My vote goes to the AIR FORCE

The TechDas truly does have a 'floating on air' quality to its replay - delicate and transparent. Great presentation, many thanks, MF.

Thank you for actually playing music in a review! This needs to happen more often, not necessarily the comparison, but some actual musical context to flesh out the review.

My goodness, that's amazing. Thank you for sharing the demo.

My vote goes to the OMA. That table really brought the drums and piano to life. What a drum solo! Really cool to hear. Thanks.

Thank you for this comparison! I love the Air Force for sound, the OMA for rhythmic drive. If I had the opportunity to purchase one, definitely the Air Force.

Hello Michael, Thank you for posting such a great video and content. I played your comparison in my reference system and I much prefer your direct drive OMA turntable, the dynamics and tone separation on the instruments were fantastic. Best Regards.

Hi Michael, the OMA really sound like the real stuff, has more authority, is more expansive and detailed, The micro- dynamics and the decay are to die for. For me was a huge difference. This is the kind of videos I like the most. Thank you

The OMA TT displays clear attacks and transients in the drum parts and better defined rhythmic patters. However, the ambience of the club appears to be better portrayed in the AF III take, along with a more eclectic tone for the piano which makes it more real. It is astonishing how can one pick such differences even through youtube compression and subsequent reproduction through conventional Macbook speakers!! "Non-scientifically rigorous" blind tests allow me to systematically report these same observations on subsequent reproductions, which incidentally do not speak about frequency limitations but about tonal quality and rhythmic speed. Thanks, Michael, for your videos, teachings and jokes throughout so many years.

I like the sound from the Air force, thanks for the video !

A stunning TT. Love Tony Williams. Thanks for sharing. Greg

Thank you Mikey, great video. More comparisons like that are most welcomed. BTW I like AFIII more.

Wow. That IS surprising. (Really? Cartridge angle & all?). Huh. Well, my vote goes to the OMA K3. Thanks Mike. Very entertaining.

Wow, thanks for this. That is a well-mic'd recording! The OMA K3 has more presence to my ears. It sounds like a live recording. The drum heads are much more tuneful.

Great review and love the comparison….

Hi Michael, great demo. As an owner of an AF3 Premium, I'd have to say that the instruments, both piano and drums sound more dynamic, detailed, and "real" on the first TT., and I preferred it. I know from experience that the footers and rack that the table sits on make a huge difference. It would be interesting to see how different the Techdas would sound on the rack that the OMA is on and vice-versa or perhaps playing the Techdas without those foam footers. I know you kept the VTA exactly the same when you switched the arm over. Would adjusting the VTA differently on the Techdas improve the transient speed? In addition to the differences in drive mechanisms, I suspect that the different metallurgical properties of the platters, in addition to the differences in platter mass , account for a large percentage of the sound differences, with gunmetal having a warmer, more muted sound. Time for a titanium platter upgrade for the AF3 Premium!!!

Wow much more depth and open and clearer sound stage

Listening on my far from reference level headphone setup the OMA K3 sounds far more 'natural' to me - the sound is very smooth and well... natural! As soon as the music started, it felt like I was listening to bunch of real musicians, which made it easier to just listen to the music as if one was in the room with the band. The AF3 sounds great, but not as smooth and 'life-like' as the OMA K3.

Great video Micheal. I prefer the first turntable but having said that, I could easily live with the Tech Das. Thank you.

Great comparison, Michael, thank you for going to all the effort! Through my system this unfamiliar music sounded more sonorous and easy-on-the-ear on the AirForce but I could make more sense of the tune on the OMA... if that makes sense.

Surprising how much more open, detailed and dynamic the OMA sounds. I bet if you had the tape it is a lot closer.

Great comparion Michael! They're both beautiful turntables. I didn't realize that Nishikawa-san passed away last year so my condolences to him and his family. Overall though, the OMA was way clearer and dynamic. The AF III is pretty expensive but the OMA is several times more costly so almost not a fair comparison. I've always wondered if turntables sound different - just more quiet or less quiet, too fast or too slow. Your video presentation dispelled this myth. I could hear a distinct difference. Thank you for setting it up!

AF3 is the clear winner ! The drumkit has the weight of the real thing !

Awesome presentation Mike. I'm surprised by how different the two turntables sound. My preference is the TechDAS. Going in, I expected to prefer the OMA, but that was not so. Tonally, I found the the TechDAS to be closer to the sound of a live performance and much more open and dynamic.

They both have their own sound quality I Vote for both .

Both sound terrific but I feel the first TT (OMA) has the more lifelike drum and cymbal sound. I have Air Force V which is very enjoyable.

