Is Direct Drive Really Better?

Hi Zaikesman.

No my comments had nothing to do with your posts. I had a look at http://de.geocities.com/bc1a69/index_eng.html after reading one of your posts.

My post is indicative of the frustration I have with folks who believe that a consensus (or should I say chorus) of opinions constitute a fact.

I have spent some time with an idler wheel (Thorens TD124) and the sound was really not up to scratch. Compared to a TD125 I had at the same time it was downright bad.

However, the after reading up on DD tables I think there may be something to them. The points laid out in the web pages and your posts do sound plausible. Personally my only preference is for sound I enjoy, not BD over DD. I need a project for summer so I want to see if I can lay my hands on something like a Denon DP6000 and see what they are about.

My only concern is that due to the fact that these tables have not been in production for a while, repairs may be an issue if the need arises.

Regards
Paul

I don't see why at least a very close approximation of a controlled setting which would allow a one-to-one-to-one comparison of table/arm/cart combos could not be accomplished.

Of course THAT could be accomplished. But that tells you absolutely nothing about whether belt or DD is superior. It only tells you whether one combination sounds better than another. If that's all you want to know (and for most audiophiles most of the time, it probably is) that's fine. Just don't draw unwarranted conclusions from any such comparison.

Thanks, Zaikesman, I was wondering about that taste until you pointed to my foot in my mouth. I did, rather pointedly, ask for opinions.
I've read some very good arguments on all three sides and it seems that not much has been determined about superiority or inferiority. As someone said, the head to head comparison is not something that can be done with any precision, measurements are just measurements and all sonic evaluations are subjective, so it seems to come down to one of those Joe Louis vs. Mohammed Ali debates where everything is based on projection and extrapolation.

I was fishing for a consensus of some kind and it appears that presently there isn't any but as I said earlier I sense a developing inclination back toward DD and maybe 4yanx is correct to call it "buzz". Nonetheless, it may be that the fracture in our ranks has something to do with "buzz" vulnerability. It may just be that mine is pretty high.
I've been using a Well Tempered Reference table for 12 years but in the past month or so I have acquired an SP-10, an SL 1100a, an SL 150 MK II,and a Luxman PD 441 for evaluation. The WTT is for sale now and I'm looking forward to evaluating the buzz. A friend has predicted that I will find the Luxman to be the best of what I have. Has anyone else used one?

Pabelson, if you think that the whole thing boils down to speed accuracy and rumble, you are sadly mistaken. Internal resonance within the drive system and resistance to external vibration and the period and frequency of those vibrations are just three more of the various factors that come into play.

I'm not talking about "the whole thing"; I'm talking only about factors for which one drive system or the other has an obvious theoretical advantage. So if you want to convince me that I'm mistaken (and I might be--I certainly can't claim any real technical expertise here), then the first thing you have to do is offer a plausible reason why one drive system would be presumptively better than the other for each of the three factors you mentioned.

Even if the factors you mention are relevant to the belt/DD question, I suspect the speed accuracy/rumble tradeoff is still the dominant factor. If one drive system could be shown to be superior in minimizing both speed inaccuracy and rumble, I supect this debate would be over. I seriously doubt the factors you mentioned could tip the scales in the other direction.

Of course THAT could be accomplished. But that tells you absolutely nothing about whether belt or DD is superior. It only tells you whether one combination sounds better than another. If that's all you want to know (and for most audiophiles most of the time, it probably is) that's fine. Just don't draw unwarranted conclusions from any such comparison.

So what would you rather have, something that sounds best to you or something that the numbers say is "superior" to something else? The definition of "superior", at least im my music room, is what sounds best, not what some imperical set of measurements say. A bucng of the 70's amps were so good by the numbers that they should have been creating live music - unfortuantely, many of those same amps sounded like crap. I would draw a conclusion that something was better based on the sound it made everytime and look at a decision based on measurements as the unwarranted choice. But, that's just me, maybe.

Drubin, I don't think accepting what one hears as true mean abdicating reason and critical thinking. Just saying that measurements can lie. When they do, THAT is whan you NEED reason to tell you the REAL truth! ;)