didn't allow him to express this understanding in a more passionate fashion, but I guess he wasn't really surprised either. He expected to people to react like I did to his achievement.
He told me then also about his future plans. The first step he planned, was to release another deck, at half the price of Air Force One, that would be called Air Force Two. The second step would be a release of Air Force Three that again, would cost half the price of Air Force Two. And finally I planned to present another model, double the price of Air Force One, to be called Air Force ZERO.
The one I already had reviewed and loved so much was, as it turned out, only the first step on company's road-map. From pictures I thought Air Force Two was a smaller design than it's older brother, but I was wrong—it occupies as much space on the rack as the "One". The impression of being smaller was created by a different looks and mechanical design. Previous model sports a chassis cut from a single aluminum block, this time it is cast and combined of two decoupled parts, still with the same hammer paint finish. Anybody who had a chance to deal with industrial machines like lathe or miller surely knows what I'm talking about. Nishikawa-san pointed out that this is a true tool, that should work just fine, without any need of repairs in 10, 20 and even 50 years, and thus the industrial design. This deck weight 47 kg, while the "One" weights 79 kg.
One of the elements take is responsible for lower mass is platter. It is a single, 10 kg piece, that lacks this additional part, that in One was put on the top. Also turntables feet have less complex design. Previous model sports air suspension, the newer model uses a hybrid suspension. A new suspension system with four-legged (as opposed to three-legged of One) structure accommodates upper chamber sealed with air and lower rubberoid diaphragm with built-in springs, sealed with oil internally. That diaphragm is connected to the upper chamber via a tiny hole of the orifice plate and damps the spring movements mutually by internally sealed oil and air from the chamber and as a result, produces a high vibration insulation effect by means of reducing Q-factor of resonance.
Despite those differences the core design remained unchanged. It is still a mass-loader with platter floating on an air-cushion. An external, medical-grade, pump, pumps compressed air under platter, that floats instantly to the height of 0,03 mm. The second pump, working in the same chassis, sucks the air from under the record which attracts the disc to the platter. Both pumps are noiseless. One needs to put an ear directly against the pump to hear that it is actually working. And yet, since pump itself has to generate some resonance, I placed it on a pneumatic platform, Acoustic Revive RAF-48H.
Turntable operation is similar to the one of the "One". There are large, backlit button that allow user to choose speed, stop motor and turn the sucking pump off. There is a small display placed between them, that allows user to read current speed and check if final speed is achieved. Turntable sports an advanced system of motor control. When started it spins platter to the larger speed then required and later stabilizes at the proper speed. At this moment "Locked" sign lights up and than user may finally lower the stylus to the groove. Measurements conducted by HFN proved that this system worked perfectly.
Air Force One was provided for my review with SME Series V arm with MCS150 cabling (16 900 PLN) and Dynavector DV XV-1t (29 900 PLN) cartridge. This time I wanted to listen to "Two" with my own cart, Miyajima Labs Madake, and I did. Turntable was delivered with a tonearm, I'd never seen before, Frank Schröder, model CB. It was a 9" version with carbon fiber tonearm's tube. A previous version of this arm was custom made for Artemis Labs. This new version is available either with carbon fiber or wooden tube.
During review this turntable was paired with the same phonostage, RCM Audio Sensor Prelude IC, but I also tried it out with a Mk II version of this great preamp. After the review of "One" I've been asked many times, why did I used such an inexpensive phonostage in such an expensive system. The answer has always been the same: it sounded unbelievably well and I liked it a lot. Also, I've been using it for 5,6 years with all reviewed decks, arms and cartridges, so it is the best tool for any comparison for me.
To get a better perspective I decided to conduct part of my tests also with quite expensive ZYX Premium Artisan phonostage and ZYX Ω Premium DIAmond X cartridge. Additionally, with Sensor (MkI) I used also an active step-up with battery power supply, a costly ZYX CPP-1 v2. Signal between ZYX module and Sensor was delivered with Crystal Cable Absolute Dream. Expensive enough? I think so. But still the key part of the test, for me I mean, was the one with Sensor.
During this test I used the same speakers, Harbeth M40.1, and power amplifier—Soulution 710. The only difference was a preamplifier—instead of Ayon's Polaris III now I used the top model from the same brand - Spheris III. Cabling remained the same as used for "One" test.
