2. analog
  3. 128631-117

My personal experience with Direct Drive versus Belt Drive

This is my personal , yet limited experience, with a DD versus Belt Drive. This A/B took place in the same system. with literally the same tonearm. I am choosing not to mention brands at this point. I feel by keeping the brand out of the discussion, anyone who contributes to the the thread (myself included), can be a bit more forthcoming. I am not big on audiophile jargon, so I will keep this short and sweet. I started with DD, in a system which I was very familiar with. The room of course, was different. The DD struck me as near perfect. I could hear the starting and stopping on a dime, and the near perfect timing that many have associated with the DD.  It didn't take long at all for me to conclude this was not my cup of tea. It satisfied my brain, but didn't move my heart. Maybe I was used to the imperfect sound of belt drives, and it was indeed that imperfection, that made for an emotional experience. Who knows? (-: Fast forward to the belt drive.... Again, same actual arm. It sounded more analog to me. Decay was much more easy to hear, along with subtle spatial cues. Was it the less than perfect timing, that was allowing me to now hear these things I could not with the DD?  I have no clue! What I was sure about was the emotion of the music had returned.
fjn04
harold-not-the-barrel
895 posts
 
^ Exactly all can sound good, it´s just a question of implementation.
lewm and hiho, with all due respect I just get the impression that you are living in a world of theories and your illusions.
My direct rim drive does the trick for me. And I will try tape/string drive some day too.
lewm
13,182 posts
 
Harold, Theory is all I've got.  I just look at how rim drives work, and I consider what might be good or bad about it.  Rim drive itself seems to have come about as a band-aid available to belt-drive makers who feel pressure to offer an alternative.  Teres led the way in doing that, I think. But in another way, you are quite correct; I would be out of line to say that I know how YOUR particular rim drive turntable sounds.  It may be great, and I may be completely off base.  I did not mean to slur your choice of turntable.  I can speak about belt-, idler-, and direct-drive with more of a sense of authority, because I've heard more than one example of each type in my system, but even there, anyone's particular experience must be limited.  I don't claim to know it all, but I may sound that way some times.

hiho
451 posts
 
harold-not-the-barrel: "hiho, with all due respect I just get the impression that you are living in a world of theories and your illusions. My direct rim drive does the trick for me."

As long as it does the trick for you, that's all that matters.

I never said it doesn't work. It's just more demanding on the execution. Looking at pictures of your turntable, it uses a solid pulley and the platter rim is a softer material. That's a good solution to the issue I mentioned. The designer knows his theory and addressed it. No illusions there. 

fjn04 OP
1,561 posts
 
This little voice tells me, It's time to start a new thread. (-:
stringreen's avatar
stringreen
6,475 posts
 
When I modified my belt drive to rim drive, it was a definite improvement...clearly audible.  From the instant the cartridge touched the record, the bass was more solid, more clarity in the mids, even it seemed to have improved the dynamics. 
More to discover