Ready to try vinyl

Johnnantais,

I thought your posts were interesting if a little labor-intensive to read (and I'm sure to write). I don't disagree with you on principal, and I've been lurking on your Lenco forum now for a few weeks now (but now writing) with great interest. Since I don't have the time to address everything you said, I'll just bring up a few of your points I'd like to discuss:

You wrote that hi-end belt drive makers "DO have it all wrong, a case of the usual orthodox dogma not being questioned and everyone blindly following without re-examination"

So, I'm sure you are intimately aware of the R & D of all of these companies in their decisions to use belt drives, correct?

You were correct in saying that most of the TT makers on the list Judy and I compiled (very tongue in cheek I might add) don't fit into the buget of the entry-level tables we're talking of (let alone most people's bugets at all). I'm not saying that companies haven't in the past tried to sell lesser technologies as better than they are because they want to keep costs down, but I find it very hard to believe that given the high price tags of so many of these players (SME, Nottingham, Brinkman, etc.) that none of these companies have realized what you, in your infinite wisdom have, and moved to DD or idler motors. I mean, these companies are selling so few units a year for such high price tags, that they seem to jump on any even perceived tech edge they can. We weren't making that list as a set of recommedations to the original poster, but rather being smart-asses, and pointing out how unhelpful pshcyicanimals orignal post was. I never made a post saying "belt drive is better than everything else on earth and everything rotates around belt drive". Psychicanimal made a post saying belts were a waste of money and that idler/dd drives were amazing, but didn't give any examples of tables or even say why. It just seemed that was an irresponsible post, and highly unhelpful and even misleading for the original poster. Granted, we're all a bit off of topic now, and this really shouldn't be a debate over DD/idler vs. Belt.

The last point I'll address (so much for being brief, eh?) is in regards to the following comment you made: "For those who want to exercise a little thing called "independent thought" and who like hands-on experience, then I invite you to try the Lenco Challenge"

So you chided R_F_Sayles for unwarranted personal attacks, but it's midly hypocritical then to call anyone who can't be bothered making their own TT (your Lenco project) or who buys a readymade product a "slave" as you put it.
So anyone who buys a plug and play or belt drive table doesn't use independent thought? o i c.

In any case, I enjoy your Lenco project, and I haven't above, nor here, criticized the idea of DD or idler because to be honest I don't know enough about them, I was only chiding psychicanimal for his largely unsubstantiated post. I think you have some valid points, but you're a little heavy-handed/conspiracy theory about it all, no? You honestly believe that all the belt drive biggies are sticking to it because it's cheaper for them? I'm cynical of capitalism, but when you're talking about a record player that cost more than most cars, c'mon!

Johnnantais, Point taken. I found you just a bit quick on the hammer to dismiss a lot of previously held research and knowledge as simpleminded belief. True genius and raving lunacy both come from those beginnings (the ones of dismissing...). And look, if I was a bit curt, well tough, but if you feel I personally attached and/or offended you I truly apologize. I mean it. I still feel from everything I’ve seen and heard in TTs that idler-wheels will come to Hifi right after I see pigs fly! Best of luck.

re: Direct vs. Belt -- I have had more than 20 different turntables of all sorts over the last 7 years - I was "collecting" them for a while - until I got married! And here is why I agree with Johnnantais (for the most part):

What exactly does a turntable do? It's a platter spun by a motor that we put a record on. The ABSOLUTE BEST thing it can do is turn at an accurate, highly constant 33rpm and not impart any vibration to the lp. It cannot "add" anything positive to the playback. Unless you believe in voodoo (which is not uncommon here) there are only 3 factors in the performance of a turntable:

1. The degree to which it maintains a constant, accurate speed
2. The degree to which it manufactures and imparts any "noise" of it's own to the lp. More a function of the main platter BEARING quality - NOT the motor type or location. Good electric motors don't make noise and don't vibrate - bearings do! Belt drives are not relieved of having bearings.
3. The degree to which it isolates the lp from external "noise" - primarily acoustic feedback.

The Technics 1200 specs as well or better on factors 1 and 2 as any high-end belt drive ever can or will. And the 3rd factor is easily controlled by the user and the installation as much as by the design of the deck itself. And the SP-10 just blows the vast majority of them away. (The wow/flutter , speed, etc. measurements are all Google-able so lets not get into a debate about that.)

