Direct Drive turntables

Dear friends: IMHO we can't " live " with out measures, more on this latter on.

+++++ but the only thing that really matters is how the equipment meets your individual requirements to connect with the musicians. " +++++

" individual requirements ", this subject is the one that makes the difference and the one that makes everything extremely complex an almost impossible to have " measures " that can predict why something can/could like me or not.

I can't argue why you like something that I don't but I can argue if what you like is more or less accurate or not.

The Universe and the " Mother Nature " works with accuracy in all " orders " , with out accuracy things can end on " caos " and disaster.

In audio things are not different accuracy and accuracy levels are essential: a TT must spin at 33.333rpm not at 34.06rpm, the electrical voltage in USA has to be 117v ( or whatever. ) not 220v , a RIAA eq measurement must be accurate and measure in the 20hz to 20Khz range not between 10hz and 12Khz, etc, etc.

Measure accurate measures help to the audio item designer to know and meet his design targets, he needs to measure and try to design with accuracy on: frequency response, noise level, harmonic distortion, etc, etc,
Today it is extremely rare that an inaccurate audio item can sounds great, of course that due to our each one " individual requeriments " could sounds great but this is not the overall subject.

Me like all of you likes " good sound " / " emotional sound " but I like more ( an always looking at. ) accurate " good/emotional sound ".

There are a lot of good electronics that " sounds good " but are or have serious inaccuracies: amplifiers with high output impedance ( say over 0.5 ohms. ), amplifiers with differences on its frequency response and output voltage on both channels, same with line stages, phono stages with RIAA eq deviation over 0.1db ( designers of phono stages with RIAA deviation on the 0.5db that not only does not cares about but that are proud of that spec!!!!), snesible differences between channels in frequency response and RIAA eq deviation in phono stages, etc, etc, etc. I say inaccuracies that put severe colorations to the sound we are hearing.

I'm very sensitive to inaccuracies/colorations and I'm training/trained to detect very fast and do not tolerate when I can do something about. Some of you know that this " tool " is true because I was at your places and speak on system " colorations ".

Because I like accuracy and neutrality do you think that I don't like " good/emotional sound " ?, " good/emotional sound " is my prime target along accuracy.

Many of us that have " good/emotional sound " even not know how accurate is that sound and many times we don't care about.

The MUSIC has the magic to move us even through a " walkman " in the subway but this is not the subject either.

For me it is a myth that measures has nothing to do on what we are hearing and I have to add: if you know what you have to measure.

When we were on our self Phonolinepreamp design and before ( way before ) we start to hearing it we use the more digital/computer advanced tools/models to " measure " each single stage on our design from different approaches: noise level, THD, IMD, bandwindth, frequency response, etc, etc. We made it first to have what a " perfect model " predict on performance at each single electronic stage, second for when the first unit was build we can compare real measures looking for differences against that " perfect model ", third to have standard measures if we want to build more than one unit, fourth to guess how beat those measures through design or changes on parts.
We made several scientific tests looking for differences between a signal at the input ( with out any electronic line stage process. ) against that signal at the line stage output.
With out tests, measures and the like we are in hand of " random " ( like many people " likes " to " live ". ), accuracy?: what's that?

I'm the " harder " critic of what I hear/heard in my audio system even harder that what I can be with other people systems. I hate mediocrity but I hate more when the people accept that mediocrity.

Like I say: I like " good emotional sound " but I like more accurate good emotional sound!!!!

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.

My travels in DD vs. Belt came to a head twice 1) years back with my first Luxman PD444, 2) three years ago with my minty beauty Goldmund Studio. I was a Walker disciple having penned the first review in TAS and having helped Lloyd with the belt tensioning device. I went on to own this extraordinary table while various belt drives migrated through the system. It was not until I brought in for testing the Luxman 444 that I began to see the whys and hows and benefits of DD drive. For the first time the timing and speed accuracy of my reel tapes was mimicked. After much tweaking with sound boards and AC drives I was to achieve a soundstage with the Luxman that did not sit direct upon the loudspeakers, one that breathed and floated like a belt drive. But what a total trip into madness that was. It took months to get this right. And so I read about Porter and his SP10 and his quest and I sit back and toast him a glass of 85 Cab! What an ordeal. Some could just ring up Payer and punk down the dough and get the finished product but us penny pinching masochists had to have it our way. I remember the MBL distributor brought over a CSN rip of Fremer’s comparing the R’port to the mighty Continuum. I thought the Rockport had the pitch better but a rip is just a rip and so many other variables come into play since the comp was not side by side in timeline. I will say with all this that I was smiling a very broad grin when I first brought home the Goldmund… oh, so much space, like a belt drive but now with pitch stability! A grand achievement! Somewhat of a golden color but so what when so much music density is in the room!

