OK, so I'm a nurd.
Was walking the dog this morning and got to thinking about your theoretical objection (i.e. 800 rpm = bearing noise).
There are two ways to get high effective inertia, one is to spin something really heavy, or with a really large radius at low speed, the other is to spin something lighter or smaller in radius at high speed. If you want to get really nurdy, Torque = (Inertial mass) * RPM.
When you go with the low speed approach you have to deal with a few problems, one is that there are physical limits on maximum size of a turntable system, another is that precision is more difficult to maintain as you scale upward, a third is that if your device spins on rolling bearings then the number of bearings (and the chance of getting one too far out or round)goes up as the bearing count goes up. When you go with the higher rpm approach some of the design challenges are reduced in magnitude and you can get higher effective inertia than would otherwise be possible for practical reasons.
In any case, still think that the proof is in the pudin, but even from pure speculation you can make a case for either approach.
Happy Listening!
Was walking the dog this morning and got to thinking about your theoretical objection (i.e. 800 rpm = bearing noise).
There are two ways to get high effective inertia, one is to spin something really heavy, or with a really large radius at low speed, the other is to spin something lighter or smaller in radius at high speed. If you want to get really nurdy, Torque = (Inertial mass) * RPM.
When you go with the low speed approach you have to deal with a few problems, one is that there are physical limits on maximum size of a turntable system, another is that precision is more difficult to maintain as you scale upward, a third is that if your device spins on rolling bearings then the number of bearings (and the chance of getting one too far out or round)goes up as the bearing count goes up. When you go with the higher rpm approach some of the design challenges are reduced in magnitude and you can get higher effective inertia than would otherwise be possible for practical reasons.
In any case, still think that the proof is in the pudin, but even from pure speculation you can make a case for either approach.
Happy Listening!
