Direct Drive turntables

Alectiong:

"Hi, has DD a "theoretical" advantage over belt drive that will translate into better sounds? I am confused by opinions out there. Some say DD has a characteristic livelier/dynamic sound. Some say the type of drive mechanism really doesnt matter so long as the platter spins and vibrations are taken care of.
Happy NY."

So all technology aside here is what I "hear." I have two reference points, my personal journey, going from a SME 20/2 with SME IV.Vi arm to a Grand Prix Monaco with Tri Planar arm. Cartridge and tonearm cable remeained constant (Lyra skala and Purst Audio Designes Proteus Provectus). The Monaco hits the notes with the often referred to PRaT. Piano for the first time sounds like a hammer hitting a string. Impact, dynamic then lingers until the string finishes vibrating. The SME, which is a very good belt drive really missed the impact/dynamic it was blurry in comparison. I hear this trait over and over in my listening. It seems to marry what is good about digital, but keeping all the stuff I love about vinyl. Many vinyl purist won't like this description, but I think it's appropriate. I did feel like the SME table and arm had a little more "weight" on certain notes, but at the expense of detail, transparency and impact. This maybe arm signature between the SME IV.Vi arm and TriPlanar. I never tried the SME arm on the Grand Prix table, the combo with the Tri was just so much better, I never looked back.

The second is via a friend. Going from a Walker belt drive to a Technics SP10 mk 3 in a custom plinth. Similar result to my experience above. He used a SME 312s arm on the technics.

So 2 great belt drives, 2 direct drives, one brand new techonology one the best of vintage. Both owners are very happy DD converts...

Dertonearm, Have you seen the photos of the new "direct idler-drive" turntables to be marketed by TT Weights? There are two models, one megabuck and one for under $10K. But both sport VERY heavy platters in the 30-lb range and higher. I thought that would make you happy. (Unless your minimum criterion for Nirvana was >30kg, not >30lb.) Still, those are fascinating products.

Dear Alec:+++++ " Hi, has DD a "theoretical" advantage over belt drive that will translate into better sounds? " +++++

IMHO the opinion on DD advocates can tell you " several " advantages " and in the other side the BD advocates can tell you too the " advantages " on this design and maybe and only from the theoretical point of view both ( some way or the other ) can/could be right about each single advantage.

Now, a TT audio item is not a set of " single/aisle " advantages/disadvantages but a whole finished audio item with intrinsic trade-offs ( there is no perfect TT. ).

Where reside ( mainly ) those trade-offs? ( certainly not on the TT drive design. ) and this is a hard question with many answers, example: type of bearing, TT plinth, kind of motor choice, platter build material, arm board build material, TT " system " vibration/isolation ( external/internal ) mechanism, whole TT quality/build execution,.

These and many other factors are the ones that makes the " differences " and IMHO you can get/have the quality performance you are looking for with either TT drive mechanism.

Some people here and there try to put " things " in a very simple manner/way but the TT ( stand alone ) quality performance can't be judged in aisle way because this audio link is only a part ( important one ) of the whole analog chain where our ears and music/sound priorities are part ( too ) of that analog chain.

I'm almost sure that if you/we take a top BD ( like the one you own or a Walker. ) and a top DD ( say Mónaco ) with a matched tonearm/cartridge and care to set up ( the same for both TTs. ), same arm board build material, same suspension/isolation mechanism, same mat and an un-biased attitude you /we can't hear any detectable difference other that what we " want " to hear.
Now if both TT are designed the same ( mainly on build materials ) my " almost " sure can convert on a simple " sure " no detectable differences only because the TT drive system.

The Jfrech comparison help to tell us that the differences ( IMHO ) comes mainly for the TT design differences more than for the TT drive mechanism and in the case of his friend due that the tonearm in the TT's were different!!!!

The analog imperfections like an audio chain makes extremely complex to have a " simple " answer to your question: the whole subject is very complex and till today I don't read/know ( anywhere ) a precise answers that can be corroborated in a scientist/theoretical/mathematics model. Till this happen the best way to go is to have first hand experiences and decide ( take action ) in consecuence.

Btw, a good alternative is to own/run BD and DD in the same audio system and forgeret about useless " controversies " on that subject.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.

Lew, TTW do look interesting and are located to the south of where I live ,sometime into the New Year I plan on a visit for a look & listen.

Dertonarm your point about platter mass on this Denon Cotter table, could a re-fit platter with a much heavier design work without damage or modify the existing platter in some other way?
Also when do you plan on releasing your turntable onto the market?

One final question, anyone here Albert Porters Panzerholz plinth design?

Stiltskin, I believe that a high mass (whatever high mass may mean in the individual case...) platter can be fitted only to a direct drive if the heart of the drive - motor and axis - is designed with the respective resulting inertia and pure vertical mass in mind. As the direct control is in most cases an essential design parameter of a direct drive.
I for one wouldn't dare putting a 30 lbs (but I would favor 30 kgs anyway Lewm....) platter on a Denon drive coming originally with a 6 lbs platter. At least not for very long.
A direct drive working with a high mass (and resulting very high inertia) platter has to feature other design parameters in some key components than the average dd from the 1970/80ies.
Aside from that - not the material of the plinth is the core issue, but the internal damping (not bad with Panzerholz, but even better in composite materials) and most important the resonance frequency of the suspension.
I can not stress that point hard enough. Please remember that it was AR with its very first suspended TT which single-handed put in motion record playback high-end (a decade and more later adapted by Linn with their LP-12).

A happy new years eve and a healthy, peaceful and prosperous 2010 to all analog A'goners!
Cheers,
D.