How good is the Micro Seiki DDX-1000 Direct Drive turntable ?


Here is the MICRO DDX-1000 direct drive. Never tried myself, but it is the most compact DD designed for 3 tonearms.

*The question is how good this turntable really is, compared to some other vintage Direct Drives ?


Some information from VintageKnob website:  

The DDX-1000 is the original design, with two sculpted strobe markings around the 2kg / 31cm die-cast aluminium platter. The resulting moment of inertia is at 330kg / cm2 and the top mat in fact covers a thick cork sub-mat set inside the platter itself.

The DDX-1000, in real late 70s modernism is a direct-drive. The motor is a DC-Servo with FG frequency generator reference set through the strobe neon lamp which "checks" how many stripe it sees and rectifies if necessary ; the resulting speed accuracy is of 0,03%.

The starting torque is of 1,2kg / cm and load characteristics allow the DDX-1000 to remain below 0,04% deviation up to a 3g load set at the outer limit of the platter - specs-wise, we're here under the contemporary Sony TTS-8000 for instance...

The heigh-adjustable feet are typical Micro Seiki (or Luxman, of course :) and contain a mix of inert damping (neoprene stuffing) and mechanical damping (spring).

The is no Quartz Lock on the DDX-1000 ; the MD-1000 power-supply box holds the power on/off, start 33rpm, start 45rpm and stop buttons plus two ± 6% speed controls.

The AX-1G to AX-6G tonearm bases fit everything from the ubiquitous SMEs to the Technics EPA-100 or PUA-1600L.

Of course, the motor of the DDX was used as basis for the Marantz Tt 1000 (1979), and that of the DQX-1500 (an updated DQX-1000) for the Tt 1000 mkII (1992). And, as often, Micro's direct-drive motors came from... Victor.


DDX-1000/G :

April 1976 limited edition (really limited : 30 units) custom made in... bronze. Howerever, it is black-looking for the most part, with the bronze only kept visible for the top of the three feet ; the platter was kept in AL and the command box was anodized in all-black style ; even the AX-1/G was in-bronze-but-painted-black...
Names of the people they were made for (and offered to - these were gifts !) were silkscreened on the (bronze...) motor's cache (...but painted black) - a rarity to say the least.


The DDX-1000 naturally spawned a myriad of lookalikes and still does today - perhaps better than the original, perhaps not. Or not that much :) 

128x128chakster
Regarding the lack of a dust cover, I have always draped a light, velvet cloth over the turntable when not in use.  Dust is not a problem at all.

Hope this helps you.
@mammothguy54es, thanks I thought about that as well. The only reason I did not do this was for visual appearance reason.  I have seen dust covers made of plexiglass but they need to be placed somewhere when the turntable is in use...

@chakster 
Do you prefer the performance of the luxman to your sp10 mk 2? Or just the convenience of use?
PD-444 is superheavy DD and it does not required all that hustle with the plinth and feet as the SP10mk2. I preffered Luxman "sound" too, and sold SP10mk2 with no regret.  My SP10mk2 was mint condition and fully original just like my PD-444. If i will even buy Technics again it must be mk3 (or SP10R), not mk2. 

Luxman PD-444 is a serious turntable and i'm happy with a pair of them in the studio 
Thanks for the comment on the comparison of the two tables. I have an sp10 ii , i was thinking of building a plinth for it maybe since i have so much time now. 
Yes. The mark iii is supposed to be in a different league. Have you considered any emt direct drive tables. Not the easiest to change arms and will only take one arm, but very good. I have a 938 and 948. Compared the 938 at a friends to the sp10 mark ii and the denon dp80.  The emt 938 is a much better table than those. Not a very good comparison though. The others had better arms and cartridge setups and phono stage. The 938 was running all stock with its own built in phono stage and it was still a noticeably better table.