Well gee, at least I notice that some are paying attention! I would point out that nowhere have I ever written that PRaT is the ONLY factor to consider in reviewing or evaluating a turntable, but it IS the Prime one. I also write often about detail, dynamics, tonal accuracy and imaging. Extrapoplating I would assume that Art Diudley has never done so either. PRaT is the MOST important factor, since the sense of musicality arises from PRaT, or timing or whichever facet of correct speed you want to talk about. By this I mean, if one has to accept less than perfection and sacrifices must be made, where does one make the sacrifices? I submit that musicality (PRaT) is the one thing that must NEVER be sacrificed. I would also point out that correct timing (PRaT), IS "speed stability, wow and flutter" and the more stable the speed the better the PRaT will be. This is my whole point in my Lenco Experiment, and yes, the Lencos are far superior to the Linns even in my beloved PRaT, though if I didn't have a Lenco which in addition to PRaT also produces world-class detail, dynamics and all the other audiophile paraphernalia which is wrongly placed ahead of PRaT, I would live with a Linn, Roksan or other 'table which places musicality (not simple "smoothness" and information) and thus timing at the top of the heap. The better the speed stability, in addition, the better the information-retrieval, imaging, cartridge tracking (and thus improved sonic performance), "gestalt (musical piece being presented as a piece/whole and not a collection of disparate parts).
Atar1 also assures us that since he cannot afford the top-of-the-line pieces he is in no position to judge - "All of these turntables, including the Quattro, are so far beyond my budget it would be like asking me which exotic sports car is the best in the world by having me read reviews about them" - but then goes on to sing their praises. Based on what, their enormous price tags? Let us bow before these Mighty Creations as they have ludicrous price tags far beyond our reach. These 'tables have all been criticized in various ways, many of them for lack of musical involvement - the SME 30 for one - and whatever strengths they might have, it means nothing if they don't draw you into the musical magic (and not simple HiFi special effects). The reason the Linn still has such a strong following after all these years, even at its inflated price tag when fully tricked-out, is because it is first and foremost a musical turntable, as all turntables should be (but sadly aren't).
I believe that many want to ignore or wish away the issue of musicality, since it can't be designed-for except by the sort of talent we cannot understand or explain (and often by simple accident, or "discovery" which, however, should be recognized and imitated), and which must be recognized. It is far more difficult to trust our instincts and senses and biological and emotional responses (which is what music is all about), than to sit in front of speakers with a check-list: "trumpet clearly audible in left-hand corner, check; echo audible around viola, check; harpsichord audible in right-hand corner, check..." I've said it before and I'll say it again: musicality is not an entirely subjective experience, much as the pundits would have us believe this (so they can sell their over-priced a-musical monstrosities), accurate speed (and by this I mean truly accurate speed, in practice and playing a real LP) being seminal in this regard. If these Big Heavyweight turntables fail to recover PRaT (as any do, I had the Maplenoll Ariadne with 40-pound platter which was less musical than the Athena with the lighter 15-pound platter it replaced), it is because their speed stability is in fact not stable. The heavier platters simply reduce the belt-reaction time (caused by stylus drag which is VERY audible) due to increased inertia, lowering it into the lower frequencies where the timing - or PRaT - resides. The lighter turntables move the speed instabilities up into the higher frequencies, and so lose detail relative to the big turntables, which is why so many audiophiles, trained by the largely detail-oriented audiophile press (easy to describe and look like experts), assume they are superior in every way. The culprit in all these speed instabilities is the belt, being rubber stretches and contracts at frequencies as already described, which is audible. This is why thread drives sound better than rubber-belt drives. But better than these weak little cogging motors and threads aided by expensive band-aid electronics is a well-designed idler-wheel drive with a monstrous but designed exactly and precisely and solely for turntables. Try the experiment to verify my assertions, I've thrown this particular gauntlet down several times over the last year with a 100% success rate so far (even my enemies admitted the Lenco's great sonic prowess and musical power), all are welcome to join and report on the results. Based on my own experience of heavy/massy belt-drives vs lighter belt-drives, I'd hazard a guess that Art Dudley was right in his review, but he committed two crimes: he spoke of musicality as if it were important, and he placed a cheaper product ahead of a more expensive one on musical grounds. I would describe him as a man of courage and integrity, it just happens that only the English still produce classic 3-point suspension turntables which major in PRaT, the 3-point suspension tunrtable being an invention of the American company Acoustic Research. Ironic, eh?