The TechDas is my favorite because not only can you hear the bass drum and Mr Carter better(which makes it a more cohesive trio), but Mr Jones doesn’t sound like he’s scuffling with the tempo like he does on the OMA(which feels slightly too fast to me)

To me the Techdas sounds more alive, it bops along with more dynamics and weight than the OMA. Just my thoughts. Thank you for giving viewers the chance to hear these magnificent machines.

Great video! I like Air Force III better on this time around. I hope you do more comparisons like this!

Wow the decay from the Oma at the beginning from the bass drum is outstanding 😮

K3 is more live sounding. Very open and detailed.

I like the sound of the Air Force. It seems it has more body in the lower midrange

Very interesting, but I believe one reason why both turntables sound different is that they are positioned on different racks.

I can't imagine how much work you had to put into this demonstration, but boy is it helpful! It's pretty astonishing how different the two tables sound. The OMA has so much propulsion and precision. As a drummer and a Tony Williams fan, that clarity and propulsion is especially valuable in his solo. I can hear every single note on the cymbals and his signature single-stroke rolls. I've heard tables and cartridges that provide great detail and precision, but they usually seem sterile to me, too analytical. But with the OMA the precision is paired with propulsion, and that combination, in my experience, is unique and would be very, very addictive for me. It's what I feel when I play live. Thank you, Michael, for all the hard work you do for us.

Without a doubt, the OMA K3 transported me to the presentation location. Much more realistic in terms of drums life. The AF3S highlighted the piano but I found the OMA's timbre to be more faithful.

Both great sounding turntables. In this comparison it demonstrates the difference a direct drive vs belt drive. OMA Direct drive has better speed, timing and attack. The AFIII favours sustain (decay). The challenge is to balance both attack and sustain which as part of the setup process and component matching. However, this demonstration has achieved demonstrating that turntables do sound different. I thank Michael for his time and effort in sharing this with us.

OMA all the way. Amazing reproduction of the live session. Very dynamic, agile, with the perfect balance of warmth and neutrality

excellent video Mikey! Seldom you see comparisons like this. You are one brave sole! Comparing two TTs with such a price difference. Listening through my headphones, one is more punchy, more on edgy, and more dynamic, the other TT is smoother, softer, and more relaxed sounding. Is this correct?

fantastic music and sound quality really comes thru even with KZfaq and high end digital headphones. I love both the TT. Initially I liked the direct drive but I feel the belt drive has more warmth, separation, texture, and weight.

Air Force seems to sound more natural with better SNR. I'm not surprised, given that it's a belt drive.

Just as with your previous comparison, somehow the cymbals lose a bit of top end air and attack on the AF IIIP. As a past drummer and someone who spends time around live bands, the TechDAS is very clearly rolling off something up top, but I have no idea how - it's just not there. To use a clichéd audiophile term, the AF IIIP presentation is ever so slightly veiled compared to the OMA's.

Grüße aus Deutschland und ein super Plattenspieler 👍👍👍

Rube Goldberg would have loved this. Tens of thousands of dollars to play twenty dollar records. Includes over engineering to compensate for over engineering. Fun video.

Wow that looks like a Micro Seiki 1500-FVG! Looks like it functions like one too...I owned one for years and it was amazing...

Thanks Michael. I've been enjoying your turntable comparison videos and hearing more of the outstanding OMA K3. The OMA is no doubt a better sounding TT than the AFIII. I don't think it's a fair fight though. I'd like to hear your OMA against Hartley's Basis Transcendence with the SuperArm 12.5 and the same Lyra Atlas cartridge. Now that would be a fair fight - the best sounding direct drive table vs. the best sounding belt drive TT.

I like the explosive dynamics from the OMA...the Tac Das sounded more mellow ...nice but ide go with the OMA. I remember attending a Marc Dohmann master class in all things turntable...he said if I remember the music should explode out of the grooves through the speakers....I like that effect the OMA offers and that of the Helix turntables. The Dohmann turntables for me walk the dynamic and mellow tightrope very well. Ille stay with my old Technics SP10 mk and Denon DP80 tables ....I have an old Linn Lp 12 and Thorens TD160 for the more mellow experience. Direct drive is just easier for me anyway. Michael you clearly illustrate your point as well. On Point mate.

This is a stellar comparison of two giants! The OMA js the clear winner for me and it’s surprising to hear the differences. The delineation of the cymbal strikes on the OMA just did it for me; it’s on another level. Horses for courses and the Tech Das has the deeper bass, but dare I say the OMA sounded the more clean and natural, almost less synthesised bass - it sounds darn near perfect.

