Why will no other turntable beat the EMT 927?


Having owned many good turntables in my audiophile life I am still wondering why not one of the modern designs of the last 20 years is able to beat the sound qualities of an EMT 927.
New designs may offer some advantages like multiple armboards, more than one motor or additional vibration measurements etc. but regarding the sound quality the EMT is unbeatable!
What is the real reason behind this as the machine is nearly 60 years old, including the pre-versions like the R-80?
thuchan
Mapman,

I agree. If an expensive turntable cannot hold its speed, it fails to meet the objective, doesn't it? Not only should it hold speed, it should be adjustable for those fine ears that, as Doug Deacon says, can hear a one-fifth harmonic.

Too many turntables today try to carry the day with bling. Bling is fine, but isn't much use when one closes his eyes, and tries to escape to that place where the music wants to take him. Maybe that level of performance is why the EMT 927 is held in such high regard after all these years. I initially posted just because I believe there should be historical references to inspire modern makers, and EMT set the bar for that.
Mapman, speed constancy while playing music is a major keep. Also major vibration control is essential. I certainly have heard very expensive turntables that were massive and had lots of bling, but sounded pretty poor. I think it is also the case that well conceived linear trackers with no tracking distortion are typically superior. Long tone arms also are superior for this reason.
Dear Tbg: ++++ " with no tracking distortion are typically superior. Long tone arms also are superior for this reason. " ++++

I respect your opinion but maybe you think that what you listening trhough a long tonearm is because that lower tracking distortion, my take is way different:

a 12" arm against a 10.5" with a Löfgreen A set up gives you this numbers about distortions:

the maximum % distortions between null points are:

0.46 and 0.54. Difference: 0.08%

average RMS % distortion:

0.31 and o.36. Difference: 0.05%

IMHO that kind of % distortions can't be detected even for a bat.

The differences you are talking perhaps comes from other " side ".

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
For me tt has two jobs to do well:

1) spin record at proper speed
2) isolate from noise

I feel most good tables set up properly and in good working order are proficient at both.

tt alone cannot isolate effectively from external physical vibrations and EM fields, both of which are sources of noise. This is where the user's setup alone can work and solutions need not be at all expensive.

THese things addressed effectively are what produce top notch results.

Expensive tables with very high build quality can help address external vibrations but cannot solve that in all cases alone, so money may not be able to buy the complete solution from a tt maker.
Rauliruegas, I have seen the data of tracking error and nevertheless find the Ikeda long arm sounds much better than the short arm. I would prefer a straightline tracking arm and perhaps the pivoting tracking error arms will become more affordable.

Mapman, I think you are ignoring the drag on the speed of the turntable from the stylus on the record that varies with the nature of what is being tracked.

You say that most "good" tables do a good job of spin speed and isolation. I totally disagree.