New Teres Direct Drive Motor Available as Option

Thom, what a cool idea! By using one platter as the pulley to drive the other, I think (if I remember my Newtonian mechanics correctly) there is less stretching force on the belt and a lower likelihood of slippage, ergo less speed irregularity (because the driving platter will have a huge mechanical advantage compared to a tiny pulley). Moreover, the driver Loricraft constitutes a high torque motor, as opposed to the very low torque motors favored by some designers for use with high mass platters. So, I see that 2-Loricraft idea (if it sounds good) as support for the idler drive/rim drive/high torque motor school. This is not to say that I disagree with your basic premise as stated.

Swampwalker, I don't want to wade into an argument about belt drive vs idler drive vs etc, but "torque" is defined as angular force. So, torque is the product of mass multiplied by acceleration, like any other force. Then, if stylus drag could be thought of as the equivalent of a force that delivers "negative acceleration" to the platter, a high torque motor might be of benefit in overcoming it. The question you raise is however a good one which I have not seen addressed; just what in fact is the magnitude of the force we describe as "stylus drag"? I dunno myself. I think it's key that stylus drag is constantly varying during different musical passages. That's where idlers may have a real advantage, by offering relative immunity to minute changes in platter speed that might other wise result from stylus drag.

Ketchup, One would need to know a lot more about how a cutting lathe works. Perhaps someone among us can enlighten the rest. But if your idea has any validity, then in effect "stylus drag" is a good thing. There seems to be a body of empirical evidence that this is not the case. I would guess that cutting lathes use powerful high torque motors that are securely connected to the lathe, so that heavily modulated passages are treated no differently from those that are less so. But I'm just guessing.

Paul, I think you misunderstood my intent. My main point was that we need someone who is or was in the record-making business to tell us whether Ketchup's point has any validity. And I am only saying that my guess is that it does not, but I admit I don't know. Now you have cited your empirical and subjective experience to contradict me, while also saying that this type of evidence is not acceptable. Your opinion is certainly as valid as mine, but one would need to know more about cutting lathes to settle the matter.

Did you try a plain old brick or rock or piece of slate as a control for the benefits of the Shakti stone?

I think I remember that the Shakti stone does have the property of soaking up some of the stray fields radiated by transformers, over and above the fact that mass loading the tranny helps to reduce vibration. I also think I read that any old out of use transformer, if placed atop a functional transformer, will have some of the same positive effects, but I've never tried that, nor have I used Shakti stones. From the hayday of audiovoodoo, promoted often innocently by HP, the Shakti stone hangs around. I don't dispute that it may do some good, I just am interested in the why of it.

Or, if you want to get fancy, the best strobe/disc I know of is sold by KAB. Worth the reasonable cost, IMO.