The difference is not subtle. Quite a surprise. Thanks for sharing!! IMO, the Air Force III is a more relaxed presentation. The OMA is more detailed. I'd like to have either sitting in my space.

I’m going OMA. The airforce was great but not at the same level as the OMA

the af3 sounds as if its running faster. the OMA is pure joy. more colours ,more fluid. more details. more fine dynamics. i cant believe this can be the true .

👀 So only the table was different? 👀 Wow! The first playback sounded like stereo mic'd pair in front of the drums -much more bass, especially in the kick. The second one sounds like spot mics: more focused detail on the upper part of the set, with less bass; sounded a little tighter. Personally, overall I liked the first one better. The focus in the second recording was great, but the first gave me more of the "you are there" effect. Then again, maybe the second one.☺️

Airforce One..The imagining is spectacular and almost as good as my Dohmann Helix 1 V3 with the same arm..I found the OMA less satisfying almost dull tbh..I still love the Thorens Ref this might be the TT for.me.Just got to get some pennies together!!

OMA K3...better bottom end attack and definition

It's a hard comparison, but the OMA kept its definition even when the band got more full. The Air Force seemed to slightly squash instruments together during the louder, fuller portion.

The OMA has best dynamic, the AF III sounds slightly warmer and smoother to my ears

I wanted the Tech Das to sound better since it is more attainable, but the OMA K3 sounds more dynamic and airy, the AF 3 in comparison sounds like extremely good digital.

Love Hank on drums

IMO the K3 is a little more in the pocket rhythmically (the interplay of the piano, bass and drums in the beginning just sounds right). On the other hand the TechDAS sounds a bit more dynamic and more lively (louder?), for example, in the drum solo. But at the same time, relatively speaking, it sound more hifi. Forced choice (tough choice), the OMA K3 is my preference for the feel of the performance it conveys. Would love to be in the room to hear the differences first hand. Nice demo and musically this record is a terrific choice for this faceoff. Thanks MF.

Well, the OMA plays the record in approx 5 min 53 seconds. The AF 3 plays the record in excess of 6 min. That difference explains the softer Tone in the AF.

Even a better power supply for the turntable makes an audible difference. I don’t know how but it does 😅. I was listening to the first sample and thought how could this be better …. and for me it wasn’t. But both turntables are great components.

This is the turntable, that blind test takers, couldn't distinguish from a $60 AR XA unit from 60 years ago. Bought and sold, by manufacturer.

MIchael I much preferred your OMA on this one

Glad to see high end tables still using belts, according to OMA direct drive is the only way to go. 🤥 I’ve been into audio 40+ years and a good belt drive has always been my preference. Nice work as usual Michael, Happy New Year 🙏

AF3 for me!!😍

I wouldn’t be able to sleep if I had any of these in my house. Half million dollars? Too much responsibility for me. Love the review

It is THE sweet spot of the TechDAS line

The Air Force has a more open sound, at least on this evidence. With that said, either deck is great.

Amazing. of course the Air Force is a fabulous turntable but in this direct comparison although the bass response is a bit heavier it just seems syrupy and romantic by comparison to the OMA I'm sure some people will enjoy that more, god knows i Loved my koetsu rosewood pro 4 back in the day for similar reasons, but the OMA just has more living presence.

I think the direct drive turntable speed has a big part and why it sounds just a bit clearer and more dynamic. For some reason, it sounds a little slow on the Air Force three. just a little. My question is do you have an extended version of this album? Because the track on Spotify or KZfaq it’s not as long.

Air Force for my Listening!

How does a platter run away with itself? Basic physics. It can only slow down on it’s own inertia.

I'm curious, does the vacuum pump have to be left on at all times to maintain the bearing, otherwise would the floating platter start to settle down until it is no longer a floating bearing? I thought the Air Force had slightly more clarity and spatial separation .. but it's hard to really tell listening though my $300 PreSonus computer monitors, LOL.

Hhhmmmmmm……. 2nd set up seemed “fuller” sound to me with the base more present. Almost as if the video mic was closer to the speaker. However, in all honesty, i would have been very happy with either and not looking for more. What did i learn from this? That i want to find that album! Outstanding selection! Im logging off KZfaq to find it now. Thanks for introducing it!

