TECHNICS SL1200 MKII.......THE REAL FACTS

Hellenic-vanagon,
Yes, this was a fun read to be sure - but it did omit a crucial control; the cartridges were not matched. This was a major flaw in attempting to compare the turntables themselves. Brent, in the last paragraph, does make mention of this, but more should be made of this point.

The facts have been known for a very long time: every cartridge and arm combination will produce resonances at various frequencies. These resonances will greatly alter the resultant sound, either to your preference or away from it.

Add to this the fact that the speakers in use will have had a specific 'voice', and the problems compound so much that it becomes impossible to know exactly what is being discovered. In fact the whole exercise might just have been an example of equipment matching and no more.

In any scientific comparison like the above it is simply essential to minimise the variables, otherwise the results are useless.

So my conclusion is there was no useful conclusion. This is in no way meant to criticize or praise any of the equipment under 'test'; no doubt they all had their attributes, but we're really none the wiser:-)

I owned a heavily modified SL1200 MKII:
Jelco SA-750d arm
Funk Achromat
Mapleshade threaded brass footers
KAB-PS outboard power supply
KAB-strobe disabler
Clearaudio headshell leads

Not bad at all and lived happily with it for a few years. The REAL FACT is that, to my ears, it didn't sound as satisfying as my current heavily modified Rega RP3. Extremely light and rigid with breathtaking reproduction of music with the right isolation.

The general rule is that a belt drive can be more stable and isolated than direct drive.

Belt drive should provide better isolation from the motor. It's also believed to filter out flutter by being elastic.

In theory, belt drive should have the lowest rumble of the two, with Direct having less wow and flutter.

Belt drive usually works with a rubber belt or band that drives the platter or sub-platter from the motor spindle. This method should have low rumble but a higher risk of wow (slow speed fluctuations) as the belt stretches and tensions. This can be effectively controlled with a decent power supply unit.

Direct drives should have little wow and rumble, but can exhibit flutter (high-speed fluctuations) if not correctly controlled. Some (like yours) have crystal-controlled speed generators and produce excellent results.

As to what is best... I don't think that will ever be answered.

It all boils down to taste and synergy.

Happy listening!

Ok, not sure why I bother in this rather circular argument but I will add my 2 cents.

Every direct drive turntable I've read about and seen measured has lower wow & flutter and better rumble figures than most any belt drive unit. They also have in the magnitude of 10-100 times better speed stability. Now both properly made belt drive and direct drive turntables will have most/all sonic flaws be below general audibility. So we are talking for typically a debate only.

Direct drive turntables DO NOT have the motor in any direct contact with the platter. Any vibrations of the motor can only come through the bearing mount and the rest of the chassis. Engineers can reduce or mostly eliminate much of that. Since a direct drive motor turns 1:1 speed any first order vibrations will be at 33.3 or 45 rpm only. Well below what most of us will normally hear, at least as problematic.

Belt drive if engineered well can provide superb playback but all belt drive motors are coupled to the platter, yes a rubber belt acts as an isolator but it does attach the motor to the platter. On top of that most belt drive motors are 300 or 600rpm design. The vibrations they give in the first order will be at 300 and 600 rpm and if not filtered out/down well may be heard by normal human hearing.

This is why again pretty well any good direct drive turntable measures better W&F and lower rumble numbers.

I've owned both drives, both can sound great and can provide years of enjoyment but quite simply if engineered properly a direct drive turntable is a superior playback machine for all crucial specs, W&F, speed stability, affects due to temp. and humidity and rumble. It is not even a competition. To argue against such makes no sense to me.

This said as long as the engineering understands things, a belt drive turntable can provide a sonic pleasure that most any human can enjoy and will be generally incapable to hear any of the playback back ills we do not like such as W&F, speed stability problems and rumble issues. But belt drive requires more routine maintenance such as replace the of belts due to use, and age. Belt drivers do not like huge temp. and humidity ranges and many lack torque to deal with stylus drag in groove modulations. The question is can this stylus drag in groove modulation be heard? Well that is another rather circular argument, much like debating $2000 power cords vs the $5.00 ones.

I have a classic, high end, vintage, quartz locked, direct drive turntable. Impeccably engineered when the Made In Japan Corps had huge amounts of cash to R&D these behemoths. It's has impeccable speed stability, suffers from no cogging nonsense, has superior W&F measured less than .025% wrms/.04% Din. It has a measured rumble of >78db. It has a speed stability measure at <.002%. Set up properly and used properly it makes no audible room incursion noises, it's dead silent as a drive system on LP playback noise. It's near maintenance free and I will put it up against any other turntable made. I'm not saying it will equal or best all, but that it will not be embarrassed by any be they regular priced models or even uber high end ones.

Sorry folks I once began to fall in to this higher end, audiophile stuff (err, mucho crappola) and eventually realized too much of it is snake oil. I'm a hi-fi buff and anal about care and use of all my gear. I have very good hearing and I am a rather critical listener to music. I am human and not perfect so as such these flaws affect listening and pleasure of music. I put good money for value and I do not (sorry if this offends) delude myself in to a world of uber high end, too much audiophile snake oil. But if such works for others SO BE IT! IT'S YOUR MONEY!

I very much agree with your views on direct drive. I disagree with your view on the uber high end. Yes, it is expensive and probably overpriced. But some of it is actually really good stuff. It just depends on the manufacturer, the engineering, and the type of people that run the operations. Imo, the really good companies do not indulge in the snake oil business. It's true there's a lot of dubious marketing involved, but it's up to the consumer to see through that. And as you said, "it's your money." The point is to be happy and put together a system that brings forth a very satisfying musical experience!

As to high end, I totally understand why many may be enamored by it and as long as it's money one can afford to spend it's ok! I believe in the value to cost ideals though. I do not buy low end junk but I also do not see the value in the diminishing returns that uber high end gives in terms of performance over the multitude of quality gear at lower prices. Of course as audio jewelry of uber high end, well that's another discussion on said value or lack there may be.

The audiophoolery stuff though abounds in this hobby/adventure. I hate the snake oil crap that succeeds in taking money from otherwise regular peoples pockets. I have fallen even slightly for some of this snake oil crap. I've learned my lesson on it all.