Just stumbled over one of the whispered CLYW Collaborations!
Here is the Official Description from off of the site I found (and bought) them at!
I got one enroute, If i Like it ill get a BUNCH more. What do you think? Excited? I am. 
CLYW is sending some to me, waiting for it to arrive in the mail. Can’t wait to test it out!
Is there anything different about them or just a good, high quality bearing?
Where can I order some to try them?
Whoo hoo! its gone. Back to the Topic. PIXEL BEARINGS!!
8 step design sounds cool. I like the YYR DS’s 4 step design so maybe this will improve on that? I never was a huge fan of the Koncaves either so well see if it feels closer to or father from the Koncaves. The lower walls of the Pixel makes me think it will be even better!
They will be available soon. Very exciting bearing design!
2 Likes
Thanks Andre!
Ill buy all my next ones from here. Really looking forward to it.
Will these be on future CLYW releases?
In case anyone is curious, here’s a picture:
I think it looks really cool. First time I’ve actually gotten excited over the shape of a bearing.
From what i Understand of what ive read over on Ask.fm, YES. these should be a new default bearing in CL’s near future.
So basically it’s a digitized, pixilated form of a concave bearing.
2 Likes
With a seemingly lower rim than the Koncaves do. I dont know how to explain it exactly, but the koncaves seem to make my binds less tight comapred to a OD 10-ball that gives very tight binds, but I dont like how flats allow the string to usually favor one side and rub on the inner area of the yoyo decreasing spin times (to an extent) and accentuated torsional rotation (encourages the yoyo to move like the hands of a clock do during its sleep, i dont know the correct term for this motion).
Terripin X Wing cuts give great combo of both worlds of gentle but noticeable centering, great binds, but the cost is not great and the sound isnt ideal.
YYR’s DS bearings are fantastic, and the CTX/CenterTrac are really hit or miss as far as quality, but if you get a good one, KEEP it. Ive got 2 or 3 “good ones” and 5 or 6 “miss” ones.
Grooved bearings sound great, but i dont like how they play nearly as much as i thought. The way it forces the string to center up and not move around as the layers add up, gives a strange subtle feeling that It didnt feel really help the way it looks like it would. The Buddah bearings are great value and great performance, but id avoid the grooved bearings all around regardless of make or brand.
V-cuts ive got limited experience with, so i cant say much, but they also seemed to interfere with tight binds. I could bind consistently, just not as tight as i can get with something shaped differently…
For the kinds of binds I tend to do, the shape of bearing doesn’t seem to matter in the least.
I do think it’s also a function of finding the right string. It’s probably a bit trickier if you have just one favourite string rather than your choice between 3 favourites (a thin, a normal, and a thicker one). I have a few binds that are my defaults, and I can tell after a few throws if the binds are the right tightness or not. If the binds are too grabby, I don’t really think about swapping out the bearing, I think of going to a thinner string. If the binds are too slippy, I go up to a thicker string. That’s about it. I’m almost never using the thick string and slipping binds.
Then if they’re REALLY slippy and cruddy, I think to myself, “needs new response”. 
All that’s pretty academic, though.
I did an experiment a while ago to satisfy my own curiousity, in which I performed countless tricks and binds on the same yoyo and string setup, swapping bearings (flat, concave, CT, grooved+concave, angled like Whipple…) in and out throughout the course of several hours. I observed (totally anecdotally… nothing scientific to publish) that the “string layering” was fine in all of my bearings , even the grooved ones. As it turns out, the string releases from the groove super-easily when it’s time to layer. It doesn’t grab in there. Then I tried my binds… and I’m talking dozens upon dozens of reps… and they all performed pretty much the same no matter what profile.
I even WANTED the flat to perform worse because I had a bit of confirmation bias going on, but the more I went, the more I was like, “Yeah, the flat is fine, too”.
The ONLY factor in which there was a clear difference was in the precession. Flat bearings precess like crazy, and profiled bearings precess barely at all. That was enough for me to continue using profiled bearings like I do. By coincidence, the most quiet-performing bearings (I do prefer quiet) were profiled also, so it was win-win.
Bringing it back to the Pixel. It is profiled, which whether you buy into as significantly better or not, is at least SOMEWHAT better in that it won’t precess. It is also lightly lubed, which my experience from the CTX tells me is a great thing. Sure, clean it if you must. But if you break it in, it is going to be smooth and quiet, I’m betting.
Those are really enough factors for me to be interested in getting some Pixel bearings into my life.
1 Like
I actually find flat bearings to bind the best.
I’ve been throwing one of the sample pixel bearings for a couple weeks now, I like it a lot. It feels really smooth, plays pretty quiet, and performs on the same level as any Konkave/Center Trac/DS. Definitely an improvement if it’s going to come stock in CLYW yo-yos in the future.
I don’t see anything new. It is pretty much like a KonKave … and its limits (cross multiple string sections in the center). In my opinion the best profile for bearings remains the central trac, with a central flat part to accommodate multiple string sections and side slides to keep away the cord from the response system
1 Like
It’s observations like this that made me go, “Yeah, there’s GOT to be a difference,” and I really didn’t find one. Binds were the same. Layering was the same. Everything was the same. Except precession, in which profiled had an edge.
It might depend on the kind of bind you do, mind you. I have a few binds that I know the performance characteristcs of very well (mainly Guy Wright bind, Sky Bind, and a frontstyle bind with an extra Oliver Twist on it). Nothing. No differences. Again, not scientific, but I WANTED there to be a difference (Haha! Flats are so snaggy!) and there really wasn’t.
Could run the tests again, a year or so later, and see if my perceptions have sharpened and I was just missing the subtle difference. But I have confirmation bias that it’ll end up being the same.
Id like to do this test as well. Ive got enough types to try.
And as you said before, the string will play into it alot! I used to have problems with certain tricks binding up on my in the middle of the execution, to much pain and dismay (BG1). Swapped out to a thinner (cloud) and never had a problem since (that wasn’t due to my lack of tension control).
Ill try with a more focused mind next time I try out all of them, but I do still feel that flats bind better. though i do not prefer them. We shall see! I too may be missing the subtlties against each other. Im still pretty new at this (just over 1 year)
So, outside of the bearing, what is that yoyo? The Luftverk collab???
I asked about this on their facebook announcement and Steve said “No plans at the moment…maybe on a special release or two, though.-Steve”
I’d personally hope that eventually they make their way to all their yoyos. It would only make sense. If you design a bearing for your yoyo, and you have a bearing with your companies name on it, wouldn’t make sense to not use it. At least in your higher end (Canada made) releases.
Ill see if i can find that bit that made me think it was going to be… Ill post back later today if i can find it…