My context is not one of history so perhaps my wording confused the issue.
Based on my own experience DD from the mid seventies on took flight in sales.
The electronics end in controlling speed and stability had passed all the other
very significant issues that were common and detrimental to all tables not being addressed as commonplace.
I disagree that Micro was not making well received and better than mid fi DD tables at the time. Many forget the brands made and designed micro that carried another brands name and the design and parts supplied top other brands on some popular and better than average then tables and many never available in our markets . I said quote
"at a time when everyone was dumping belt to manufacture DD because the electronic end was at a rabid pace of growth and precision and yet , Micro Seiki went back to making high end belt/string drives"
Now to give you context that was missed the first time. The manufacture of tables was drying up by now in view of the 70's output as less were being built now in the 80's . When I referenced about when I got that micro seiki and I quoted from the manual their belief of not focussing on a particular drive or electronics ,
("the absolute requirements imposed by mechanical strength , precision and mass cannot be replaced on equivalent terms simply by electronics......we must now stand behind belief that there is no need to stick to *audio common sense* which dictated that it is possible to discriminate all the way between part of the mechanisms of the turntable " .......) that's actually right out of the manual....
it just always struck me as to how important everything else was/is and something that intelligent rarely gets spoken in a manual of all places and it impacted how I looked at approached things ...........
Now at that time Micro was no longer producing DD tables in numbers as before for themselves as a brand or others and many of the others were STILL building all out DD models when Micro was building all out belt/string drives. Pioneer was building the Exclusive P3a , Technics was building the SP MK3, Nakamichi the Dragon T1000 etc.....my context is most of the higher end in design and tolerance of machining and addressing more ways to protect the signal from outside influences were on DD not the belted tables that as many were mid fi as you claimed DD were in my opinion then, many. I saw it as ballsy to be building what wasn't yet perceived by the expert descriptive sellers in the magazines as the better choice. I am pretty well versed in the history of it and I think the focus of what really was my context is being over examined as we are speaking in a short period when Technics DD tables were selling like crazy and so were the other brands of DD and semi and auto function became more important than sound and I know that from selling them and that's what people focused on who weren't infected with our disease. Belt drives became less popular , less models made
available here, and remember I never said anything of "better", quite the opposite with not much bias. Then in a blink a few years later CD comes out and the electronics paced to grow it. Some of the bigger brands of the time were focussing on all out DD units now sought after and ransom paid for , yet Micro went the other way with an all out belt/string drive that cost more than a car. When for the most part outside of the cult linns and some then , less know Michell and other tables in the mainstream, many I knew , chased the hi end units being dumped for far less than their real value . I never suggested belt was eclipsed by DD in quality , however in sales in many areas those DD tables it seemed everyone had one and us guys that kept a belt through the latter 70's
and early 80's we were a minority. Personally, with all bias aside of drive choice I think high profit margins to produce lower production cost belt drives and the CD dictated the steering of what became more common again and not what the good phrasing sellers in the rags did or said. America is a big population so while undeniably more belted units would sell in that market but saying they outsold all direct drives during that time...not sure I would buy that blindly but different markets can have different trends though......
@ Tom,....good question.
First off I think we all have a bias we focus on that draws us one way or the other
that is where our attention draws and peaks , or fades if it isn't there. For me , I seem to unconsciously focus on voice , and the tone and decay of instruments which my ears seem to allow my brain to interpret listening with a well set and sorted belt drive while listening to recorded music as being closer to what I perceive it to be when just listening to the naturalness of live sounds. That , for me, has a relaxed feel to it, not the sound as in relaxed, but myself relaxed in just listening without effort and not wondering what's going on here, just seems natural to my ears at this stage. A good belt still has good dynamics on the leading edge notes but for some reason the tone/timbre and decay seem more natural to me and how my melon is interpreting what my ears are hearing.
Direct Drives really do have some distinct strengths that
some will be drawn in with the dynamic drive the sound has to it and its difference in bass presentation and sharper change notes. But I think because of my focus of those tones and decay and the voice as well as instruments doing so, and I hope I don't start a flame war , but in the long term it effects me like CD does as being to abrupt and unnatural to me. Some obviously better than others but very few I can listen to for hours on end of all genres of music. That's not a dish on DD , I just am not looking for what DD excels at , and that how I perceive as slightly unnatural or emphasized. Others love it and that's cool if that's your focus and I don't think we all hear things the same way either not just in the extremes from hearing loss but the interpretation the melon makes of all this . I think our tastes in genre of music play into choice to some degree . I have a friend who just stayed mostly rock and his well set up and sorted DD choice, without question excels at Rock. Not saying they are only good for Rock , just my ears think the dynamics and speed the music gets full attention here like it was played.
I'm actually slowly picking away at rebuilding a hammer tone Garrard 301 table with a pretty good shape unit that will get a nice plinth to sit in after the bearing and drive sees some modern tolerances and new materials with a vintage ortofon
arm . I had one years ago , and after doing one up in a plinth for a friend I really wanted to hear that unique sound a good idler has again.
To answer your question, if forced to one table of the three drives.....
likely a thread/belt drive of mass simply because of how thread/belt
drives as I said do tone and the decay and timbre of voice and instruments
to my ears. Keeping in mind to be fair , this usually requires added cost to have a stable speed that the better belted designs have in tight tolerances of the control and power supply in relation to the motor, but it really is a common need for all
to be stable and not drift, not just accuracy. Still , I have heard some pretty fricken good tables over the years of all 3 drives. First serious Lenco I heard , if someone had of described exactly what I did hear, to me without me having heard it , I never would of believed it with any seriousness at all..............
