A Copernican View of the Turntable System

the 3 standard drive principles in tt design

Cheap? Cheaper? Cheapest?

Dear Syntax, not really simple in graduations - rather more or less convenient and simple to construct, but not ideal.
Each of these drives in turntable design do imply that there will be errors induced by the drive which have to be fought back by motor speed/torque control and a kind of "feedback-loop".
That - control by feedback-loop - already was an error when introduced in speaker designs in the 1970s.
The royal device is obvious - no error from the start.
Then one don't have to correct.
Somehow simple and logic.
Cheers,
D.

Dear Thuchan: As you said different drive TT systems works depending on implementation and even more important than that: depending on the designer targets. Yes,, there are options other than the commercial ones for TT designs and the hybrid always is an alternative.

IMHO the main subject is not that designers does not looks to other solutions but that almost all are luking the TT as an stand alone item.

Today almost all the main/normal TT targets are accomplish one way or the other. speed accuracy, speed stability where we have specs/figures here ( from many years and today TT samples. ) as low 0.001% ( Walker Rocport, Technics, Denon, etc. ), with wow&fluter as low 0.007% ( Audio Turntable ) or signal to noise ratio/rumble at 90db to over 100+db almost undetectable ( Technics, Rockport Avid, Clearaudio, Walker, etc, etc. ).

So IMHO these subjects are already ( I posted several times. ) well covered from the point view of measurements. As always there is land to improve but whom of you can detect for example a TT with a speed stability accuracy of 0.001% against the same TT that measure 0.0003%?

IMHO a TT designer after fulfil the " normal " targets the main target is to fulfil the cartridge needs and I mean it.

This IMHO is where I think exist a " long land " to explore and I think and hope that in the future the TT advance that we could " see " will address the " fulfil cartridge needs " and what this really means.

Now, +++++ " The SME 20/2 is in my honest opinion a fine reproduction machine but to my taste flat and not very vibrant. " +++++

even that I talked on the SME 30/2 I will take your 20/2 statement and the first question is: is it not what we are looking for in a TT? a DEAD SILENCE TT design that does not add nothing to the cartridge performance and that does not take out nothing to the cartridge/groove tracking performance.

Why need we a TT with " dynamic, power, vibrant and the like " performance characteristics?, I don't want it, my target is only that the cartridge take the 100% of the information in the grooves with out no single " factors " that could disturb its job in anyway. Same for the tonearm.

IMHO several differences between this and that and the other TT came mainly ( I'm speaking on good/decent designs, any drive system. ) the way each TT DISTURB the cartridge work. Same for tonearm. Is here where differences on performance begin and appear and not because example: 150db SN against " only " 98db.

That you like it how the TT DISTURB the cartridge job that does not means is right but only that you like those type of colorations against more accurate/neutral designs and there is nothing wrong with that: it is your previlege and your audio way of living.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.

Dear Thuchan: I would like to add what I posted several times:
the TT is only a cartridge's slave and some designers did not took in count yet and its designs were and will be TT designs where the TT is the star.
IMHO this is part main part why we have and will have what we have about. I'm sure that when TT designers be in focus that what they are designing is important only if that design helps to fulfil the cartridge job. Same for the tonearm: other slave.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.

Dear friends: This is the link that I forgot to posted in my 10-14-11 ( " another stand alone tonearm. ):

http://www.ttweights.com/momentus_duo_drive.html

R.