why is belt drive better than direct drive?

Belt drives typically offer better isolation of motor vibration. Whereas a direct drive unit has the motor "directly coupled" to the platter / record / arm / cartridge interface, the only thing linking the motor to those things is the belt. Depending on how the motor is mounted and the shape / size / material used in the belt, most of that noise can be minimized or at least drastically reduced. While there may be some technical advantages to direct drive, most of them are overcome by using "fresh" belts on a belt drive. While old belts tend to stretch and increase speed irregularities via slippage, ANY motor variations or vibration in a direct drive unit is instantly transmitted to the platter with NO damping whatsoever in a direct drive unit. Like anything else, there are pro's and con's to each method. As a case in point, ask a "DJ" or "scratch mixer" which type of table they prefer. It will most certainly be the opposite of what is considered to be the audiphile "norm". Sean
>

Psychicanimal, please explain what you mean by "no one can PLAY records on a belt drive" ??? I'm sure that i'm not the only one that got lost on that one.

I think that Fisher came out with a table that should've been the BEST in theory, but like most of their products back in the 70's and 80's, was WAY under-designed. It used magnetic propulsion instead of any form of direct contact to the platter ( belts, idlers, direct drive, etc... all make contact with the platter one way or the other). Since there was NO contact between the drive source and the platter, it would offer the greatest isolation from motor induced vibration. That is, IF it was properly implemented.

As was typical of most "budget" brands back then, they took what could have been a PHENOMENAL idea and implimented it as if it was going to be sold at K-Mart. Low grade parts, no isolation in the chassis, junky tone-arm, etc... Like most other "junk" made back then, it went the way of the wind and a great idea never received the attention that it should have. Sean
>

I've used Technics tables before. Since i'm not "drag racing" turntable motors, "clocking" the start up time or "scratch mixing", i'm not real worried about those aspects.

I am more worried about the subtle details, better resolution, improved isolation and lower background noise that a good table ( of ANY design or brand ) delivers. I never got that out of ANY of the Technics tables that i tried. While they were more than "Technic'ally" competent, they just weren't "musical" or "revealing". However, I did get pretty good results with another brand of DD table, but it is far from a "normal" design. I will say that it is not as quiet as my belt drives and lacks the isolation from external vibration, but it was a BIG step up from some of the other DD's that i used to own. Sean
>