Richardkrebs
Yes I agree on moving away from which is best to what do we need.
Mosins previous posts on motors used in various idler drives for example would indicate to me that you cant even put Garrard 301/401's in the same camp as say the EMT 927 - I'm not saying one is better, more that the motor drives are completely different in motor characteristics, use of motor flywheels/eddy brakes, distribution of mass in the platter etc. So the fact that they are both idlers is all they have in common.
With regard to my stylus drag testing I wanted to test two things -
1. Does my TT deal effectively with stylus drag
2. How accurate is my KAB speed checker ( assuming the Timeline is more accurate ).
I have always set the speed with a record playing using the KAB speedstrobe.
Some folk on the forum reckoned they couldn't see stylus drag with the KAB.
So my test procedure was :
1. Set the speed with the KAB with no record playing.
2. Use the Timeline to validate the speed at both inner at outer grooves.
3. Reset the speed again with the KAB with the record playing tracking at 2g
4. Use the Timeline to validate the speed at both inner at outer grooves.
In both instances the TT passed the Timeline test and also confirmed that my KAB was accurate. The Timeline indicated no errors when using the KAB.
As for consistancy of stylus drag - presumably stylus drag has record groove modulation, stylus pressure, antiskate forces all contributing.
All I can say is with my TT the inner/outer grooves made no difference as verified with the Timeline and with the KAB, running the record as far as it would go, the KAB remain rock steady.
I suppose the next step might be to set the speed using a flute concerto and check whether you get through a Mahler Symphony or Reference Recordings Dafos on time without speed correction to quantity that differential.
The point I take from your Goldmund example is that you are suggesting that mass alone will not provide stability with a motor that simply doesn't have enough torque to start with.