Idler wheel drive vs Belt

I'm drowing in contracts right now, but in the meantime I'll post this brief explanation of why I think idler-wheel drive is the superior system, given equivalent amounts of effort: "We know things now they didn't know when they were manufacturing idler-wheel 'tables. We can now realize their potential. Due to the high rotational speed of these motors, great relative mass and so high torque, no expensive solutions need be made to address the weak motors now used in high-end decks. The platters on the Lencos weigh about 8-10 pounds, with much of the mass concentrated on the periphery: the old boys understood flywheel effect to ensure stable speed. The Lenco platter is a single cast piece, of a zinc alloy of some sort, very inert for a metal, and then machined and hand-balanced in a lab. No ringing two-piece platter problems to overcome. Even the motor is hand-balanced in a lab, and weighs something like 3-4 pounds, and runs silently on its lubricated bearings. Think of it: a high-torque motor spinning at well over 1500 RPMs (compared to a belt-drive motor's average 150-300) which pretty well wipes out speed variations by itself. The idler wheel contacts the motor spindle directly, while contacting the platter directly on its other side, thus transmitting most/all of that torque without any belt stretching. Many high-end decks offer thread belts which don't stretch, thus giving an improvement in sound. The Lenco does the same with its wheel. But the platter is also a flywheel, and so evens out whatever speed variations there may be in the motor. It's a closed system (motor-plattter, platter-motor) and speed variations brought on by groove modulations don't stand a chance in this rig, and it is clearly audible. The trick is that big, solid plinth you build at Home Depot." I think belt-drives, be they thread, tape or othrwise, suffer various speed stability problems regardless of mass, as the braking action of stylus force drag is not eliminated, but simply lowered in frequency (reaction time is slower). Plus the motors used in these 'tables simply cannot match the motors used in the big idler-wheel 'tables, which were developed with the secific task of spinning a platter and overcoming stylus-force drag. Direct drives sound dry and "sat-on" and dynamically-constricted (in comparison to a Lenco) to my ear: I think the quartz-locking is audible, I, anyway, prefer the sound of servo-controlled DDs better (these at a state-of-the-art level might compete wth a good idler-wheel drive in my estimaton) more on this later. Essentially, it's a torque war, and the idlers win hands-down. Hi Divo, all I have are those few pithy words from an ex-Teres owner, no more details than this, since I did not do the comparison myself: one reason I decided to enlist the entire world in my experiment is I can't possibly do it all myself, and anyway, even if I could, who would have believed me? More tomorrow!

I agree, but additionally I think the mounting plinth is quite important. I have heard the Shindo Labs 301 versus other Garrard 301s. There is little to say, other than the Shindo sounds far superior. I grant that there are many other improvements in the Shindo, but I suspect the plinth is central to its sound.

The fundamental issue with belt drives is perhaps that they are just that.A stretchy belt that "wows and "flutters" with a change in the weather,always doing that no matter how fine your motor and bearings are.In a way the Lenco idler enclosed drive system already accounts for what you are trying to do with direct-drive and so the obvious flaw of inconsistency in speed is being minimised in being tackled head-on and not left hanging by a thread(belt?)or "cogging" issues.If the same investment was made into developing modern idler technology as it is with belt why could'nt it(idler) be the best way.

Check the price on a complete Shindo Lab completed 301 with the Ortofon arm. It is extremely expensive and in a completely different price category than such beasts as Teres, Scheu, VPI, Transrotor; same thing for the Loricraft. I think the "new" 501 offered starts at 7000 plus. This does not really address the issue of developing a "new" direct drive or idler wheel table. Loricraft simply takes the old Garrard design and copies and improves it.

If idler wheel and direct drive technology were economically viable then new units would exist. The upfront investment in such a thing makes it uneconomic. Hell, shure is even discontinuing its one good high end cartridge. I fully expect quality belt drives to continue to rule the roost.

Divo,

A place called Stirling Electronics sells refurbished Technics SP10 Mk II direct drive motors and the prices are not bad, actually. This company also can provide a custom plinth for the SP10 as well as SME and Audio Note rewired rega arms.

Loricraft also sells refurbished 301 and 401 tables and also sells a moderately priced "skeletal" plinth which they say works well. A more comprehensive plinth can be built or bought; all you need is dough.

The Shindo Lab and the Loricraft 501 are simply way too expensive for me to consider. A complete updated Lenco with a correct plinth, tonearm, and high quality isolation base is probably the best bet. Take care when looking at those 301 garrards with plinth and arm for under a grand on EBAY; they almost certainly will require total servicing and parts under the hood. Check out the prices at Loricraft for a complete restoration on a 301; not cheap. Makes more sense to buy a refurbished one from Loricraft with a warranty and be done with it. OR....buy a mint Lenco L78 and build your own.