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
Dev, I apologize. I should not have stuck my nose into the conversation between you and Win. Win is more than capable of defending himself, if he should choose to do so. I guess I took some umbrage at the tone of your questioning, rather than the questions themselves. Similar to the tone of your response to me, rather than its content, and then to Mike Lavigne.

It's probably fair to say that Win does not "make" the motor to his turntable. He freely admits he did not design or make the motor controller. And I am sure someone else cuts the slate pieces from blocks of slate, and some water-jet facility probably makes the final shapes and holes. Perhaps Win only assembles and calibrates those discrete parts. OK? Point taken.
Its always a fair question to ask how one knows how a particular component in an audio system is contributing to the end results.

Listening to a system only indicates what each of the components used is CAPABLE of doing in that particular configuration, not how the individual parts sound in general.

Its useful information but one should be careful about jumping to general conclusions about specific components. Turntable A may be the winner in system A. That probably is a good indicator that it is a strong competitor but does not mean that it will perform equally well in system B.

An analogy is that a baseball player may lead the league in batting in stadium A, but fall well behind the leaders in stadium B. IF they are among the leaders in multiple stadiums (the more the merrier), however, that is probably a good indicator that the player is pretty good.
Dev,

you make a fair point about telling what is doing what outside of direct comparisons.

that said; when an unfamiliar system sounds crummy, who knows why? but when an unfamiliar system sounds very good, particularly a vinyl sourced system, i believe some things can be learned. either the speed is good or it's not. either the music has flow and energy or it does not. and familiar pressings reveal plenty about noise levels and such.

this weekend at the Newport Show i heard a number of rooms where the system sounded good but i did not hear the 'magic' in the vinyl front end, and other rooms where i heard quite a bit of 'magic' from a vinyl front end 'through' a less capable system. last year at the Newport Show i wrote of my impressions of taking one Lp around to 10+ rooms and hearing one same cut from all those systems. yes; no ultimate truth was revealed but lots of pretty good ideas were percieved.

i had heard the OMA system for a couple of years running at RMAF prior to that year, so i had a bit of a feel for it. and i had been living with three turntables at that time and paying very close attention to how various turntables were sounding then.

so while i agree with you in general principle, i am confident that my impression of the Saskia at the 2008 RMAF was useful to me and worth sharing.

i respect your right to dismiss it. it might have been better for me to have qualified my impression of the Saskia from that 2008 show.
"either the speed is good or it's not."

That's easily measured and determined. $150 Japanese turntables from the seventies used strobe lights as indicators. Most decent tables in good working order had good speed control. The most common problem was belt drives with dirty or defective belts, usually an easy fix. I heard many tables and was able to recognize speed issues to some degree by listening but not always with enough precision to detect minor speed problems.

"either the music has flow and energy or it does not"

This is one I do not understand. Is this a speed thing again? Is it dynamics? If the latter, the table itself has little to do with it. The overall phono setup and system as a whole is what matters. The cartridge matters a lot more than the table itself. IT has to have good performance in general and especially with the specific tonearm on that table to be truly great.

"and familiar pressings reveal plenty about noise levels and such."

For a reference point, my 30 year old Linn Axis that cost me about $600 new at the time is still as dead quiet as my digital with good quality records in good condition. Again, setup of the rig and quality of the vinyl are the main factors, not so much just the table itself.

Things like these are why it never surprises me when a seemingly meager or ancient device on the grand scale of things perform like champs. Ability of the owner/user to make good equipment choices and get things set up right is probably the biggest factor of all with phono.
Dear Mapman, my experience suggests there's more to speed control than watching those built-in strobes. But I agree that cost of the tt is no parameter by which to judge it, either.