Direct Drive turntables

Hi, has DD a "theoretical" advantage over belt drive that will translate into better sounds? I am confused by opinions out there. Some say DD has a characteristic livelier/dynamic sound. Some say the type of drive mechanism really doesnt matter so long as the platter spins and vibrations are taken care of.
Happy NY.

Has anyone compared the m5g with the gps Monaco?

While I am certainly not an universal admirer of direct drive in TT-design, I nevertheless would like to give due credit to a highly underrated design of the late 1970ies and early 1980ies.
Mitchell A. Cotters implementation of Technics dd (not that great...) and the bigger Denon dd (much better here) into his B-1 suspended plinth resulted in a work of genius (while pretty ugly looking..).
I am right now restoring a B-1 for a friend and have set-up one at a friends place early last year.
This smart and superbly damped and VERY effectively suspended (with very low resonance frequency !!) TT shows what a dd TT is capable off, if the brain behind is not guided by religion or "visions", but by a clear and logic mind a blue book written by an engineer understanding the physical demands of record playback.
Sonically, the Cotter B-1 w/Denon dd (with its stock Fidelity Research FR-64s or FR-66s..... M.A. Cotter did officially recommend using these 2 tonearms only with his B-1, as they did represent the best in his eyes and ears) is the very equal of ANY TT around today above 80 hz.
At any price.
Fast, very dynamic and with superb transient and low level detail. Its mid and lower bass - while still transparent - is however too low in weight and punch compared to TT's with high platter mass.
But this is the only sonic drawback and it is well shared by the vast majority of all other turntables of our day.
Anyone really interested in TT design and with a mild interest to find out what dd in turntable design can sound like should really try to give this big monster of years long gone by a serious listen. Make sure you listen to it set-up the way it was intended to be used - with FR-64/66s and FR-7 cartridge.
And with a 5-6 mm thick PVC/Metacrylate mat firmly attached to it platter and a good clamp (Sota Reflex or similar).
One of the smarter TT designs of audio history.

And I absolutely agree with Lewm, T_bone and Johnnyb53 - dd tt's are and very important part of audio history and were THE record playback in disco, home audio and broadcast since the mid 70ies (and still are in 2 of the 3 places..).
Plinth, suspension and smart and consequent applications of physics were and are rare - then and now.
And yes - the platter mass and its fundamental benefits for the "sound" of a turntable.
The one big, inherent drawback of dd turntables.

Alectiong:

"Hi, has DD a "theoretical" advantage over belt drive that will translate into better sounds? I am confused by opinions out there. Some say DD has a characteristic livelier/dynamic sound. Some say the type of drive mechanism really doesnt matter so long as the platter spins and vibrations are taken care of.
Happy NY."

So all technology aside here is what I "hear." I have two reference points, my personal journey, going from a SME 20/2 with SME IV.Vi arm to a Grand Prix Monaco with Tri Planar arm. Cartridge and tonearm cable remeained constant (Lyra skala and Purst Audio Designes Proteus Provectus). The Monaco hits the notes with the often referred to PRaT. Piano for the first time sounds like a hammer hitting a string. Impact, dynamic then lingers until the string finishes vibrating. The SME, which is a very good belt drive really missed the impact/dynamic it was blurry in comparison. I hear this trait over and over in my listening. It seems to marry what is good about digital, but keeping all the stuff I love about vinyl. Many vinyl purist won't like this description, but I think it's appropriate. I did feel like the SME table and arm had a little more "weight" on certain notes, but at the expense of detail, transparency and impact. This maybe arm signature between the SME IV.Vi arm and TriPlanar. I never tried the SME arm on the Grand Prix table, the combo with the Tri was just so much better, I never looked back.

The second is via a friend. Going from a Walker belt drive to a Technics SP10 mk 3 in a custom plinth. Similar result to my experience above. He used a SME 312s arm on the technics.

So 2 great belt drives, 2 direct drives, one brand new techonology one the best of vintage. Both owners are very happy DD converts...