Platter Upgrade for Garrard 301

Lewm,I am glad that at list somebody 'get it' regarding
Pierre Lurne (you spelled it correctly). But I have no
idea how you 'get' the conclusion. I was explicite with my
reference to the platter and the bearing design (aka the
complexity) and so far I know even an Gerrard 301 needs
one. I even stated that the platter is 'the most important part' of an TT.I deed not mention 'belt' or other drive types.
I am a big fan of Lurne but I discovered dat Kuzma is even
better so I sold the Meca J1 and bought an Kuzma Stabi Reference. What your experience with Lurnes turntables was Ican't comment on unless you experinced Audiomeca J1.
Cheers

I would agree that the Kuzma Stabi Reference is a superb choice. Don't recall the model name of the Lurne' that I once auditioned, but I do think it was an early effort. Anyway, peace be with you.

Mikelavigne. There is doubtless great beauty in and joy
from the artistic descriptions that we call literature.
But as Frege clirified to us there is some difference with,say, science.So he wrote hes 'Sense and reference' so
that an writer my compose an beatuful story about,say,
Pegasus without worry about the 'bearer' of this name
(aka the reference).So look with me,if you care,to the
beaty of the sentences Mike composed:
"but 'not fully satisfied'with the Rockport is not the
answer the question.curiosity and wanting to be involved
with a fun direction is most of it..."
I was realy moved and longed to join the club.
But then came an sentence with 'entailment' in logical
sence:'after I have fully experinced what Technics and
Garrard have to offer the we will see...'.
The 'entailment' is,it seems to me,the expectation,hope or
even the 'pretention' to surpass the engineers from Rockport by the force of hoping,so to speak.
I tryd to help the 'adventure' by providing some 'theoretical grounding' and refered to Lurne,an
physicist who wrote about 'design philosophy' for TT AND
the PLATTER but nobody was interested.
So my mind made some kind of an leap to an French cardinal
and 'the lady'.
The lady:'Sire is it an sin that I admire my own beauty
all day long?'
Richelieu:'ceartanly not my lady,ceartanly not.An illusion
is not a sin'.

Cheers

Nandric, Great post. You've added a little high class culture to my day. That Richelieu was a card. (Means "comedian" in English slang.) But don't worry about Mike; he knows very well what he is doing and why.

Lewn. I admire the capability of Mike to compose or produce
beautiful sentences (I assume he is an writer).
But the issue between us was the opposition between Rockport and Garrard 301 'project'.I.e. not about my
worry about Mike.
So we have the so-called 'initial conditions' or the state
of affairs at present.
Jean made a kind of contribution about(present) 'knowledge
and compability' but sayd nothing about the 'capability'.
Weisselk used the metaphor of the 'Baby and the Bathwater'
to warn about the 'Baby' (aka 'save the Baby).
So the 'picture' one can see or can deduce about the state
of affairs is,at least, very confused.
I used,so to speak, the logical approach and analysed the
statements made. So for me there was the implication that
the 'club' intends,hopes,etc to surpass the engeenirs who
made the Rockport without ,say, the necessary qualifications to realize such an project. I.e. those are
'mechanical matters' that must 'obey' phisical Laws and
are as such not something 'subjective' in the sense of
our 'intending','hoping for'.etc.
So x can hope that y in some garage can produce an better
platter then the engeneers by Rockport but this is,at least, very problematic.
BTW the issue is not about persons but about the arguments.
Cheers