Perhaps this is what Halcro is referring to: https://patents.google.com/patent/US4888564A/en?q=phase&q=lock+loop&oq=phase+lock+loop. From a brief glance, it looks like what is described in the tt101's service manual. Perhaps it is related to the pitch control capabilities that the tt101 and tt81 possess and their other turntables, e.g. tt 71, don't. I leave it to those with superior technical minds to render judgment.
For those who prefer their information concatenated with pretty pictures, Vinyl Engine has several jvc brochures from the late 70's which describe the merits of their line of quartz turntables (along with the 'numbers' for each turntable in a convenient side by side format).
One other tidbit relating to the differences between the tt101 and the tt 81/71 is this: only the 101 has a coreless motor. If one is to praise Technics for utilizing this type of motor in their new design (they are terribly late to the game, no?), then one should acknowledge at the very least that the 101 should sound different, and likely better, than its siblings. To dismiss the 101 after listening only to its siblings therefore strikes me as a logical error.
For those who prefer their information concatenated with pretty pictures, Vinyl Engine has several jvc brochures from the late 70's which describe the merits of their line of quartz turntables (along with the 'numbers' for each turntable in a convenient side by side format).
One other tidbit relating to the differences between the tt101 and the tt 81/71 is this: only the 101 has a coreless motor. If one is to praise Technics for utilizing this type of motor in their new design (they are terribly late to the game, no?), then one should acknowledge at the very least that the 101 should sound different, and likely better, than its siblings. To dismiss the 101 after listening only to its siblings therefore strikes me as a logical error.