SETUP
Top class turntable should be set up in buyer's/reviewer's place by a specialist representing distributor. Surely user/reviewer can later play a bit with setup, but it is very important that the initial setup is done by someone well trained, someone who knows the particular turntable by heart. We are lucky here, in Poland, as it is RCM (a company who made also my phonostage) who represents TechDAS on our market, as this is a company of true analogue fans and specialists.
They came with turntable, they put it on the rack and leveled it. Next they placed a platter in place – they used special handles that make moving this heavy platter much easier. Then they had to screw in main axis, that also fixed platter to the main bearing. Next step was connecting deck with a pump, that sat in a very nice, aluminum chassis, so it could be placed "in plane view".
Motor setup is more complicated job. It sat in a heavy, cast chassis itself, that used three feet. It had to be placed in a precisely determined distance. The drive is transmitted via a flat belt made of non-stretchable polyurethane. Later one has to start an auto-calibration procedure—the tension of the belt is measured and chassis moved closer, or further away until a desired tension is achieved.
Next step is tonearm mounting. AF2 as a standard is able to accommodate 9 and 10'' arms. Upon order a second armboard can be added that is able to accommodate 9, 10 or 12'' arm. Other optional accessories include a clamp, and an anti-vibration platform. Platform for AR1 was made by American company HRS – it differed slightly form a standard model to accommodate turntable's feet and motor. Today TechDAS offers its own acrylic platforms. Unfortunately these are quite expensive – one must pay for a platform for AF2 24 000 PLN… Distributor delivered for this test just a turntable without clamp and platform. Although—in some cases I used few Pathe Wings clamps (see frame 7"/10").
SOUND
Records used for the test:
• Adam Makowicz, The Name Is Makowicz (ma-ko-vitch), Sheffield Lab LAB21, "Direct Disc Recording Limited Edition", LP (1983).
• Budka Suflera, Giganci tańczą, Polskie Nagrania MUZA SX 2293, LP (1986).
• Charlie Haden, The Private Collection, Naim Label LP110, 3 x 180 g LP (2007/2008).
• Chico Hamilton Quintet, Chico Hamilton Quintet, Pacific Jazz PJ-1209, LP (1955).
• Duke Ellington, Masterpieces by Ellington, Columbia/Analogue Productions ML 4418, 200 g LP (1951/2014).
• Frank Sinatra, This is Sinatra!, Capitol Records T768, LP (1956).
• Helmut Nadolski, Meditation, VeriTon SXV-786, LP (1976).
• John Foxx and the Belbury Circle, Empty Aveniues, Ghost Box GBX019EP, 10" LP (2013).
• Julie London, By Myself, Liberty Records MCR-1, "Columbia House Record Club", LP (1965).
• Kraftwerk, Autobahn, King Klang Produkt/EMI, STUMM 303, Digital Master, 180 g LP (1974/2009); review HERE.
• Kraftwerk, Autobahn, Philips 6305 231, LP (1974).
• Krzysztof Komeda, Dance of The Vampires, Seriés Aphōnos SA04, 180 g LP (2013).
• Maria Peszek, Jezus Maria Peszek, Mystic Production MYSTLP 014, 180 g LP (2013).
• Mark Knopfler, Tracker, British Groove Records 4716983, "Deluxe Limited Edition", 2 x CD + DVD + 2 x 180 g LP (2015).
• Nat ‘King’ Cole Trio, After Midnight, Columbia/Analogue Productions 28180, 3 x 180 g 45 rpm LP (1957/2010).
• Niemen, Niemen, Polskie Nagrania MUZA XL 0710-0711, "MONO", 2 x LP (1971).
• Skaldowie, Rezerwat miłości, Polskie Nagrania MUZA SX 1796, LP (1979).
When reading Ken Kessler's review I noticed that he used a certain phrase a lot: "in comparison to Air Force One" (an interview with Ken see HERE). It has to be clear, even for those who can't fully understand the text, that the author can't shake a lively memory of his meeting with the TechDAS' flagship. For me the AF1 is an absolute reference and all other turntables may only try to get on par with it.
