Dear Macrojack: I think that because there are several subjects on it it is almost imposible to tell which one is better: DD or BD.
If we take two of the TT primary functions: speed accuracy and speed stability, we can conclude that the DD beats the BD system: example, the Walker one has 0.002% on this spec against 0.001% on an SP 10 or Exclusive.
If we take the wow and flutter, the Sp 10 beats ( easily ) my Micro Seiki RX 5000: 0.015% against 0.025%.
We can take too the Rumble and here in the case of Walker or Avid it is around 90 db against 92 db on the SP 10 or 95 db of the Exlusive one
Btw, I own SP 10s, Denons, Micro Seiki, Luxman and Acoustic Signature.
From the point of view of how it performs on their designs the DD ones beats the BD: you can " see " at the measurements and this is a fact, period.
It is curious the BD manufacturers almost don't give almost any specs about: I wonder why?.
All those specs are extremely important to know about the quality build design if not which were or which ones are the TT targets on the TT design and how the designer compare the result ( build ) against those targets ?. Of course that the TT designer can had other kind of targets but it does not sense to me if he do not take in count those ones like speed accuracy and speed stability between others.
The TT specs can't tell me " per se " how good is the music reproduction performance but tell me how good care take the designer on the build of that unit and at least on the speed spec can tell me what " to wait " for.
Now, the " best voted " today TT is the Rockport that is a DD design and in the other side the Walker is the best example of what we can have in the BD designs.
Both designs go to an extreme design, here we can't say ( real ) which is better because in both trhey take in count almost all the issues for a perfect TT performance design: speed accuracy/stability, kind of motor, platter resonance/vibrations, energy disipation, plataform, air bearing, tonearm, quality on execution, " beauty on that execution ", etc, etc.
Which one do you like and which one performs better? ? , this is a subjective answer and we can have different answers about like different persons we are.
Which one is better?, here we have to go for facts: measurements, something objective and for this point of view the DD is a better one.
I send to build my plynths of my SP 10 and Denon TTs with a solid beautiful marble and Onyx one piece stones ( 40 kg ), as a fact this plynths function like the tonearm boards. I use the Audio Technica pneumatic suspension footers and tip toes like between TT and the plynths.
These DD TTs are very precise and have better music sound reproduction quality performance at both frequency extremes than my BD TTs: this is very easy to find out, play a piano work in either design. Why am I not using them?: because I need to mount, at least, three tonearms in each TT ( that I can change in any moment ) and the Micro and AS ones comes ready to work on it.
One of my future targets is to build a system plynth/arm board for I can use my DD TTs in the same way that my BD TTs, in the mid time I have to accept a 95-98% ? quality performance of what I can achieve with my DD TTs, not big deal.
Regards and enjoy the music.
Raul. |
Dear Zaikesman: +++++ " To me the real-world value of DD might be where it is right now ..." +++++
I agree, we can buy a SP10 MK2 for 400.00 dls ( with out plynth and tonearm ), a Denon DP 800 for 500.00 0r a SP 10 MK3 for 1,200.00. Btw, all these TT designs comes from more than 20 years ago!!!! ). Any one of these TTs ( with the right plynth/footers/tonearm/mat) can compete not with ++++" any belt-driver in its price range. " ++++ ( like you say ) but with the 40K+ Walker BD TT and for a ridiculous price fraction.
+++++ " Which drive method is allegedly "superior" .." +++++
IN my opinion and if we take only the drive system " per se " then the DD is a superior drive system over the BD one. The first and most important function on a TT is the speed accuracy/stability and here the BD system can't compete with the DD system and this is a fact that any one can see it through measurements and own TT specs, period. Btw, ( at least on my TTs ) one musical reproduction characteristic on the DD TT is the more real and natural decay time of the notes, this give to the sound reproduction a better feel of the " live music " against the BD TT.
+++ " .. the evidence could point toward factors other than drive method ruling the roost at that level. " ++++
Yes, there are several other factors than drive system where one or the other could be superior.
About Stereophile: well the champion at the moment is the BD design Continuum for around 90K, speed accuracy? : 0.006%.
Regards and enjoy the music.