I will say I have a deep curiosity for the big Continuum and if I can cajole Mike into letting me schlep up my Pierre Lurne’ concoction (my best table set up to date) I will find out if I need to lighten the Vanguard account by some huge multi thousand dollar amount.

And Raul… no clamp? You shame the turntable PHDs (laugh out loud). Vacuum clamping? Simply the best with the Luxman PD-555- everything was more real. Though I lost sleep over the suction detriments and had to sell it before I had a nervous breakdown! Really!

My best!

Peter

Dertonarm, An interesting test. I'll have to give it a try. But the test is about record slippage and not stylus drag (at least the way I define stylus drag). I generally prefer clamping. I suspect that this is mainly due to better coupling to the platter but some of the difference may well be due to record slippage. Thanks for the measurement suggestion.

Dear breuninger: +++++ " And Raul… no clamp? You shame the turntable PHDs.... " ++++

I made several/lot of tests with different mats and clamps even with vacuum hold down systems, in any case/combinations I detect advantages and disadvantages then I made/make a own design mat with a propietary blen material and I test too where I find that with this mat design not only reduce/minimum the trade offs on performance but that the overall quality performance was/is better with out clamp. I have to say that I never try a ring platter mechanism.

I wish I can/could have our mat design with an integrated vacuum mechanism, this could be great!!!

I repeat again again and again ( many times everywhere ) that the mat/platter build material where the record/LP seats directly is almost the more important subject/factor to achieve the highest quality performance, no single doubt about.

Till today in my knowledge the TT designers and DIYS don't find yet the right build material or blend materials that IMHO is responsable of the recording/play back quality performance ( everything the same. ).

We can see in this thread and other ones where everyone is " worried " about TT drive system, heavy/ light mass, plinth, suspension, etc, etc but no one of these people address the importance ( critical ) of that intimate relationship between that mat/platter and the LP, well maybe I can't explain good: I know that one way or the other these people address that TT " characteristic " but they don't find yet the right one.
IMHO here is where the TT ( as an audio item. ) could give a very high jump on overall quality performance that no one of you could even imagine!!!

If I was in the TT design this single target will be the one where I put all my " energy " because all the other factors/characteristics/targets in TT's are almost know, " invented " and achieved. Btw, the same on tonearms and cartridges.

If we think/make the same normally we achieve/obtain ( more or less ) the same results. We need to " change " if we want to grow-up.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.

Regards ad enjoy the music,
Raul.

And yes to Raul,
+++I repeat again again and again ( many times everywhere ) that the mat/platter build material where the record/LP seats directly is almost the more important subject/factor to achieve the highest quality performance+++

I have to fully agree to this basic tenant. As Yoda would say “most important is the platter to the record interface.”

I would be more on firm ground in this thread to think of the differences in terms of _difference of coloration_.

Pure lead or a high lead mix: sound has a dead "it-ends-here" coloration. very accurate reproduction of the space between the images and notes.

Hard rubber like formulas: detail and depth to the coloration, a color not unlike putty or clay, very nice space between the notes but flavored with something extra.

Clear Acrylic: more of an endless feeling to the coloration, almost a reverb of select frequencies are accentuated. Have to get used to.

Special formulas (Goldmund, Lurne' and other Alchemist designers): a small shadow coloration that follows the music, like SETs somewhat. Very addictive to my ears at this time in my career. Huge space and you can minimize a touch of gold glow if you roll up your sleeves and try creative belts, AC/DC drives, and outboard motors.

Peter