This review gives readers a clear message: Air Force Two is a remarkable turntable with but one, key downside—it's not the Air Force One. It's, in my opinion, non-substantiated generalization. AF2 wasn't created to compete with AF1, not even to compare these two designs. Someone who can afford a Japanese flagship should buy it and don't even bother checking its smaller brother out. The latter was created as an opportunity for those, who are not able, for any numbers of reasons, to accept the price of AF1, or can't afford it. What's more—I believe that this turntable offers quite a different sound than Air Force One and difference is significant enough to consider it a totally different product. Ladies and Gentleman, let me introduce: THE AIR FORCE TWO.
Sonic signature of Mr Hideaki Ashikaga's turntable places it in the same family as: Kuzma Reference, Kuzma XL2, Thales TTT-Compact with Simplicity Mk2 arm (see HERE) and SME 30 (a review of 20/3A see HERE). This sonic character differs significantly from what is offered by such turntables as: Linn Sondek LP12 or Avid Acutus Reference. It's significantly different also to what vintage decks, like PTP Audio Solid9 offer. Mostly because sound precision is simply remarkable. There is no exaggeration in this affirmation—listening to well known records using AF2 one will hear things one's never heard before.
Despite this remarkable precision the Japanese turntable does not overwhelm listener with huge number of distinctly presented details. It is surely not about trying to create a believable presentation throwing large number of details at listener. That's what some manufacturers, especially on lower prices levels, sometime do.
AR2 does not require listener to put together all these details into a bigger whole, it is done automatically, beyond listener's consciousness. This deck offers remarkably selective and detailed sound, but it's not what attracts attention, at least not at first. What strikes listener from the very first moment is how resolving and precise AR2's performance is, how detailed and selective it also is one realizes bit later, when one realizes what builds this incredibly good performance.
As it befits a true "tool", and that's what this deck should be considered to be, it does not matter what music genre one prefers, when a record was recorded, how good is a pressing, what label does it come from, what's the shape of particular record. Each and every time what we get is a believable presentation of the particular record represents in both, technical and artistic terms. The Japanese turntable presents musical event in both, analytical and synthetic way. The analytical side of presentation is the more important one but it does not dominate the performance.
The performance delivered by this turntable is highly nuanced, regular terms used to describe less refined decks are hardly applicable here. On one hand, when used, they do describe some small part of particular aspect, but on the other they deepen certain stereotypes, which in this case is road to nowhere. This is an absolute high-end and nothing is unambiguous, at least not for someone who uses a top class system on everyday basis.
Let's talk, for example, about tonality. It is so difficult to qualify, as it seems remarkably neutral. Avid, Linn and other suspended decks seems to offer richer, warmer sound, but they in fact, enhance these features themselves, which means that they deviate from neutrality towards something, that many call naturalness. Well, in fact suspended designs are not the only ones that can sound this way—similar sound is offered by non-suspended designs like Scheu Analog Premier Mk 2 or DPS 2, to name few. There are some turntables that seems to offer even more neutral presentation, like already mentioned Kuzma Reference, like some top models from Transrotor, Artus FMD for example—they seem more resolving, more selective, and yet, in direct comparison, it is TechDAS that seems more natural, organic sounding.
Frequency range is nicely extended on both extremes, it is the medium (vinyl) that puts a limit to it. The best reel-to-reel tape recorders are able to deliver even more energy at both extremes, sound seems even more open and less restricted by mechanical natural of its reproduction. Vinyl is, after all, only an interpretation of what was recorded on a tape. And yet, AF2 comes really, really close to the original. Some, especially those who never heard any of TechDAS decks, nor a true master-tape, might call me a "heretic" after what I'm about to write. I believe that: Air Force Two delivers a performance that in terms of tonality is closer to analogue master-tapes than Air Force One. The latter might convey the magic, the spirit of such tapes in a better way, but the deck under review delivering more distinct, more open presentation, not as "soft" as AF1, comes closer, shows more fidelity to original tapes than more expensive brother.
Because it is a tool. An incredible, musical tool. Like many other high quality, Japanese tools, it also seems to work much better than any other one used before.
AIR FORCE TWO AND DIFFERENT CARTRIDGES
This Japanese turntable is one of the most neutral sounding machines I know. So I was a bit surprised by what my son, equally bewitched by AF1 and appreciating AF2, pointed out. Namely both Japanese deck "enforce" their system of values over whole system. They both act as alpha males. Supposedly they are part of the crowd (system) but actually they run it.
