Why will no other turntable beat the EMT 927?


Having owned many good turntables in my audiophile life I am still wondering why not one of the modern designs of the last 20 years is able to beat the sound qualities of an EMT 927.
New designs may offer some advantages like multiple armboards, more than one motor or additional vibration measurements etc. but regarding the sound quality the EMT is unbeatable!
What is the real reason behind this as the machine is nearly 60 years old, including the pre-versions like the R-80?
thuchan

Dear @mijostyn  : I agree almost on what you posted but that BS expression because some vintage TTs, evenm today, have excellent design merits that we can't just dimished.

 

R.

@dover You said the weakness of the 124 is the belt. I agree. In fact I was just wondering if I could build some kind of kevlar belt for it. Something more stable. Belts are definitely a problem.

Also interesting point you mentioned regarding the self correction of AC motors vs DC motors. 

@rauliruegas I've read Fremer's reviews. I can't speak for measurements using a vinyl disc but I do believe gyroscopes give pretty accurate readings and I stand by what I said.

The 3 turntables I mentioned are all direct drive but they use some kind of wizardy technology that I don't understant. They are the exception. And that's why they are the only ones to have those numbers published.

@mijostyn 

A turntable does not have timing or pace for that matter. 

Actually it does. Because as you said

A turntable just spins at 33.33 rpm as quietly and accurately as possible. A great turntable has no sound of it's own. 

But they don't. And there's the rub. Thats why they all sound different.

Instability in TT's will destroy the timing as recorded.

 

Such a broad statement...very subjective. What sounds good to you, may sound like crap to someone else. 

@dover, that is very true but in regards to the music they do not. The timing of the music is the purview of the artist. They do not play to account for speed instability of the playback device. Any deviation from a constant 33.33 is in error (assuming the lathe was not off). You are correct in that instability of the turntable can hurt the timing of the music if it is bad enough and older idler turntables are far less stable than good modern ones. Even if they are good when new wear on multiple parts will take it's toll. This may not be true of older DD table as they have fewer mechanical parts to wear. I have no idea what aging of electronic parts will do but all bearings will wear out eventually. 

@rauliruegas The most ground breaking turntable of all time was the AR XA. It broke the norm and introduced brand new technology that substantially improved playback. All turntables before it were compromised by their idler drive mechanisms which were needed to change speed with the lack of electronic motor control. By 1960 that technology had exhausted itself until they were dumped on the market for pennies on the dollar and audiophiles on a budget started tinkering around with them. My very first table was a used TD 124 and for a 13 year old audiophile it was brilliant. But, even with a good cleaning, lubing and change of idler wheels it still rumbled like a freight train. Subwoofers were still a years away so it did not matter as much. Since the XA we have direct drive tables, electronic management of belt drive tables, vacuum clamping and various new thrust mechanism, magnetic and air. If you can think of anything else please add on. 

@audioguy85 , subjective? that is a poor excuse. There is nothing or should be nothing subjective about a turntable. It's performance characteristics are easily measured. If it changes the sound it is because it has an unwelcomed resonance. This is not true of cartridges and tonearms. They can alter the sound in ways we can not easily measure. And as always most of what people think they hear has been psychologically modified.