Mosin,
there are many parts in the audio chain. With some of them "quality" can not be judged "objective" in any way, but is a matter of synergy or "taste". Well, a turntable may be a mysterious machine to some. The drive method - and you got me wrong in that point - is not paramount in any way. It is just, that certain technical features which are paramount regarding the ultimate performance of a turntable for phono playback can not be implemented with 2 of the currently in use 3 drive mechanism.
A turntable is no mysterious machine. It is a machine. Nothing else. No voodoo, no secrets, nothing supernatural.
Applying all the physical aspects in a correct - and consequent - way will always result in a very heavy device with a high mass platter and an isolation from mechanic periphery (underground) below 1 Hz resonance frequency.
This device will never come cheap. The drive mechanism will be a logic choice following the high platter mass and the resulting inertia.
I have listened to all turntables which I found worth listening to after inspection of their technical design. I do not believe in philosophy or implementation of "ideas" in turntables. It is all about constructing a machine with consequence. To do so I apply physics without taking into account whether it looks good in the shop or whether it fits a certain price range. Its about performance and consequence. Two things lacking too often in too many fields and minds. And the turntable is NOT a link in a given audio chain. It is the very foundation of the extraction of the audio signal from its mechanical matrix. Looking for synergy or compensation effects here is inconsequent and will means to abandon the search for maximum performance right from the start. What is lost here is never again found.
Others will have different point of views and different approaches and will certainly not share this view in some or all aspects. But that is not my problem. It is totally fine with me.
Cheers,
D.
there are many parts in the audio chain. With some of them "quality" can not be judged "objective" in any way, but is a matter of synergy or "taste". Well, a turntable may be a mysterious machine to some. The drive method - and you got me wrong in that point - is not paramount in any way. It is just, that certain technical features which are paramount regarding the ultimate performance of a turntable for phono playback can not be implemented with 2 of the currently in use 3 drive mechanism.
A turntable is no mysterious machine. It is a machine. Nothing else. No voodoo, no secrets, nothing supernatural.
Applying all the physical aspects in a correct - and consequent - way will always result in a very heavy device with a high mass platter and an isolation from mechanic periphery (underground) below 1 Hz resonance frequency.
This device will never come cheap. The drive mechanism will be a logic choice following the high platter mass and the resulting inertia.
I have listened to all turntables which I found worth listening to after inspection of their technical design. I do not believe in philosophy or implementation of "ideas" in turntables. It is all about constructing a machine with consequence. To do so I apply physics without taking into account whether it looks good in the shop or whether it fits a certain price range. Its about performance and consequence. Two things lacking too often in too many fields and minds. And the turntable is NOT a link in a given audio chain. It is the very foundation of the extraction of the audio signal from its mechanical matrix. Looking for synergy or compensation effects here is inconsequent and will means to abandon the search for maximum performance right from the start. What is lost here is never again found.
Others will have different point of views and different approaches and will certainly not share this view in some or all aspects. But that is not my problem. It is totally fine with me.
Cheers,
D.