Everything we've discussed so far is, of course, of little importance if the product doesn't work. But (spoiler alert!) it works, and in some cases, spectacularly. The package includes a set of four rechargeable AA batteries and a corresponding charger. You’ll need two at a time. The battery life is long—I completed the entire test with one pair. To insert the batteries, you need to open the top part (there’s an Allen key for this). The interior of the ES-001 is dense, and you can't help but admire the Japanese craftsmanship. This is a small electromechanical work of art.
Those who think like engineers will have realized that, aside from everything else, the entire construction must have its mass distributed uniformly around the vertical axis. Otherwise, it will add another deflective force to the rotating system and place stress on the platter's horizontal bearing.
Using the device is simple in theory, and there's a highly informative user manual (though it could be even better). However, for real-life use, you will need some practice. The pressure you apply to the disc and how you apply it are crucial parameters for the final result. At the end of the process, you can rerun the test to see if the correction was adequate.
An added difficulty arises due to the suspension of the platter. The ES-001 is quite heavy, and it will weigh down the suspension, increasing the mass and thus altering the resonance frequency. But this happens with any clamp, and in most cases, you can compensate for it, or you can simply remove the clamp after alignment. The real issue, however, is that the disc’s push must be done in such a way that it doesn’t move the suspension. This means you need to use one hand to push the disc and another to hold the platter in place. Alternatively, you can use both thumbs for movement while the other fingers stabilize the platter (this worked much better for me). I used the ES-001 on the Linn Sondek LP12, and I assure you that all this is feasible with a little practice.

Let's start with the theory: Mechanical noise in turntables is one of the key factors affecting quality. Typically, we describe an analog system as "very good" when it has a "dark background," "discipline," and "absence of mechanical noise." There are a ton of records that can reveal anything that wobbles uncontrollably due to poor-quality materials, or external noise transmitted from the bearing and arm base to the disc and the cartridge. A good turntable is one that stays still because this ensures the cartridge doesn't move unnecessarily. Therefore, when we remove the disc's eccentricity from the equation (which, to scare you a bit, is almost equivalent to the eccentricity of the platter itself—almost, because when only the disc is eccentric, the platter's mass doesn't participate), only good things happen.
I dug deep into my record collection to find various discs that should and could be corrected. Of course, if a disc is in bad shape, a simple push might not suffice. For this purpose, the ES-001 package includes a reamer, a simple mechanical tool that allows for the enlargement of the disc’s hole. This ensures sufficient movement room, but of course, it “binds” the disc permanently to the clamp! It’s a matter of personal choice.
In any case, using the ES-001 led me to the conclusion that eccentricity issues can take three forms. First, there is eccentricity due to large tolerances between the spindle and the disc when the hole is in the center. This is perfectly and easily corrected by the clamp. More difficult is the situation where the center of the hole is significantly off. Correction can be done under certain conditions, and perhaps one must resort to enlarging the hole. Lastly, there’s the possibility that the disc is "correctable," but the inner surface of the hole (which is essentially a short cylinder) has significant flaws. In this case, moving the disc becomes problematic (you push up, but it moves in another direction, for example), and in some cases, you'll need to enlarge the hole here too.
With the eccentricity eliminated (or nearly so), the results are easily audible, especially if the disc has significant spatial information in terms of instrument focus, space description, and depth. All these improve from slightly (if the disc is of good quality with the hole where it should be) to significantly (if the disc is highly eccentric). I wouldn't be surprised by some jaw-dropping when one hears things they’ve never noticed before from a specific cut. The overall result is more coherent, clearer in space, and with a better sense of presence. Additionally, and in ways you can't predict—only appreciate in comparison—parameters usually dependent on the cartridge improve, such as the midrange, in terms of layering and the treble, in terms of transparency. The low end’s articulation might also improve audibly, as the tonearm has less work to do. I emphasize, though it’s obvious, that the final result depends on the issues of each disc; the ES-001 itself works excellently.
While the impact on sound is indeed present, we must also discuss the practicality of the ES-001. We’re talking about a very expensive component (justifiably so, perhaps, because its structure is really complex, and the need for precision is great) that requires effort to use. How many discs will you “center” in an afternoon?
Personally, after some time of use, I believe the ES-001 targets specific user groups:
First, those involved in archiving, who need a one-off playback session, at the highest possible quality level. For example, if you have a significant record collection you want to digitize for any reason, this is a serious tool. At this level, the device can also be used as a tool for evaluating a specific disc before purchase. Not all records are the same, and if the price is high due to value or rarity, it’s worth ensuring their good condition.
Second, those who own (and have thus paid for) a top-tier analog system. It’s perhaps unfair, but the harsh truth is that even the best turntable depends to some extent on the quality of the disc it’s tracking. Significant eccentricity, high wow & flutter, large movements of both the tonearm and cartridge (which, being top-tier, are probably equally expensive) lead to a noticeable drop in final quality, especially in stereo imaging.
Lastly, I wouldn’t exclude the true connoisseur of analog systems. They will see the ES-001 as the solution to a real technical problem, one worth spending money on if they’re seeking the ultimate quality. This isn’t about psychological tricks or subjective opinions. We’re talking real, tangible engineering—fractions of a millimeter, yes, but painstakingly so.

Conclusion

Although its price greatly limits the audiophiles it concerns, the ES-001 is a real tool. It works as the company describes, and it's user-friendly, once you gain some experience. It’s, also, undoubtedly an excellent object to own. All that’s left is to congratulate DS Audio for their courage in presenting such an extreme solution and for their effectiveness in such a demanding construction!

Listening Sessions Recording

The following recordings were made with a DV-RA1000 Tascam master recorder (using 24bit/192kHz sample rate) and you can download them to have an impression of what the device under review sounded like. It is obvious that any recording of this kind could not be absolutely transparent but, according to our experience, the majority of sound attributes we listen to, during the actual listening sessions, are preserved. No need to say that you should use these samples cautiously and for informative purposes only. Do not rely on them exclusively to make any buying decisions. The file format is .flac, so expect that the zipped files will be quite large (even if the clips are about a minute or less long. You could use an ABX listening tool like the ABX plug-in for foobar2000 if you want to make some more elaborate experiments. Contact us if you have any questions.

Listening Sessions Recording TOC
Track #01	Linn Sondek LP12/Ittok/Karma - Rotel RHQ-10 "Michi", Corrected.
Reference	Linn Sondek LP12/Ittok/Karma, Rotel RHQ10 "Michi", No Correction.

Previous | Next | More Reviews