Not sure that I really see the point of 3d printing the parts (although scratching many geek itches, yes) when your optics are going to be a much larger cost than the mechanical mounts, and the quality of the mechanical mount is so very important.
It would be nice if that were always the case. I suspect this is very much like my electronics stuff, a $2 MMIC amp mounted in a $30 aluminum diecast box. You can blow a lot of money on chassis and component mounting.
Also, speed. Could print something where an exact model just drops in place with superglue and a perfect fit. I could probably replicate their chassis in aluminum by hand in a days work, but I'd much rather go lazy and print one. Also each engineering revision drops from "days work" to "hit print and come back later"
For example, a "cheap" 1" notch filter from Thor would run about $500, whereas a kinematic mount would be somewhere closer to $40.
Also, Raman typically is very weak, roughly 10^-6 of the laser intensity. The CCD/CMOS has to be low dark count.
The things is, if you have spent $5000 on components, why should you save couple hundreds of dollar on good optical mounts?
This 3D printed plastic base/structure will never have good stability and precision for any serious scientific application.
As far as a decent scientific bench instrument goes, we're mostly in agreement. I'd love to know if you could make a decent optomechanic system like this on a SLS with a metal substrate.
Radio's always interested me but I haven't done anything with it since high school.