Why the disdain towards direct-drive TTs from some audiophiles?

[stratokaster]

Well this brit spots such illogical disdain from many forums and nationalities, sometimes belief bias can play a part of course.

As someone using a Rega as my main player I also champion the (low to mid $) Denon DDs as fine, very undervalued options. My bedroom player is a little Technics TP4 DD, horses for courses really. I agree some low end DDs were a bit nasty (a 80s hitachi a friend had comes to mind, horrible) though there were a few belt drive nasties as well. Don't get me going on the last days of Garrard, the stuff of nightmares..

Sorry, I didn't mean that all British audiophiles are like that. I was referring to a very specific type of audiophiles who sometimes can be a bit obnoxious. There was a video on YouTube where the author was showing his Sony PS-X9 (which is definitely one of the best turntables ever made), and one guy commented: "The Japanese never knew how to build a proper turntable, all this engineering but it will never be half as good as a well set up Rega"

I also know a lot of British audiophiles who are very happily running Technics SP10s, ToTL Kenwoods and other fine Japanese gear without any prejudice whatsoever.

 

[cafe latte]

My theory is as follows:

1. DD turntables are complex, and must be sold in a significant quantity to justify the high development cost, and the high cost of the tools required to make them.
2. Boutique high end turntables are not typically sold in very high quantities, thus making a very high development or tooling cost not economically viable. In fact, I can't think of a single high end turntable company who actually makes their own motors, let alone the amount of electronics a DD turntable requires.
3. Because of the two above points, high end direct drive turntables from boutique high end companies are an impractical product. Mass market companies with the economy of scale to support making DD turntables on the other hand tended to focus on the mass market, with more profitable high volume mid-fi products. Some statement type high end DD turntables did exist, and these are IMO holy grail type products, the likes of which we are unlikely to see again (Excepting the modern Technics line!)
4. As soon as the CD was introduced, it seems to me that a full stop was put on big companies spending money on developing better turntables, leaving the small boutique companies with their simple technology left as the only ones to carry the flame of high end turntables. For the rest of the 80s, mass market turntables were mostly shadows of their former selves, being relegated to "you can still play your old records" duty, rather than being the center of a system. I suspect these are the bad sounding direct drive units which really inspire prejudice.
5. Yeah, I really want a Nakamichi turntable some day!

The sl1200G is getting up there not forgetting the new version of the SP10 name escapes me as not had my coffee yet . Anyway that is sold without an arm and at 25K is for sure high end, then there is the Brinkmann lovely high end DD.
Chris

 

[cafe latte]

Relatively few direct drive turntables have been offered
e.g. without tonearm and/or with vacuum and/or with spring isolation and/or hardwood plinth.
Most direct drive turntable tonearms appear better suited to MM than MC cartridges.
While most belt drive tables are bundled with tonearms, they benefit from that tweak aura,
sort of like Chevy Nova owners got by buying from dealers that also sold Corvettes.

Why would a DD be better suited to a MM? A MC is the same as a MM but in reverse is coil moves the technologies are basically the same. I have 50 odd carts and my faves are not my 2k MC but my MI's and my MM are up there. They all get used on idler drive DD and belt drive method has nothing whatsoever to do with cart type non at all. And before we get onto moving mass the lowest moving mass cart ever was a MM not a MC.
There us much hype about MC you need more gear to use them and you cant replace the stylus much of this is the sellers benefit not the user. Love my MC's but cart type means nothing.
Chris

 

[David_NC]

I've had belt, idler, and direct drive 'tables of various price points (though none of the high-end / multi thousand dollar models). I'd say most of mine were decent though, and converted to today's prices, in terms of inflation, are definitely pricier than the current low-end models. My fave now is a restored Dual 1219 idler / rim drive. It was tested on Dual test equipment to make sure that it meets or exceeds original specs, which it does. It's the first turntable I've had that I felt can actually let records sound really, really good, and better than digital, in some cases. The cartridge is nothing fancy - a new Shure M97xE that's properly aligned. It tracks badly warped records that have no business being played just fine, and doesn't skip when people walk, which seems to be an issue with most turntables I've had.
Honestly, I think that quality direct and idler/ rim driven 'tables would be harder to design and produce in numbers to make them viable in the market. It'd be much easier to design a belt drive turntable of any quality by smaller shops and could be done so cheaper. Up the quality a bit, and it's easy to get really high-end on these. I've heard really high end (to me) 'tables that sounded really good for sure, but I'd not spend the money they cost on them; I'd likely spend it elsewhere in my system.

