Direct Drive vs. Idler Drive vs. Belt drive

I have owned all three drive types, and am of the opinion that the DD tables such as the Denon DP 75 and 80 are an excellent value. I suspect the two part platter isolates the record and cartridge interface from the effects of motor vibration that has a direct pathway in many DD table designs. 

Now my personal tables are a Sota Cosmos Eclipse and a Well Tempered Reference, both belt drives of course. Both sound excellent, and offer quality sound. The Sota with the Phoenix Engineering speed control devices has solid sped stability, and even the WTR has no significant speed variations to be heard. There are other advantages to each design that seem to outweigh any limitations to drive design. 

I had divested myself of the Japanese legcy direct drive tables in my system. However, I could not be helped, and I bought a Brinkmann Bardo DD table. It does not use the high torque design of the Japanese tables, and the platter mass is in the 20 pound range. Start up times is similar to a belt drive table, and torque is noticeably lower. However this is a wonderful sounding table. I use an Audiomods Series 6 arm on it with a Ortofon A90, and this table is the most evenly balanced table I have heard. It sounds eerily similar to the Sota, with perhaps a bit more sharpness on the corners of notes. Yes it is like good CD or good tape in presentation. 

All drive formats have the ability to deliver excellent sound. Listen to them, and pick the ones that speak to your heart. 

@lewm 


Total 14.8 kg (Chassis 5 kg, Platter 9.8 kg); Power Supply 0.5 kg


So 21.6 pounds.

I even checked my math with a conversion program!

In the past I would have dogmatically agreed that platter mass was a key point for good analog playback. I still think its a key contributor. 

However the Well Tempered Reference has shown me that is not a bit t Truth. I bet its platter does not weigh over 5 pounds, yet it has excellent sound quality, has solid speed stability, excellent bass response, and portrays space in a very believable manner. Is it the best table? No. But for its price point it was a very good table, and viable even in todays marketplace. It may not have a lot of techno wiz bang options, but it still gets to the heart of the music. Mass alone does not define SQ. 

Turntables are holistic creatures, and placing a high level of importance in a specific design feature narrows our understanding of how things are ultimately sorted out in our analog playback systems.

Another interesting tidbit on patter mass comes to mind. When I bought my SP 10 MK II I was quite content with it. I came across a custom machined platter for it that weighed about twice the mass as the stock one, made of stainless steel as I recall. I ordered it and installed it. What I found is that the sound became smoother but was robbed of life. The table was fully capable of keeping accurate speed at the stock platter weight, and there was nothing of consequence to be gained from increasing it, matter of fact it was a step backwards. Perhaps platter mass does matter, but only within the context of what the designer envisions. The Well Tempered Reference indicates to me that platter mass has to reach a certain point for speed stability, and needs to be made of well damped and inert materials, but perhaps the critical level of mass needed is not as high as we would expect. But once again, its contained within the context of the designer envisions, and what that person works out to be the final balancing act.

I am a fellow of modest means, so I don’t play in the deep end of the pool. I have been fortunate to live with a variety of tables over the last ten years, which have included TD 124, 401, DP 75, SP 10 MK II, Rock MK III, and various VPI/Thoens/SOTA. But there are limits to my financial resources so I don’t comment on all at leading edge designs because that is not where I have any experience. My current tables are what my resources allow me to own. Currently have a SOTA Cosmos Eclipse with SME V and Transfiguration Proteus. Next table is the Brinkmann Bardo with Audiomods Series 6 and Ortofon A90. Final table is a Well Tempered Reference with Ikeda 9 Kawami. Nice tables at their price points, but they have their ceiling.