So why do so many people think they need zillion dollar turntables? IMO it's because the zillion dollar decks all have great arms and cartridges (usually matched to each other properly), whereas the older Japanese DD's that you're comparing to usually have only "acceptable" cartridges and for the most part terrible to mediocre arms with no thought applied to which cartridge was put on what arm!

My main table currently is VPI/w SME 309 arm, not a radical $$$ set-up, but by no means a cheap combo - and I don't think it sounds tremendously better than 1200 with the same cartridge mounted and properly set up. A little better sure, but going back to the original poster's question - they wanted to try out vinyl inexpensively. I'm absolutely certain that if a nice clean lp doesn't thrill 'em on Technics 1200, then it wouldn't on a TNT either.

Hi Mimberman, again I never posted I believed in a "conspiracy theory", I thought I had made myself very clear that assumptions were being made and never investigated, which means no conspiracy of the sort you mean. So, to make it short, when idler-wheel drives were murdered by a concerted effort by the press and industry (and indeed we've seen this before: a concerted effort by the press and industry to promote CDs and murder vinyl simply to increase profits, which actually happened by the press unquestionably accepting the grand claims of the profit-hungry corporations: "Perfect Sound Forever" ring a bell?) because, yes, the profits were larger in building belt-drives because they were simpler to manufacture, and also allowed smaller companies to enter into the fray (i.e. Linn) because they could never hope to start building idler-wheel drives while they COULD attach a small motor to a platter via a rubber band, then it became common "wisdom", as indeed it is largely common "wisdom" today that digital technology is superior to analogue (we vinyl lovers are dinosaurs), that belt-drives were in fact inherently superior to idler-wheel drives and direct drives. This, becoming "common wisdom" or to put it another way, dogma, became the fundamental assumption on which all later work was done. Then, it became simply development work into perfecting belt-drives, because direct drives and idler-wheel drives were simply discredited and "proven" inferior and were not to be re-examined. This is the road tread by all the legends you list. Maybe even some of them did have their doubts, but if everyone wants belt-drives, why argue, sales are assured. In fact, this type of scenario goes on now in all the sciences all the time, with new practitioners of each science being inducted into current dogmas, and never having the imagination to re-examine what has gone before. Case in point from earlier, which was my point: mankind did believe the earth revolved around the sun, until the Greeks came along. This was rectified by Copernicus, who investigated earlier writings thanks to Aristotle's diatribe against the Pythagoreans who believed the reverse. When dinosaurs were first discovered and examined, they were believed to be warm-blooded, which is now a daring new theory. And you can bet that all kinds of current theories will be supplanted by older ones revived by re-examiners.

"...none of these companies have realized what you, in your infinite wisdom have, and moved to DD or idler motors." Classic argument by authority. Given my explanation so far, then it should be clear that they did not realize this because they never questioned the fundamental assumption: belt-drives are superior (and don't deny this is the current dogma and has been for decades). And your "infinite wisdom" remark is just another "argument from athority" in a different flavour, always leveled at those who dare to question "common wisdom", as in "How dare you question all these experts?!" I dare, because I heard. My "infinite wisdom" is my ears, I trust them, and I will not deny my senses or agree 100% with a writer or designer until I've heard for myself and compared (at least, I try to live by this principle). Say what you like, a small low-torque motor is very affected by stylus drag, and a rubber band exacerbates the situation by always reacting and this reaction is not eliminated by resorting to high-mass platters but only lowered in frequency, which is clearly heard if only you would sit down and listen to a proper idler-wheeel drive. The fact that stylus drag grossly affects speed in belt-drives is in fact admitted by these designers, who devise various ways to combat it from multiple motors to the simple use of massive platters. Idler-wheel drives and DDs were designed from the initial point to eliminate stylus drag first, and in doing this, they are superior to belt-drives in various audible ways, and in the case of idler-wheel drives specifically, I believe in every way (not that DDs couldn't be further perfected). In fact, already owning both an Audiomeca turntable and an air-bearing Maplenoll at the time I first tripped over idler-wheel drives, it only took exposure to a tweaked Garrard SP25 (little cheap crappy spud, but idler wheel) to convince me, as it had slam, presence, an intense musicality and bass I never got from my belt-drives, I was convinced.

"So anyone who buys a plug and play or belt drive table doesn't use independent thought? o i c." No, this isn't what I wrote at all: those who buy belt-drives for enjoyment or in ignorance of the whole debate about DD and idlers do not fit this bill, but those who blindly defend belt-drives without having heard a properly set-up idler-wheel drive (argument from authority which is ideology not science: evidence is scientific), or to put it more simply dismiss them out of hand, do fit the bill: they are mental slaves.

