Vintage DD turntables. Are we living dangerously?

Hi and thanks for the thorough response!
What I meant by noise is not audible noise as much as high noise floor or lack of pitch black background which hurts the 3D and the dynamic contrast and gives you a sense of flatness to the sound.
It is still amazing that with 4 pole (!) motor, 50-60 dB S/N and wow and flutter at 0.6% one gets results that are not far off DD's with 75 dB S/N, core-less motor and 0.02% wow and flutter.
A lot of isolation, superior bearing and better platter, somewhat reminiscent of the EMT 927 and 930 idlers, I assume.
The one thing that these idlers have in spades is torque (which translates to drive, a sense of flow and PRAT) but my question is:
How much torque do you really need?
If you manage to overcome cartridge drag on transients with ease do you need the extra torque?
Does a Technics with 16kg cm sound more convincing than a TT-101 with 1.3 kg cm?
Lewm, I agree with you that opinions are just that, opinions.
At the end each of us have different reference points and preferences and what appeals to one person might not appeal to other.
I remember having a discussion with a guy who was very opinionated about things audio. He talked about turntables, about building his own record cleaning machine, about soundstage and audio preferences.
When he visited me and heard my system he said that the midrange intimacy and concentrated sound was too much to bear.
When I visited him I saw two Kef mini-monitors the size of Bose AM-5 located on the sides of a plasma TV with 1,600 watts SVS sub.
Basically a Bose sound - bloated bass and two tweeters with no midrange to be found. This is just to show you how amazingly subjective this hobby is. Who am I to judge? To each his own.
Many audiophiles will look at my gear and will say to themselves that its mediocre and that's fine with me. In the end its about pleasing our heart and not about convincing others that our sound is great.
I believe that with this understanding, when it comes to opinions, one can judge a differential (one item compared to another when all other parameters are the same).
Based on what I read between the lines, it seems that to make an idler wheel work one needs a heroic effort: see EMT 927 with its industrial washing machine sized motor and steam train flywheel sized platter and EMT themselves moved to DD once they could (once torque was sufficient to start a song in less than half a second when broadcasting).

Harold, You are welcome to dissect the wonderfulness of the L07D and attribute that quality to magnetic levitation of the platter, but I think that misses the point. IMO, the L07D is transcendent because in its design every aspect of construction and function was considered and addressed in one single product, from plinth to headshell. One may quibble here and there with some of the choices that were made, but there is no denying that the L07D's excellence is the product of its "whole-ocity", if Harvey Rosenberg will forgive me for borrowing his parlance.

Doron, I have never seen in person an EMT927, but in my mind the EMT927 and the Lenco L75 are at opposite ends of a spectrum; the Lenco is on the "less is more" end of the spectrum, and the EMT is on the "more is more" end of the same spectrum. The business of torque is a mystery to me, because there is to some degree a correlation between torque and performance for dd and idler tt's (leaving belt-drive out of the discussion), but with some exceptions. The Lenco has a physically large and powerful motor, but the torque that can be delivered to the platter is always limited by the coefficient of friction between the idler wheel and the platter surface that is in contact with the idler wheel. In a Lenco, that contact patch must be small, because there was a negative trade-off to using a wide idler wheel, as is typical for idlers that drive the inside rim of the platter or the outside edge; a wide contact patch would cause "scrubbing" in a Lenco, between the idler wheel which "wants" to go in a straight line and the platter, which must rotate in an arc. So, the torque of a Lenco is truncated by the force required for the wheel to dissociate from the underside of the platter and skid. If you grab the platter, you can feel that happening well before the motor comes to a stop.

Lewm, I do believe that the L07D is a triumph in TT design namely due its successfully completed construction in every aspect in one single product. I just think that the maglev is the dot of i, so to speak.

The Victor TT-101 is a triumph in speed accuracy & stability as Halcro has proved in his videos with the 3 TAs in action at the same time. I just wonder how it would perform with maglev on its spindle...

Both are truly exceptional and superb TT designs, even in today´s standards IMO.

Small point: As I understand it, the L07D platter is not completely suspended via Maglev. Rather, the load is only partially dissipated in that fashion; there is still some vertical force exerted on the bearing and thrust pad. (I never have pushed down on my platter so as to prove that to myself.) But to your point, the Kenwood engineers definitely saw some benefit in Maglev.

Kenwood´s platter in partly "suspended" like Clearaudio´s. Actually it´s not floating and the spindle maintain contact with the trust pad. But the maglev takes platter´s weight in some extent and the force exerted on the spindle and trust pad is less. Does the maglev take the most or a great part of platter´s weight is another thing. Anyway, maglev in general provides some kind of benefit in sound quality. In my system it´s a serious improvement.