Resonance control is the name of the game. A table has two electro mechanical sources of energy, and two mechanical ones. Unwanted energy that makes it to the cartridge/record interface is noise and in a perfect world is shunted away. Motor vibration, bearing noise, uncontrolled resonance at the cartridge, and arm/bearing resonances in the tone arm, they all affect the signal being transferred from the vinyl to the phono stage. How the designer deals with it is what we hear, and I don’t know about you, but I certainly am not capable of passing judgement on each design characteristic that is made and assessing its contribution to the final product. At best I can have an opinion of what the overall sound is presented from the table, but nothing more of consequence. Bearing design, drive type, platter mass, arm design, plinth mass, isolation footers, suspension, power supply and so on, well I can have my opinions on what I think matters, but I really have no way of proving it to be true. So I would never make statements of fact in this is the way it is. Because I have no way of controlling all the variables in a comparison, and therefore can never really "prove" what I personally think is true. even just what I wrote above. Its just my observations and thoughts.

Why you did that ? You could just add Micro Seiki CU-500 gunmetal mat on top (perfectly matched). Here is mine. The weight of CU-500 is 2.7kg and it's 5mm thickness. That was huge upgrade for my stock SP-10 mkII.

When you're using not original parts, but some overkill superheavy custom platter why do you expect improvement ? Technics platter is already heavy.


Then why are you adding mass to the platter also? It is already designed to operate as the engineers at Technics intend it to, yet you feel you can improve upon that. 

This is no different than what I originally did, which followed the line of thought of increased platter mass would improve sound quality by less resonance and increased rotational stability. For me that was not the case, and I returned the item and gained a bit of knowledge/experience of what I prefer in turntable configurations. 

I am noticing something about you. It appears you are one of these people who believe that your choices are the only correct way to do things in this hobby. If others disagree with you or have a different perspective then they are misguided or ignorant. Audio is a journey and there are many pathways to take, and folks often have a different destination in mind and value a different perspective of what they get to hear and experience. Honestly, it would make my time here more enjoyable if you would refrain from interacting with me. Unfortunately this place does not have an ignore button. 

"I did different thing and it’s not just about mass, because the SP-10 MKII does not have additional layer of the different material on top surface of platter as mk 3 model so i just used Micro Seiku CU-500 to upgrade it.

As the result, the platter made from one material was decoupled by gunmetal mat (material with different properties and different resonance). This is more like upgrading mk2 model looking at next mk3 model. There was the reason why Technics decided to add another later on top of the platter. So i had a gunmetal between the platter and vinyl record.

I asked why you just replaced original platter, because every Technics platter is balanced and there is a stamp about it. I have no idea who made the platter you’ve been using, maybe it was a bad platter (i mean not as good as the original) ? Increasing mass on Technics platter with gunmetal mat was huge improvement, but maybe not just because we add mass. This is what i want to say.

And another example is Kodo The Beat turntable, based on Technics motor, look at the Kodo platter.

Also nearly all turntables from Artisan fidelity comes with their own copper mats on top. Even tweaked Technics MK3 or Garrard 301

Even if the platter replaced with thicker and heavier one those guys always add copper mat on top of it, just like the latest Technics SP-10R.

P.S. @neonknight I am interacting here not with you personally, but with audio subject that can be interesting for others. No matter who is right or wrong, it’s important to add some information and everyone can decide what he like more. "

@chakster 

The above speaks to the concept that I had previously mentioned of the platter being critically damped and non-resonant being a more significant contributor to sound quality than platter mass as a sole indicator. 

I appreciate your above post, its far less combative and judgmental. I hope we can proceed forward on a more civil discourse. 

@ mijostyn

Well the table that gets the most hours currently is the Brinkmann with Audiomods Series Six arm, which I use for more casual listening. This is primarily based on the Ortofon A90, which is the cartridge I have that I am most willing to use up the hours on, and is probably the easiest to retip. My cartridge collection is small, I have a ZYX 4D and a Denon DL-S1 that I can also use on the table. 

When I sit down and want to do critical listening, then its time to use the SOTA Cosmos Eclipse/SME V/Transfiguration Proteus combo. 

For a change of pace I will listen to the Well Tempered Reference and Ikeda 9 Kawami . Its a great sounding deck, but I meter its use because that will be the most difficult cartridge to retip. So I save it for those evenings of critical listening, and chose between it and the SOTA. 

My analog systems are decent systems, but nothing that is on the leading edge of analog playback. Simple gear for a simple guy.