"For those who want to exercise a little thing called "independent thought" and who like hands-on experience, then I invite you to try the Lenco Challenge" This is written tongue-in-cheek, but it is also a genuine challenge: test your preconceptions against a reality to see what they're worth, and free your mind. At least, even if you come out of it favouring belt-drives, you'll have come to this decision under your own steam.

And finally, to answer both you and sayles, from people who took up the challenge:

""This evening is the first chance I have had to play with the beastie. I found (it took me a little while) the Origin Live modified Rega 250 that I bought two years ago intending to mount on an Empire 208 if I ever found one. I didn't.
I also found my little used Denon 103D. An hour later we were ready to go. No plinth. I precariously balanced the Goldring on two lead shot filled plwood boxes that I made ages ago to set a pair of Carver Amazing speakers on. The speakers are long gone, but the heavy little boxes thankfully remain. Albert I don't know what TT you had before the Goldring, but my expectations were certainly not high since I have a heavily modified Linn LP 12 with an Ittok arm and Koetsu Black cartridge. I have to say that the Goldring with the lesser cartridge (the Denon 103D at $225, while a very impressive cartridge is no match for the $1,500 Koetsu), unravelled the music and separated instruments better than the Linn with the Koetsu. At first I thought that was hearing over-simplification of passages, but when I started hearing things in the foreground that were either distant on the Linn or very subdued, I knew this was not the case. Separation of lead and backing vocals and clear enunciation of words seemed better on the Goldring. I think I have to switch the Ittok and Koetsu to the Goldring to be completely fair. But then I think that there would be an even greater bias towards the Goldring."

"I am a long time Linnie. I have own LP 12's for 28 years. My current Linn has an Origin Live DC motor and a Cetech carbon fibre subchassis. On a whim I bought a GL 75 and put an Origin Live modded Rega 250 and my beloved Koetsu Black on it. Holy shit, better bass, much better leading-edge dynamics and pretty remarkable imaging. This is all without a plinth. I'm just resting this beast on two lead-filled boxes. I am about to make a decent plinth and see where it goes."

"I STILL haven't built a plinth for my GL 75, OL Rega, Koetsu Black. But I'm playing it all the time. And I get more impressed with every LP. I should mention that I went from thin, model train oil to Mobil 1 grease and then a combination of the last two. My last choice seems to be the best. When I eventually get around to building the plinth it will be on this site. Just listened to Dire Straits' "Brothers In Arms" and Little Feat "The Last Record Album". I'm hearing things that were not there AT ALL on the Linn. Buggeration. Is that possible ?"

"I fitted my old Fidelity Research FR64s, that my Linn dealer condemned for having worn bearings in 1996. Of course the bearings are fine - some people will say anything to sell a tonearm! First cartridge in is my re-tipped Koetsu Black, again mid-80s vintage. I have had a fantastic evening's listening. The Lenco is everything claimed here and more. As forecast by Jean, there is bass in abundance (not a noted Koetsu characteristic), fantastic dynamics, energy, slam, PRaT, call it what you will, and the detail and clarity are stunning. I have been listening to some serious money turntables over the last few months and the budget Lenco beats most of them - I'm not sure yet whether it's better than a Galibier I heard a few weeks ago but it's pretty close. I'll be better able to comment when I put the DL-103 on the FR64. There's no doubt in my mind that the Lenco is preferable to the Teres 265 and 360, Nottinham Spacedeck and Hyperspace, SME 10, Kuzma Stabi and of course my old Linn."

Now all these fellows who took up the Lenco Challenge in a scientific and fun spirit don't sound too disappointed, do they? Take this fellow's example: "Johnnantais, in response to your 02-20-04 posting: I´m the guy who wrote the VA post you quoted entirely without mentioning your source. I just fooled around with my L78 i just used for 78s and reported my findings at this point. Indeed, with the standard plinth and arm. Not very nice of you to accuse me of suffering from the Dogma that´s obviously becoming an obsession for you. But i´m a good sport and i take up the challenge! I´ve been fooling around with Thorens TT for ± 2 years, stuffing them with damping materials, building heavy plinths etc. I´m already mailing with Tjoeb about the Decca arm(I´m living in the Netherlands, they´re round the corner!). And i´m going to make a plinth, MDF, birch multiply, we´ll see. One question, do you keep the original springs? With the foam inside?" Now check out his website at http://members.home.nl/fmunniksma/lencol78.htm

Johnnantais
LOL