Raul. |
Dear friends: The Macrojack start thread question: " Is Direct Drive Really Better? ", it is an open question that has several different stages. Because of that I think there is no single answer of the question.
If we read all the ones posted here in some ways all of them are right answers.
In my opinion we have, at least, two big stages about: one an objective aproach and the other a subjective one and from here we could have another stages like a: objective/subjective one.
From the objective approach what will be tell us which drive TT design is better are: MEASUREMENTS that could be corroborated in a scientific way. What should be measured?, at least: speed accuracy, speed stability ( refered to time ), signal to noise, rumble and woow&flutter.
From the information that I have the DD designs are the ones where we can find almost all those measurements. In the BD designs we can find little info about and in the IW less info.
So with out those measurements info we can't say for sure which drive TT design is better. I posted that the speed accuracy of the SP 10 ( 0.001% ) beats any BD design because searching info about I find that the Walker is 0.002% and the Commtinum 0.006%, but I can't find any info on: Basis, VPI, Teres, Galibier, Simon Yorke, Clearaudio, Transrotor, Brinckman, etc, etc..
Now, for IW the very little info about is really poor.
I have a lot of respect for Johnnantais and when he told us that the IW drive system has a better speed accuracy/stability he don't have a scientific measurement where all of us can corroborate that. So from an objective approach the Johnnantais opinion ( like mine or other people ) has no value at all and can't tell us which drive system is better.
The same is for the " tonearm/cartridge drag " subject: till today nobody can confirm which drive system ( high mass platter or not ) is really better on this subject. All we have are opinions, that's all.
Btw, from the objective approach I think that it is time that the BD and IW defender take their time and money for to have those objective measurements. Johnnantais this is part of your challenge where you can prove you point of view.
Now, if we take the subjective approach then things could be extremely complicated because any one of us could have a different opinion about. Here there is not only our opinion but in which stage are our opinion corroborated, that is, against what: what we like it or against live music?, in which room, with which tonearm/cartridge, which cables, which phonopreamp, wood/acrylic/metal design, air bearing or not, vacuum hold down record?, which mat, which clamp type, which load impedance, VTF/SRA, which records, which speakers, full range system or not, which, which, which and which?, no ended.
With the info that I have ( objective approach ) I confirm that the DD design is the best one. If any of you want to prove that other drive TT designs are better you have to prove it with those measurements not with an opinion, this opinion belongs to the subjective approach and here any of us could be " right ".
Regards and enjoy the music.
Raul. |
Dear Zaikesman: +++++ " Raul: I think your focus on speed-accuracy may be overstated. IMO speed-stability is the more important factor, beyond a certain point of competence concerning accuracy. Accuracy isn't that hard to achieve, stability is. " +++++
No, definitive I don't agree with you: ovbiously speed stability is a critical and very important TT subject but first than all we need speed accuracy, that's mean that first we need that the TT drive system runs exactly at 45 rpm ( example ) not at 44 or 46 rpm. It does not matters that a drive system has good speed stability if not has speed accuracy. In my opinion first we need speed accuracy and the second most desired characteristic is speed stability.
I don't agree too with : ++++ " Accuracy isn't that hard to achieve " +++++. I think that you are only " talking " ( with all respect: brain-masturbation . ) with out any scientific info that can confirm your statement. If it was not hard to achieve then we should have several TT with a speed accuracy of 0.001% and we only have two of them. Where do you learn or which are the facts that confirm your statements?
Here it is another of your BM that have no value at all because this BM can't be corroborated for any one ( you are accelerate your " car " in " neutral " . ):
+++++ " If a TT slows a bit when it encounters increased stylus drag, then a lathe must also slow when it cuts more highly modulated passages into the blank lacquer. To read the information as accurately as possible, the playback should read those grooves with speed distortions that correlate with how it was cut. " +++++
I'm not saying that you can't have all those BM that you posted and many more, what I try to explain is that those BM don't permit to any one to go any where.
I suggest that because you are very interested on this thread make a extensive research about your statements and share with us the facts that you find it.
Dear Zaikesman, you statements in their today status confused to many people and what all we need here is to have a clear and precise information on the thread subject with out speculations that can be corroborated.