I have to say the Air Force III got my feet stomping more, it's more organic and sweeter in sound. Your direct-driven turntable sounds more dynamic and perhaps more natural, where the piano is further forward in the soundstage. But I would choose the one that appeals to my rhyme and feelings. I then have doubts about Raven Black night, still has to be at the top of the wish list :-) Sincerely. Henrik Beck - Denmark

Hello Michael and thanks for posting. Regarding the comparisons, could you post as to what recording chain was used because TBH, even allowing for mangulation by youtube neither setup sounds great. That said, the OMA is temporally much more coherent than the Techdas. Lastly, on air bearing platter runaway, what Techdas use is just a very low friction bearing coupled with a high mass, ergo high inertia, platter. All of that is good for speed stability and according to Newton's first law, once in motion, that platter will only change its speed if acted upon by an unbalanced force e.g. stylus drag, or hysteresis in the belt, or speed instability in the motor. Techdas use a low hysteresis belt to mitigate that element. It has nothing to do with the platter running away with itself - which it won't.

I also prefer Air Force. Beautiful sound.

TechDAS Air Force III Premium for the win!

i got a TechNICS TT,,it is almost the same ,,^^

OMA wins by far. The music is dense and like live music.All the spectrum of the music is more expansive and ... complete. Nothing is missing

The Air Force seems less constricting and with some more natural warmth. I also like the looks better.

Wow!

Oma was essentially neutral and balanced, but I would choose AF because it goes into the ear in a light way.

I do wish I could hear either or both in person because there would be a world of difference between that and a KZfaq video. I guess the next best thing would be to stream this through my home stereo rig. Which I will do soon. On my modest system of VPI Prime and Koetsu Black through my Parasound JC3 I hear depth and instrumental imaging and location that is hard to discern from the excellently recorded videos. In person I would fully expect either turntable system here to trounce my own sound wise.

K3 Baby! Belts are for pants.

Mikey, don't get too mad at me for saying this. The Air Force makes more sense to me as a trio playing live versus the OMA. The OMA is certainly a turntable that has tremendous value for the near future. Does the OMA have speed control?

OMA, enjoyed the dinner conversation after Cap Audio fest.

The base drum at the end settles it in favor of the OMA

Both sound great, maybe the AF3 but just in case I’ll take both 😂

First thing I thought was “ I’ve got to get this record” Air Force for the barely win. That vacuum probably has a big hand in the performance

excellent video. Both files sound excellent. The OMA file has a bit more drive and punch, than the AF III file, almost like OMA was reproducing a direct to disc recording. The East Wind label out of Japan did quite a few releases like this. Most are live recordings with this same group. They are all recorded to audiophile standards and are very listenable. Another excellent series for any future vinyl comparisons under consideration would be the King Record (Japan) Laboratory Standard discs. There were 30 or 40 titles in the Lab Series. King removed all compression and EQ from the lacquer cuts, increased the groove pitch to accommodate the wider grooves needed for the dynamics and cut these at 33 RPM from the master tape. Not the easiest discs to track but all are sonic blockbusters, most are classical but a few pop and jazz titles were also included. The classical selections are from the Decca UK catalogue of some very famous recordings.

nice ramar brush

niceee

Does that clamp comes with the OMA table?

Difficult choice. I wouldn't complain about either but the first may have a little bit more realism in the drum fill. They are very different with the first being a bit leaner

Nice comparison. The OMA had such strong attack, it almost seemed like it was running slightly fast. Also noticed more surface noise on the first recording. But the drum solo was very engaging. The Air Force sounded more relaxed, the skins in the solo rung a bit longer, and the piano was prettier. My preference was probably the Air Force, but I’m a romantic.

It is so difficult to get the turntable setups identical...... From the platters being level, the VTF and especially the VTA being identical, azimuth, anti-skate, etc. .... (I think the VTA on the K3 was set slightly higher than on the AF3.) But otherwise an interesting comparison video.

What is up with all the staticy clicks especially during particularly loud passages on the OMA? Annoying to an unpleasant level. But absent on the AF3. Possible static discharged on the OMA so not a problem for the AF3? Or just less static problems on the AF3? Or the same arm/ cart was not tracking as well on the OMA? Although you start closer to needle drop on the OMA, the AF3 seems to have a bit more noise before the arm hits? But hands down the AF3 is fuller and richer sounding. More depth, detail. Less mud in the bass. The kick drum on the OMA sounds flabby.

The belt drive seems to sound better, cleaner crisp sounding.

Don't wish to rain on your parade, Michael, but for me the music SWINGS on the TechDAS and 'don't' on the OMA. I've yet to hear a DD turntable that outperforms a belt-drive deck in this important regard, so although the OMA probably measures better from a speed stability point of view, I suspect that the speed control algorithm nevertheless has a negative impact on the sound.

I liked the Air Force best