 

[Supercool!]

Just the same way your system can be symbiotic...or not... turntables apply far more concepts than just dd or belt. Some use massive platters and low torque others use motor muscle... damping is applied in many different ways including how the table interacts or is prevented from interacting with the arm. My point is that tts have much more going on than the drive system so it is probably best to avoid conclusions based just on that. It is how well the designer applies/chooses a variety of schemes and how well they implement them.

 

[bigaltx24]

Lemmings stuck in their own little worlds,

 

[AudioFeline]

Cheap, poorly-designed, entry-level DD turntables deserve the disdain from audiophiles. Just like the disdain deserved for cheap, poorly-designed, entry-level belt-drive and idler turntables! A bad turntable is a bad turntable,

Many audiophiles appreciate high-end DD turntables. I've heard a Technics SP-10 - in a good quality plinth with matched arm/cart - hold it's own against other highly-regarded high-end tt's. Each turntable has slightly different characteristics, but nothing bad, and very, very good sound.

 

[Andre Garcia]

I don't know if there are DD with isolated pivot. but IMO this is one of the main issues for me. BD doesn't add any external vibration to the platter.
AG.

 

[elza]

I'll stick with my SL-1100. It suits me to a 'T'.

 

[cafe latte]

I don't know if there are DD with isolated pivot. but IMO this is one of the main issues for me. BD doesn't add any external vibration to the platter.
AG.

Direct drives like the sl1200mk2 or the new gr and G have vanishingly low rumble way better than most belt drives. If there were vibrations added to the platter via the drive system it would be evident in the rumble specs. Also most belt drives pull sideways on the main bearing (the belt) this adds rumble and vibrations due to the side load on the bearing. Good direct drives like the new Technics have a super smooth motor and no side load so seriously low wow and flutter and very very low rumble. These issues you mention are direct drive myth.
Chris

 

[Pal147]

I would like to know how audiophiles would determine whether a d/drive turntable is any better or worse than a belt driven one, is it spec numbers? if so is signal-to-noise ratio important and if so what are the numbers one should look out for?

 

[oristo]

Why would a DD be better suited to a MM? A MC is the same as a MM but in reverse is coil moves the technologies are basically the same.

Moving coil cartridges generally have lower compliance and more extended high frequency energy
at significantly lower signal levels.
They typically work better in tonearms which are better shielded, damped and more rigid
than typically offered by arms bundled with DD.
This also applies for very highly compliant styli that want low effective mass tonearms,
which are also generally unavailable with DD.
The key issue is a relative scarcity of DD offerings without bundled tonearms. Given that a cartridge and stylus are most essential to LP playback performance, tonearms are selected for synergy with them, then turntables which accommodate those arms.

 

[petemcfc]

I would like to know how audiophiles would determine whether a d/drive turntable is any better or worse than a belt driven one, is it spec numbers? if so is signal-to-noise ratio important and if so what are the numbers one should look out for?

In my opinion(which typically is worthless),many read the given specs and decide off that instead of listening to the given tables.
As most peoples hearing quality fades over time,wow flutter and rumble should be less of an issue so a true test would involve a 14 year kids ears.
Maybe because of their superior hearing its that generation that are snapping up the Crosleys of this world.

 

[hatrack71]

I would like to know how audiophiles would determine whether a d/drive turntable is any better or worse than a belt driven one, is it spec numbers?

Not usually. It's listening. Numbers mean very little to me.

 

[lini]

(...) I stay away from direct drives. Why? A lot of wierd little colorful components where Mr Farad, Mrs Ohm and the Ampere family can cause a lot of mischief (not to mention those IC guys)that I don't understand or know how to fix. (...)

That certainly is a point, but it only applies to pretty simple belt-drive models. Whereas if one looks at more complex models like for example the Thorens TD280s or TD316/318/320s, there already is quite a bit more electronics involved - and if one looks at a really complex model like a Braun PS550 or Philips AF977, one may even find more electronics than in quite a few DDs.

