Direct drive vs belt vs rim vs idler arm

Works for me too. I invite anyone to come listen to the Appassionata on my tt and tell me what's wrong with it. I don't mind constructive criticism- except that it ends up costing big $$$ in upgrades. :)

I just did an experiment using the first track on Fresh Aire III. Some great drums and synthesizer on that track. I have both the CD and the record so I listened to the first track back to back. I focused on the bass. I found that the bass on the CD is just a bit crisper and deeper. Not a big difference but it is there. So is my tt deficient? Is the difference due to speed stability, cartridge, tonearm or tubes? My preamp tubes are a couple of years old now.

Another observation that I should note: The record has a much bigger, broader soundstage so the drums sound further away. The CD soundstage being smaller makes the drums sound closer more immediate. I know it is not the case, but it is like the band recorded the song in two different locations. Which one is right? Maybe I shouldn't have both versions. As per the old adage; man with two watches is never sure what time it is.

I noted the recommendation from Tonywinsc re the Dr Feikert Analogue iPhone/iPad free App....so promptly downloaded it onto my iPad and ordered the 10" Test disc from his Website.
HEREis the Frequency Plot from the Victor TT-101 Direct Drive deck and HEREare the Specs.
Note the almost perfect Mean Frequency Response against the recorded 3150Hz and the impressive .01% speed deviation.
Note also the impressive mirror-imaged sine wave plot positive and negative?
HEREis the corresponding Frequency Plot for the Raven AC-2. note the lack of symmetry above and below the mean line?
HEREis the corresponding Data for the Raven showing a less precise match to the 3150Hz Test Tone. This is the closest that the Raven Motor Controller allows me to get. Still not too bad?
The thing these Plots do not show however.....is that every time I do a new plot for the Raven AC.......it gives slightly different results whereas every Plot for the TT-101 is identical.

Whereas this information may have some value to the academic or scientist......I find the Timeline to be a better indicator of both short-term speed drift as well as long-term speed maintenance.
The only disparaging remarks about the Timeline I find....comes from those who don't own one....or those whose turntable performs poorly against one? :-)

Hi Halcro,
Thanks for uploading those pictures. It is exciting to see how different tables perform. First, note that the Raw Frequency plots are nearly the same on both tables as it should be. That is due to the eccentricty of the grooves to the center hole of the record. Is the Raven a belt drive table? I also see different results on my table (belt drive); but the numbers improve the longer I let my table run. Warm up time seems to be more critical for belt drive vs. your direct drive.
What is interesting too is that I see about a 5 second period in the filtered plots which is the same for my table. Since the period is 5 seconds, I would not call that motor cogging. I think it is the speed control circuits. The designers have probably purposefully put in long time constants to make sure the speed correction is slow and gentle so as not to be heard.