Ready to try vinyl

Here the idler/DD TT's beats any belt drive design ( including the Walker ). I own four belt drive TTs, three SP 10MK2, two DP80s and one DP75 Denon's. In the past I was owner of: SP10MK3 and a Denon DP 100 ( please don't ask why I don't own today these two TTs. I don't want to remember it ).

Raul, although I frequently agree with your writings, we are very far apart on this topic.

Having owned multiple direct drive and idler wheel drive design turntables, I am aware of their strengths. No question their speed accuracy is uncanny, but there are a few exquisitely engineered belt drive turntables that overcome this technical obstacle.

The Walker represents the pinnacle of this engineering, maintaining flawless speed accuracy and control that equals the idler wheel models while maintaining such virtues as adjustable air suspension system, air bearing non-resonant platter and integrated linear tracking arm with adjustable pressure air bearing.

Understand, I was one of the first to compliment Johnnantais and throw my support behind him when his Lenco thread was begun. In spite of my admiration of the Lenco and Garrard idler wheel designs, there is no contest between these and the Walker.

We can banter back and forth on this all day, so I will just say that you're entitled to your opinion and that I don't share your view. This, based on my own experimentation over the years with hundreds of turntables.

How many Mexican pesos is a Walker?

Dear Albert: I think that I don't explain the speed issue in a right way.

+++++ " : ACCURATE AND HIGHLY CONSTANT SPEED ( 33/45rpm in the short and long run ).

Here the idler/DD TT's beats any belt drive design ( including the Walker ). " +++++

If I can remember the Walker speed accuracy is 0.002%: a really splendid figure, but the SP 10M2 is half that of the Walker: 0.001% and the SP 10MK3 is only 0.0001%.

I agree with you on your statement: +++++ " The Walker represents the pinnacle of this engineering... " +++++

But that is not the point. My point is very simple:

" A Walker DD system beats a Walker belt drive system ", if only for the better speed accuracy of the DD design.

Albert, this is part of what I already post and maybe you loose to read:

+++++ " This single subject: " ACCURATE AND HIGHLY CONSTANT SPEED ", ( where everything the same ) do the difference between a belt drive system against a DD system, where the DD system beats the belt drive system. " +++++.
You can note: ( where everything the same ).
Your statement that the Walker is superior to a standard Lenco is out of place: of course that is superior.

I know that I don't have your wide experience with hundreds of TTs ( like you say ) and my reference to Walker TT was not against the Walker or against any Walker owner like you. As I told you my point is a simple one.

Regards and enjoy the music.
Raul.

OK then, your comments are based on specification posted by Technics, builder of the SP10 MK3.

If that number is correct, perhaps speed accuracy is not as important as it seems.

Or perhaps the whole turntable and arm package is more important than just speed accuracy, assuming Technics has stated speed accuracy properly.

Many pieces of equipment that are excellent on paper do not necessarily sound excellent . For instance, Technics also builds some integrated amplifiers that have amazingly low distortion specification but sound pretty dismal against tube based amps from Atma-Sphere, VTL or Audio Research, all of which have higher distortion numbers.

I have owned several direct drive tables and auditioned the Technics hundreds of times when I sold them. I was never impressed enough with their performance to consider them for state of the art playback. Of course I was going by sound, not the specification sheet.

Hi Albert: I think that I can't explain me or you loose my point:

+++++ " " A Walker DD system beats a Walker belt drive system .. " +++++

That's all.

I'm not a fanatic of the " numbers ", I only take care about where they are critical and in a TT that number is critical and ( EVERYTHING THE SAME ) push the balance in favor of the TT with the best number. Simple as that.

Albert, you post:

+++++ " Many pieces of equipment that are excellent on paper do not necessarily sound excellent. " ++++++

and I agree with that, but I insist: that's is not the point. Sorry.

I don't want to open the door for a direct comparison between the Walker an a SP 10MK3/MK2 up-graded. But we can do it, if you want.

I have two plinths/frame for my Denon's/Technics, one from solid green marble ( 40+kg ) and one from solid natural onyx ( same weight ), btw: beautiful frames.. I have a neumatic suspension footers for those plinths. The plinth function not only like the frame TT but it is the arm board too. I can mount any of my SAECs tonearms or I can do and additional hole for other tonearm. I have a vacuum hold down platter mat for the Technics TT. You have a KRSP and I have another one. Maybe some one that is reading this thread can borrow us a SP 10 MK3, but if not the SP 10 MK2 is ok.

Albert tell me how, when and where do you want to do it.

Regards and enjoy the music.
Raul.