Unlike in most cases where a strong sonic character of particular device is shown by other, more resolving ones, in this case both Japanese turntables are the most refined, most neutral elements in the system. So how come, that they seem to "run" or "rule" the whole system? To be honest, I'm not sure.
But the Madake cartridge, that used with other turntables seemed rather "soft", warm and forgiving, with AF2 showed a different face delivering quite powerful performance, with a brilliantly controlled bass (I didn't realize that it was capable of such performance) and amazingly precise treble. Even more surprising was a perfect control of the whole range when ZYX Ω Premium Diamond X played with TechDAS. It is a remarkable, warm sounding pickup, but with AF2 it delivered more powerful performance, with sharper leading edge, and it was more resolving than with any other turntable I had a chance to listen with it on.
Air Force Two conveys exactly what has been written on the record, the good and the bad elements equally. It so happened that during this test I received two records I bought on Allegro.pl in mint condition: the 1976 Meditation by Helmut Nadolski and 1986 Giganci tańczą by Budka Suflera. As you can see a decade sets these two records apart and difference in sound quality is even bigger. The material for Nadolski record, who was supported by Czesław Niemen, was recorded in 1973 in St. George church in Sopot. The records sounds great with stunning dynamics and a very deep sound. The music on Budka Suflera record is very good, but the recording, in contrast to Nadolski's, is quite poor, with a dull, noisy sound. AF2 proved to be a perfect tool to distinguish differences in recording/producing techniques between these two recordings, but also how much worse the technique of record pressing became over the 10 years that set this two albums apart.
Using this turntable was very useful when I tried to come u with a theory explaining difference between first pressings and some very good re-issues. The originals offer very open, fast sound, a lot like analogue tapes—I mean as similar as it is possible. The mono version of Julie London's By Myself, Chico Hamillton Quintet album from 1955 and some others—they all had this "true" element in them, which didn't always make listening comfortable, as they sometimes sounded too bright, or too rough. On the other hand Duke Ellington's Masterpieces by Ellington, or Nat King Cole's After Midnight damn good reissues prepared by Analogue Productions, offered cleaner, nicer, richer sound. Leading edge wasn't so precise, but maybe that's what made those recordings sound more palpable, warmer. It is one of the paradoxes of audio, something that makes it unpredictable and thus fascinating.
Summary
Air Force Two should be used in all National Libraries, in each recording an d mastering studio, and it surely should be used in all pressing plants—in most of such places people don't know exactly what they're doing. When they do something right it's almost a miracle, it is possible due to their genius and dedication similar to those of sound engineers from 1950ties.
Listening to music using AF2 is sort of intellectual challenge. It brings a lot of surprises no matter if one listens to well known, or totally unknown recordings. It is also an emotional challenge—the great abundance of information provided by this turntable come together and result in a very true presentation. The turntable is no more an element of the equation—listener is left eye-to-eye, or ear-to-ear with music. This is not the single best turntable in the world, there are two, three that offer even more, and yet it is one that delivers one of the most competent, uncompromising performances I've ever heard.
AIR FORCE ONE vs AIR FORCE TWO
I said I wouldn't compare models One and Two, and I kept my promise. But for this review to be complete I need to give you a chance to know exactly what you need to spend twice as money when you decide to buy AF1 instead of AF2. A quantitative approach would reveal only very small differences between the two. The "Two" offers slightly smaller scale of the sound, particular instruments are not presented with such a fabulous depth as by AF1. The "One" is more refined when it come to presenting bodies of each sound source and their tonality, but again, the difference is not that significant. The emotional aspect of the presentation is much more important, and more difficult to access and quantify. The more expensive model charms listener with everything it does while the less expensive one tries to be more honest. One needs to spend some time with the "Two" to get fixated on it, all one needs with the "One" is a few minutes.
