fsonic, I too am in disagreement with Mijostyn's bald pronouncements, on some occasions, first because he is sometimes (but not all the time) wrong, and second because he fails to include three little words, after delivering a broadside, "in my opinion". That in itself is a bit provocative. However, it is his intention to drop bombs, which is what just happened with respect to idler drive. Just take it with a grain of salt; you are one of many audiophiles who prefer idler drive turntables, which in itself is testimony to their virtues. He dislikes direct drive, as well. This does not deter me one iota from my chosen preference for same. In fact, he ONLY likes suspended belt drives. I wouldn't have one in my system, if the suspension consists of springs. I would also take issue with the notion that no one ever contradicts Mijostyn. That is simply not the case. He usually takes it well. He is actually quite knowledgeable and experienced, so it is folly to criticize him on that basis alone.
As regards idler drive motors, and particularly the Garrard motor, Mark Kelly, a definite 301 aficionado, used to point out regularly that although the motor does consume Watts, compared to other TT motors, it is in fact not that high in torque output. Audiophiles confuse power consumption with power output. What accounts for the immediacy and dynamics of the 301 sound is I think the directness of the idler drive, the very low compliance of the drive system, rather than the essential power of the motor.