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
Thuchan your thread started asking the question implying an objective answer but I think the thread is now answering the question based on subjective opinions. Do you feel as though the question in your original post has been answered?
Regards, Thuchan: Wether intended for professional or home use is secondary to the question, "Has it stood the test of time?"

Denon's answer to the 930 was the DP-100, engineered for broadcast but available with plinth for the audiophile. Other notable Denons that found their way into the studio were the DN-308 and console equipped DN-307. The idler driven Denon RCP53 was introduced in 1962. The broadcast friendly Thorens 124, Garrard 301 and the later 401 remain attractive to some listeners. RCA provided a "Type 70" series. Weighing in at a heavyweight 280 lb. the idler driven two arm equipped Type 73-B from 1954 (with upgraded tonearms) would look at home in a modern rig.

Later "professional" grade gear included the Denon DP-80 & 100, and the Technics R & B (recording & broadcast) series. The SP-10(s), 15, 20, 25, the EPA tonearms and the model 1500 RTR among them.

Bet then, everyone already knows this?

IIRC, the Thorens 124 dates to 1954, the Denon MC-103 to 1956. One might regret relegating most of these units to the dumpster due to generation or a "professional" or "broadcast" label?

BTW: In 1977, Car & Driver Magazine named the '57 Chevrolet car of the year. 36 yrs. later it still passes the test of time.

Peace,
Timeltel

the Exclusive P3 is not a good table, it is a great table :-)

PL70 is only loosely related. P3 more controlled, refined and transparent.

cheers
Following the review of the J Nantais lenco, Salvatore on high end audio was thinking that the superiority of the lenco rebuild by J.N was the superior torque that idler drive can give .If there is enough mass in the plinth the defect of idler drive are cancelled.
Perhaps one of the explanations of the success of the EMT 927.
Yesterday i was listening Mario Del Monaco in mono on a decca Lxt on a high end system at a friend's home and i was amazed by the life of the voice,something which is not easily found on today disc .
Peter,
having had some funny deja vus on audio gear I got to hear in the past from one side "never go for an idler, they rumble and cannot precisely follow the required speed".

I made my own experiences and did not rely on these statements or war stories derived from measurement reports, reviews etc. but not from one's own listening sessions.

Nevertheless I like to proove my positive impression (if this is the case) and the put hypotheses what really makes this good sound? Therefore I started this thread - and yeah I got some very good answers, objective facts and subjective statements. I also like a good discussion and arguments against my position or impression of a unit's capabilities. This is crucial for a good thread.

I would never be satisfied building up a collection of 2nd or 3rd hand opinions without looking for a chance testing or at least listening to a unit.
The more I get sceptical of the virtues of a table e.g. the more I need to check it in reality. I always wonder why audio friends keep their comfortable seat behind the fire place...

I am convinced that our brain has many ‘’filters’’ in order to, first, protect us, and then to adapt the incoming information for a more easy processing. Maybe this is one reason why "we don't conquer the world on reality checks" . what a pitty!