DESIGN
The AF2 measures 685 (W) × 460 (D) × 200mm (H) and it weights 47 kg. It is quite large machine that occupied 1.5 shelves on my two-shelf Finite Elemente Pagode Edition rack. Three main elements combine to build up this deck: a chassis with platter, motor and air-pump, and power supply. The chassis supported by large-size four-legs is of a double-layered structure consisting of an upper layer with complex configurations and a flat but thick lower layer. To secure sufficient strength, not only the thickness but also ribs are employed according to the need. As a result, the total weight reached 32.6Kg. The 10 kg platter is made of special A5056 aluminum.
This system is configured with no conventional bearings and a platter simply installed on the glass plate with a polished flat surface to be aligned with the center shaft for positioning. Once the ancillary electric air pump starts forcing air into the turntable the platter will start floating instantly to the height of 0.03mm (30μ) above the base.
Additionally platter sports a vacuum disc suction system that attracts vinyl records to the surface of the platter making record flat—eliminating any warpage and thus unwanted resonance.
Turntable sits on four feet decoupling it from the ground and additionally decoupling chassis from subchassis. This solution is called a Hybrid Spring Suspension. Each foot accommodates upper chamber sealed with air and lower rubberoid diaphragm with built-in springs, sealed with oil internally.
Motor stored in free-standing rugged aluminum housing sports a solid steel drive wheel that by fabric belt drives rotation of a platter. This is quite powerful, synchronous AC motor and the rotation is supervisory-controlled through a non-contact sensor and a microcomputer, that is placed in the same housing as both pumps ("Rotation Control System"). Motor's housing sits on three feet. Inside there is a mechanism that allows small movement of the motor which allows control and adjustment of belt's tension used to achieve a perfect speed.
Pumps and electronics were placed in a nice looking, aluminum housing ("Air pump & Power supply Unit"). There is a green LED on the front. Two pipes go out from its back—these go to the turntable, power cable that supplies motor, terminated with multi-pin RS232 plug. It is important to place this housing on a different shelf than turntable itself, or at least use some platform to decouple it. Working pumps, despite the fact that they work really quietly (it is amazing that such quiet pumps even exist), still produce some micro-resonances.
Fir&finish is absolutely top-class. Many other audio products, when compared with TechDAS, seem like prototypes waiting for their final versions to still happen. Having such a device in your room helps you to separate valuable products from all the rest, it lets you re-evaluate your perception of audio products. After a while you won't tolerate any half-measures. So you need to be careful—after AirForce 2 enters your life nothing will be the same again, you will become much more picky.
7"/10"
The platter with vacuum disc suction system is built in such a way that supports 12'' records. The whole system includes: two (inner and outer) seals with tiny slots, vents used to suck the air out and, obviously, pump. So it would seem that one can't use 10 and 7'' records on this deck. But as long as one has a proper clamp one can play also such records, although the vacuum disc suction system can not be used in such cases.
Discs smaller than 12" rest on the inner seal. When a properly heavy clamp is used they "sit" on the platter very nicely. To use singles with a large hole in the middle (the ones made for jukeboxes) one needs a triangle with a small hole—a classic disc will be to tall.
Specifications (according to manufacturer)
Chassis and motor
Weight of chassis: 32,6 kg (cast aluminum)
Weight of platter: 10 kg (A5056 aluminum)
Total weight: 47 kg
Motor: AC synchronous
Speed: 33,3 rpm/45 rpm
Wow&Flutter: less than 0,03% (W.R.M.S.)
Dimensions: 685 (W)×460 (D) mm
Air-pump and power supply unit
Power consumption: 50 W
Dimensions: 430 (W)×160 (H)×240 (D) mm
Weight: 10 kg
Accessories
Tonearm base wood x 1 (drilled for specified tonearm)
Platter cover "The Platter Top" x 1
AC power cable x 1 (180cm length)
Optional accessories:
Special Damping Table
Second Tonearm Base
Tonearm base wood for supplement (for 1st and/or 2nd tonearms)
TechDAS Disc Stabilizer (highly recommended to use with Air Force Two)
TechDAS TDC01 MC cartridge & TDC01 Ti MC cartridge
Price: 141 500 PLN (deck without tonearm)
Stella Inc
Contact: 51-10 Nakamarucho | Itabashi-ku | Tokyo
173-0026 | JAPAN
[email protected]
www.techdas.jp
MADE IN JAPAN
Text by Wojciech Pacuła
Images by TechDAS | Wojciech Pacuła
Translation by Marek Dyba
