Is Direct Drive Really Better?

In that case, Seandtaylor, there's only one winner - my Lenco GL75 idler wheel tt from the 60's cost me $200 after making a heavy CLD plinth for it. I sold my well set up Garrard 401, and Thorens TD160 belt drive as they were substantially worse in every way (though I wonder if the gap may have been closer with the Garrard if it had a heavy plinth also). Then I read an article in Hi Fi World magazine in which David Price (editor) trumpetted the 401 over his favorite belt drive Michell Orbe (at $5000). Heavyweight knockout or WHAT????!!! i am still amazed by my tt and endorse everything that johnantais says in his last post on the Building high end tt's at home despot thread.

Macro

I think it would be unwise to make such a conclusion based simply on a number of responses on this thread. The almost universal employment of belt drive in high end tables is more than just a mere coincidence.

A poster indicated that the use of belt drive is mostly due to cost, rather than outright sonic performance. That may very well be true, but I then would have expected to see a few more direct drives available considering the tens of thousands of dollars some tables retail for.

Regards Paul

Goldmund made a direct drive table and I've heard that the final version of the Rockport was DD. A poster above mentioned the Monaco turntable that appears poised to surpass all existing turntables in measurements and sonics. The Technics SL 1200 must by now be one of the best selling tables of all time. All these things point toward a degree of superiority.
I think we were led astray by the audio press when we started to prefer belt drive categorically. I'll be interested to see if a cost no object rim drive appears. Or the long rumored Bose chain drive diesel table with direct reflecting mirrored platter mat and Gabriel suspension. And long overdue -- they intend to offer a left handed tonearm with organic butter damping.
I can't wait to see Fremer gush over that one.