Regards and enjoy the music.
Raul. |
Hi: SM?, good point. Btw, from a pure objective approach the " numbers " are what define which audio device is better not if we can hear those " numbers ".
Here are some of those " numbers " and you will be the best judge:
Manufacturer wow&flutter speed accu.% signal/noise ratio
Belt Drive.
Basis Gold MK3...0.02...... 0.02...... 90 db
Kuzma Ref............0.05...... 0.08...... 83
Michel Gyro..........0.05...... 0.01...... 80
Sota Cosmos.........0.025..... 0.02...... 87
SME 20..................0.05...... 0.01...... 85
Voyd.....................0.004..... 0.001..... 80
VPI TNT...............0.01...... 0.01...... 90
Well Tempered ......0.01...... 0.001..... 84
Roksan Xerxes.......0.02...... -----..... 83
Linn 12/lingo...........0.03...... 0.01...... 70
Goldmund Ref........0.01...... 0.01...... 85
Micro RX5000.......0.02...... 0.015..... 84
Maplenol................0.03...... 0.003..... 80
Walker....................----...... 0.002..... --
Continuum...............----...... 0.006..... --
Townsed Ref...........0.02...... 0.01...... 85
Acoustic Signat........0.02...... 0.006..... 85
Direct Drive.
Rockport.................0.01...... 0.01...... 98
Exclusive.................0.015..... 0.001..... 95
Denon DP100.........0.02...... 0.002..... 90
Yamaha GT2000X..0.0025.... 0.002..... 85
Technics SP10MK3.0.015..... 0.001..... 92
Technics SP10MK2.0.02...... 0.001..... 86
Denon DP80............0.02...... 0.002..... 80
GPA Monaco............----...... 0.002..... --
These are the best TT " numbers " . The Idler Wheel have really poor " numbers " and the Rega and the like very poor too, on many others there is no single " number ", sorry.
Btw, it will be nice if Teres and Galibier could give us their " numbers ".
Regards and enjoy the music.
Raul. |
Dear Zaikesman: +++++ " or illuminate anything about what we hear or which drive method is "best". " +++++
I think that you don't read carefully what I posted about, here it is:
+++++ " Btw, from a pure objective approach the " numbers " are what define which audio device is better not if we can hear those " numbers ". " +++++
Come on!!!!
I respect your opinion but you have a misunderstood about. I'm talking of " numbers " ( objective approach ) in an absolute concept/terms and you ( like always ) are talking in a subjective point of view . Two very differents things.
At least and in an absolute concept/terms of objective approach: " numbers ", we have answers about this thread and with your subjective approach we don't have any.
Regards and enjoy the music.
Raul. |
Dear Sean: +++++ " I truly believe in measurements and a scientific approach to audio, but often the most difficult thing is knowing exactly what to measure. " +++++
I agree with you.
Btw, in the TT subject and from the objective approach it is a fact that we can only " work " with the " numbers " that are on hand: there are no others!!!!...
Now, there is no single approach that is right: objective or subjective, we have to take from both and bring the best for each one to our priorities.
Regards and enjoy the music.
Raul. |
Dear Zaikesman: +++++ " There could be others, " +++++
I agree but that is not the point.
+++++ " The status quo however is that turntable reviews (and cartridge and tonearm reviews) include no measured test results whatsoever. This is unfortunate, because I believe there can be a salutory effect on the product marketplace stemming from public accountability for technical performance claims and the availability of comparison data. " +++++
I agree too. We need a come back to " Audio magazin e "!!!!
++++ " It might be interesting if Teres would be willing to share with us some idea of what kinds of measurements are taken as part of a manufacturer's design and testing process that aren't normally published for consumer consumption. " +++++
Yes, it will be interesting and not only from Teres but for other designers like Walker ( Rushton, Albert: Can you help about? ). Btw, for what I read about the Walker TT, including the very long and very interesting review-interview in 6Moons ( I think ), Mr. Walker never mentioned any Proscenium measurements ( top secret? ): Albert-Mike-Rushton, do you know if something exist about?.
Btw, I will be really surprised if those measurements exist not only from Walker but from other TT manufacturers and here I will be very happy to be wrong.