In fact, I can't think of a single high end turntable company who actually makes their own motors, let alone the amount of electronics a DD turntable requires.

Well, unless you've meant that in that sense, that every mechanical and electronic part would have to be produced in-house, Dualfred/Langer Audio does. There you can see his DDM103: http://www.langer-audio.de/Page11.html

Greetings from Munich!

Manfred / lini

 

[ODS123]

In my opinion(which typically is worthless),many read the given specs and decide off that instead of listening to the given tables.
As most peoples hearing quality fades over time,wow flutter and rumble should be less of an issue so a true test would involve a 14 year kids ears.
Maybe because of their superior hearing its that generation that are snapping up the Crosleys of this world.

Hearing wow & flutter is not hard. George Winston's December is a beautifully recorded all piano album from Windham Hill. It has countless long sustained single key strikes, and countless quiet moments. This, and similar recordings, are a torture test for turntables. It's very easy to hear pitch-drift and motor noise; you don't need 14 year old ears. And I don't own it just to test TT's. It's a fabulous recording that I listen to probably 1/month.

Again, turning the record at the right speed and keeping it there, without adding audible motor/bearing noise, is the first job of a TT. DD tables do this best IMHO.

 

[cafe latte]

Moving coil cartridges generally have lower compliance and more extended high frequency energy
at significantly lower signal levels.
They typically work better in tonearms which are better shielded, damped and more rigid
than typically offered by arms bundled with DD.
This also applies for very highly compliant styli that want low effective mass tonearms,
which are also generally unavailable with DD.
The key issue is a relative scarcity of DD offerings without bundled tonearms. Given that a cartridge and stylus are most essential to LP playback performance, tonearms are selected for synergy with them, then turntables which accommodate those arms.

Not being rude but total rubbish.
Really dont mean to be rude as I hate this stuff on the forum but what you just said is really rubbish and just not true. No other way to say it.
Hope I did not offend.
Chris

 

[petemcfc]

Hearing wow & flutter is not hard. George Winston's December is a beautifully recorded all piano album from Windham Hill. It has countless long sustained single key strikes, and countless quiet moments. This, and similar recordings, are a torture test for turntables. It's very easy to hear pitch-drift and motor noise; you don't need 14 year old ears. And I don't own it just to test TT's. It's a fabulous recording that I listen to probably 1/month.

Again, turning the record at the right speed and keeping it there, without adding audible motor/bearing noise, is the first job of a TT. DD tables do this best IMHO.

(Moderator: Please don't delete this!! You deleted my last post despite containing no name-calling or equipment-shaming! I was given NO explanation. Sheesh. My posts get a fair number of likes, so at least some here appreciate my perspective.)

Fair reply,that isn't the style of music I listen to so I didn't take that into concideration,good point.

 

[Beobloke]

Hearing wow & flutter is not hard. George Winston's December is a beautifully recorded all piano album from Windham Hill. It has countless long sustained single key strikes, and countless quiet moments. This, and similar recordings, are a torture test for turntables. It's very easy to hear pitch-drift and motor noise; you don't need 14 year old ears. And I don't own it just to test TT's. It's a fabulous recording that I listen to probably 1/month.

Again, turning the record at the right speed and keeping it there, without adding audible motor/bearing noise, is the first job of a TT. DD tables do this best IMHO.

(Moderator: Please don't delete this!! You deleted my last post despite containing no name-calling or equipment-shaming! I was given NO explanation. Sheesh. My posts get a fair number of likes, so at least some here appreciate my perspective.)

Whilst I do agree with you up to a point, don't forget you;re also listening to the limits of concentricity of the record itself, which you can't do much about unless you're handy with an oscilloscope, a test LP and a round file ( or own a Nakamichi turntable!)

 

[stratokaster]

@ODS123 Good observation. Many musical genres are not very sensitive to small timing errors. E.g. rock, folk, the majority of blues and jazz records. But there are a lot of recordings that are. My favourite torture test is Schnittke's Concerto Grosso No. 1 with its intricate time signatures. The worst I ever heard this composition was on a very famous belt drive TT which sounded somewhat disjointed temporally. At the same time it's a piece of cake for any good idler or direct drive TT.