Direct Drive turntables

Raul,
Absolutes are difficult to support in any case.
As you realize, doing a controlled-environment test where everything else (platter and materials, bearing, isolation/suspension, plinth, arm, cart) are the same is quite difficult. I can imagine a technical construct where one could do so, but I have been ridiculed on these pages before for asking about it :^) so even a well-implemented solution would obviously have its detractors. So we are left with the opinions of people who spend a great deal of time and effort trying to "get it right" and each one provides their own opinion based on their own experiences - there are few people who have spent any serious time listening to cutting-edge implementations who would disagree that it comes down to the whole of the implementation rather than a single piece of it. While arms/carts can be moved around from table to table relatively easily so as to provide a 'constant' reference, set-up is yet another issue to deal with. So it obviously comes down to a "in my opinion, in my system" kind of opinion, and it seems that is the spirit in which the posts have been made to answer the OP's questions.

Actually, I was quite struck by the similarity between what someone else just up the thread a bit wrote about the M20FL Super, as compared to my own impressions. That other guy was likely using completely different ancillary equipment, yet his words could be substituted for my own in describing that cartridge. (It might have been Axel, who uses all solid state gear, whereas my electronics are all tubes except for my MM-dedicated phono stage.) I think this is because each of us becomes acutely sensitive to the "sound" of our own complete systems. As a result, there is remarkable consensus (by and large) on the "sound" of the transducers at either end of the chain. Our uncontrolled perceptions may not align so well if the item being evaluated is not converting mechanical energy to electrical or vice-versa. (I use the term "control" in the scientific sense, which is what Raul is really talking about.)

Oops! The above post was meant for the thread on MM cartridges. Sorry. But the point is relevant to this discussion too. However I do apologize for bringing the mention of mm cartridges into this thread.

Raul,

Lp performance has many interconnected variables, we all agree on that. how an Lp is rotated on a platter is just one of those varibles. am i hung up a bit on this issue exclusively? yes and no.

notice i use the term 'preferrer' when descibing my perspective. i am trying not to make statements, only preferences. where i stray from that intention, forgive me.

Jfrech's post also describes my basic feelings quite well. over 15+ years of listening to lots of different tt's and related gear, there is a common attribute with dd and related methods of drive where a belt is not used. and i have found that pretty much without exception i would choose the attributes of a dd/idler over a belt driven tt of a few levels higher overall performance.

there is a point where the best designed belt driven tt's do surpass less refined dd and idlers in overall musical satisfaction. the best belt driven designs don't leave me 'wanting' for dd. OTOH when i hear a dd or idler with similar refinement i enjoy the dd more. no matter how you slice it; music is better (i prefer it more) when the speed is better.....every time.

--my digital player eliminates jitter (timing errors) from any digital input.
--my tt's....
--my Ampex and Studer RTR decks are considered the best transports.

am i hung up on timing? it appears so.

the best sounding musical reproduction gear always goes to elaborate lengths to get the speed right. it's always the 'hard part'. one can have an opinion on different electronic circuits that sound the best. but timing of music is not debatable as most critical. even tonality gets screwed up when the timing is off. and when the timing is approaching perfection then the musical magic really happens.

Dear Mike: As you agree too the LP performance is surrounded by many factros that have an intimate relationship and that makes almost impossible to aisle one of that factors/variables to have some kind of measure/opinion nof its relative " weight " in the full LP quality performance equation.

Yes, timing/ryhtmun is essencial and makes a difference in quality performance.

+++++ " when the speed is better.....every time. " +++++

but the timing has influence on the other factors/variables, the TT speed ( accuracy ) is one of the factors in the timing it self and if the speed accuracy ( better speed?? ) could define that timing then why three different TT: SP-10, Monaco and Walker ( I can't find the spec on the Rockport. ) with the same spec on speed: 0.001%, sounds so different?

What I'm trying to say is that that timing ( critical ) in what we hear is not only speed accuracy/stability. Of course that we prefer 0.001% on speed accuracy than 0.003% or at least our mind will be " calm " with the better spec, could we hear differences with these two speed specs everything the same?, hard to say and interesting to find out.

Anyway, no doubt of the critical importance that the " timing " has in our music perception and that we know when the timing is right on target.
I always support the DD systems and still do it but I'm convinced that we can have or we can achieve stellar/top quality performance with either TT drive system if that TT has the right design and the right execution design.
It is clear that for you the Rockport system has a better design an better execution design that almost any other TT out there and this is a challenge for other TT designers.

I hope that in the future we can have " affordable " TT's ( either drive system. ) that even and surpass the Rockport one: we need grow-up about.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.