Turnable database with TimeLine

VICTOR TT-81
This turntable displays the same (if not better) accuracy as the TT-101.....
I believe the difference in the speed accuracy and consistency WITHOUT load compared to that WITH load is of some importance....and that's why I like to see the Timeline mark playing the record compared to NOT playing.....
The reason I believe it's important is that the musical waveform on the vinyl record can be quite benign on soft unmodulated passages (not to mention pauses in the musical content)...whilst with loud, heavily modulated passages...the stylus drag can be quite severe?
If there is a marked difference in a turntable's performance between playing a record and not playing.....there must be a gradient in the speed accuracy when faced with benign passages as opposed to modulated ones?

At any rate.....despite what opponents of DD turntables like to say about their sound and 'speed correction seeking'......there is no physical evidence of it with the Timeline which is rock solid.

Halcro, that's an impressive video which supports your point. Clearly the DD Victors and Technics Sp10s show the best results in this limited database. It makes me wonder why anyone would listen to any other drive types and why there is not more demand for modern versions of the Victor. I suppose many people feel there are other important factors in addition to speed accuracy and consistency.

I would be very interested to see a study which examines how much speed variation is audible and then how much more can there be to become distracting. In my experience, the Timeline can show minute variations to perfect speed which I can not hear.

Thanks Peter,
I share your wonderment........
It's unusual...and refreshing.....to hear someone in the 'belt-drive camp', accepting the superiority of DD turntables...at least in relation to speed consistency and control?

Before the visual proof of stylus drag and speed consistency was afforded by the introduction of the Sutherland Timeline...........most proponents of the belt-drive argument insisted that 'stylus drag' was a myth....or at least was rendered mute if the platter of the belt-drive was massive enough to create enough inertia to be unaffected by it.
This has clearly been disproven.
The argument was also put....and is still....that the speed-correction circuitry of the DD turntables meant that they were NEVER turning at the correct speed....but were always SEEKING and CORRECTING?
This argument was a logical (if misunderstood) interpretation of the actual functioning of the correction circuits of the TOTL DD models.....and conveniently overlooked the motor controllers of belt-drive turntables and THEIR similar....but time delayed (by the belt) correction circuitry?

Today, still.....you will read from experienced audiophiles how they can "hear" the effects of this speed correction circuitry in DD turntables.
Funny how no listeners at my place can point out the DD Victor from the belt-drive Raven under 'blind' testing.....but boy can they tell you which turntable they prefer :-)

In my experience, the Timeline can show minute variations to perfect speed which I can not hear.

I agree.....but, by the same token.....as my TT-101 began suffering its breakdown this week....I could hear when the speed dropped to 33.32RPM, a speed change of .03%.
So the answers to your question may indeed be complex?

Ignoring subjectivity......the single most important function of any turntable I maintain.....has got to be speed accuracy/consistency.
And for that...on the evidence of the Timeline.....the DD turntables reign supreme.
The subjectivists can please themselves :-)

Halcro, That is interesting. If your blindfolded friends can't identify the DD Victor from the BD Raven, but they have a clear preference for one over the other, what is it that they like? I must not understand your point.

I would also suggest that another primary function of a TT, perhaps equal or even more important than speed is the ability for it to provide a stable platform for the stylus to track the groove. This is so fundamental, that people forget about it or take it for granted. Imagine if the stylus moved relative to the groove. This function to provide the platform for a stable stylus, in conduction with the arm, is fundamental. I would also argue that the turntable must not introduce vibrations or noise to the system AND isolate it from external noise. These three functions are primarily responsible for the superior sonics of my SME and many other fine turntables.

I agree.....but, by the same token.....as my TT-101 began suffering its breakdown this week...

???Say it ain't so, Halcro. I hope there are people you know who can restore it. Or, were you perhaps the one who won the ql10 on the bay last week?