Regards and enjoy the music.
Raul. |
Dear TWL: +++++ " And that also includes the price range, because if a listener cannot afford it, it is of little consequence to him how great it may be. " +++++
I totally agree. The price subject is really important for all of us and to have a different point of view about TTs: how much we need to paid for almost the same quality on a DD and BD system?
If we take a look, only with the " numbers/specs " that we have on hand, it seems to me that the BD system is more expensive than the DD systems ( other than Rockport ). We can have a SP10 for 400.00 with out base/tonearm !!!!!!!!
I can put on a contest one of my Sp 10s ( against any BD one ) where I invest around: 2K, this include: Sp 10, marble base, Pneumatic Audio technica footers, Vacuum Audio Technica platter, mods on the external power supply, tonearm, tiptoe like between the SP 10 and the marble base, etc, etc. This TT could be a " sound surprise " for many of us.
Regards and enjoy the music.
Raul. |
Dear Taviran: +++++ " resolution of a system, its dynamic impact or its huge soundstage, that the fact that the turntable was completely off pitch evaded their notice. This is why I think that at least in this department, measurements are mandatory. " +++++
This is a normal situation between all of us audiophiles: our ears are perfectly " equalized " to our audio system, many of us can't hear the pitch differences. One of my point about is that people not attend to live music concert frequently, they usually heard the music through their own systems or through other friend systems and their ears are totally system " equalized ": there is no space to " pitch ".
Yes, I agree that measurements are mandatory., unfortunatelly no one TT designer cares about it: I wonder which were the TT design targets of those designers or against what they know that achieve it?. Obviously they trust in the " ears " that are really untrusty: ???????
++++ " Now from my experience, belt drives do indeed have pitch problems, but some more than others. " +++++ Of course. I already work hard with the power supply of my BD TTs to try to lower that problem. Certainly the SP 10s are better on this subject.
About the Lenco I appreciate the Johnnantais passion and that's why he think that the Lenco is better than the SP 10: Johnnantais bring with you your Lenco against one of my SP 10 and we will see.
Regards and enjoy the music.
raul. |
Dear friends: There is other point that " speaks " in favor of the DD system:
from what I know the cutting lathe machines ( that " make " the LP ), like Neumann, Fairchild, Scully, etc, etc, has DD design not BD/IW. Wonder why?, yes you have the answer.
Regards and enjoy the music.
Raul. |
Dear Jean: Thx about the Scully info.
+++++ " The best way to determine speed stability given the problem of which measurements are meaningful, is the human ear. " +++++
The question is: in what range of pitch sensitivity is our ear? how much/less changes on " pitch " can we hear ?
About the statement of Mr. von Recklinghausen, today things are changong about. Today we have better audio designs, better audio parts, better " rooms ", improved know-how, etc, etc. , at least at the high-end audio niche.
Regards and enjoy the music.
Raul. |
Dear Teres: It is a fact that in your subjective TT evaluations you really like the wood " colorations " against metal ones, that´s fine.
My question about TT material was because you are in a new TT design and I only try to tell you: look for other material options.
Btw, some of the big names in TT, both DD and BD, are all metal designs: Rockport, Walker, Verdier, Acoustic Signature, Simon Yorke, Micro Seiki, Denon, Technics, American Sound, Final, etc, etc.
Regards and enjoy the music.
Raul. |
Dear Teres: First congratulations for be on that DD design and for trying to give to the analog audio community a diferent option about, not an easy task where almost all the audio community thinks that the BD design is the best way to go.
I know that your DD design is almost at the final stage and I know that because I don't have the opportunity to hear it I don't have the " feeling " of the quality sound reproduction, but I know very well other DD TT performance and I can imagine ( a little ) your DD TT design performance.
I always support the all metal TT designs against the non/full-metal designs and I already posted that the all metal Galibier or AS or other metal ones beats the Teres wood/acrylics ones. For what I read through this thread your DD design is npot an all metal one: is there any reserve about that preclude your DD design to be an all metal one? do you think that in this moment your non-metal DD design is a better one? or do you make it in that way because looks better than an all metal one?
Regards and enjoy the music.
Raul. |
