Ready to try vinyl

Hi Mimberman, again I never posted I believed in a "conspiracy theory", I thought I had made myself very clear that assumptions were being made and never investigated, which means no conspiracy of the sort you mean. So, to make it short, when idler-wheel drives were murdered by a concerted effort by the press and industry (and indeed we've seen this before: a concerted effort by the press and industry to promote CDs and murder vinyl simply to increase profits, which actually happened by the press unquestionably accepting the grand claims of the profit-hungry corporations: "Perfect Sound Forever" ring a bell?) because, yes, the profits were larger in building belt-drives because they were simpler to manufacture, and also allowed smaller companies to enter into the fray (i.e. Linn) because they could never hope to start building idler-wheel drives while they COULD attach a small motor to a platter via a rubber band, then it became common "wisdom", as indeed it is largely common "wisdom" today that digital technology is superior to analogue (we vinyl lovers are dinosaurs), that belt-drives were in fact inherently superior to idler-wheel drives and direct drives. This, becoming "common wisdom" or to put it another way, dogma, became the fundamental assumption on which all later work was done. Then, it became simply development work into perfecting belt-drives, because direct drives and idler-wheel drives were simply discredited and "proven" inferior and were not to be re-examined. This is the road tread by all the legends you list. Maybe even some of them did have their doubts, but if everyone wants belt-drives, why argue, sales are assured. In fact, this type of scenario goes on now in all the sciences all the time, with new practitioners of each science being inducted into current dogmas, and never having the imagination to re-examine what has gone before. Case in point from earlier, which was my point: mankind did believe the earth revolved around the sun, until the Greeks came along. This was rectified by Copernicus, who investigated earlier writings thanks to Aristotle's diatribe against the Pythagoreans who believed the reverse. When dinosaurs were first discovered and examined, they were believed to be warm-blooded, which is now a daring new theory. And you can bet that all kinds of current theories will be supplanted by older ones revived by re-examiners.

"...none of these companies have realized what you, in your infinite wisdom have, and moved to DD or idler motors." Classic argument by authority. Given my explanation so far, then it should be clear that they did not realize this because they never questioned the fundamental assumption: belt-drives are superior (and don't deny this is the current dogma and has been for decades). And your "infinite wisdom" remark is just another "argument from athority" in a different flavour, always leveled at those who dare to question "common wisdom", as in "How dare you question all these experts?!" I dare, because I heard. My "infinite wisdom" is my ears, I trust them, and I will not deny my senses or agree 100% with a writer or designer until I've heard for myself and compared (at least, I try to live by this principle). Say what you like, a small low-torque motor is very affected by stylus drag, and a rubber band exacerbates the situation by always reacting and this reaction is not eliminated by resorting to high-mass platters but only lowered in frequency, which is clearly heard if only you would sit down and listen to a proper idler-wheeel drive. The fact that stylus drag grossly affects speed in belt-drives is in fact admitted by these designers, who devise various ways to combat it from multiple motors to the simple use of massive platters. Idler-wheel drives and DDs were designed from the initial point to eliminate stylus drag first, and in doing this, they are superior to belt-drives in various audible ways, and in the case of idler-wheel drives specifically, I believe in every way (not that DDs couldn't be further perfected). In fact, already owning both an Audiomeca turntable and an air-bearing Maplenoll at the time I first tripped over idler-wheel drives, it only took exposure to a tweaked Garrard SP25 (little cheap crappy spud, but idler wheel) to convince me, as it had slam, presence, an intense musicality and bass I never got from my belt-drives, I was convinced.

"So anyone who buys a plug and play or belt drive table doesn't use independent thought? o i c." No, this isn't what I wrote at all: those who buy belt-drives for enjoyment or in ignorance of the whole debate about DD and idlers do not fit this bill, but those who blindly defend belt-drives without having heard a properly set-up idler-wheel drive (argument from authority which is ideology not science: evidence is scientific), or to put it more simply dismiss them out of hand, do fit the bill: they are mental slaves.

"For those who want to exercise a little thing called "independent thought" and who like hands-on experience, then I invite you to try the Lenco Challenge" This is written tongue-in-cheek, but it is also a genuine challenge: test your preconceptions against a reality to see what they're worth, and free your mind. At least, even if you come out of it favouring belt-drives, you'll have come to this decision under your own steam.

And finally, to answer both you and sayles, from people who took up the challenge:

""This evening is the first chance I have had to play with the beastie. I found (it took me a little while) the Origin Live modified Rega 250 that I bought two years ago intending to mount on an Empire 208 if I ever found one. I didn't.
I also found my little used Denon 103D. An hour later we were ready to go. No plinth. I precariously balanced the Goldring on two lead shot filled plwood boxes that I made ages ago to set a pair of Carver Amazing speakers on. The speakers are long gone, but the heavy little boxes thankfully remain. Albert I don't know what TT you had before the Goldring, but my expectations were certainly not high since I have a heavily modified Linn LP 12 with an Ittok arm and Koetsu Black cartridge. I have to say that the Goldring with the lesser cartridge (the Denon 103D at $225, while a very impressive cartridge is no match for the $1,500 Koetsu), unravelled the music and separated instruments better than the Linn with the Koetsu. At first I thought that was hearing over-simplification of passages, but when I started hearing things in the foreground that were either distant on the Linn or very subdued, I knew this was not the case. Separation of lead and backing vocals and clear enunciation of words seemed better on the Goldring. I think I have to switch the Ittok and Koetsu to the Goldring to be completely fair. But then I think that there would be an even greater bias towards the Goldring."

"I am a long time Linnie. I have own LP 12's for 28 years. My current Linn has an Origin Live DC motor and a Cetech carbon fibre subchassis. On a whim I bought a GL 75 and put an Origin Live modded Rega 250 and my beloved Koetsu Black on it. Holy shit, better bass, much better leading-edge dynamics and pretty remarkable imaging. This is all without a plinth. I'm just resting this beast on two lead-filled boxes. I am about to make a decent plinth and see where it goes."

"I STILL haven't built a plinth for my GL 75, OL Rega, Koetsu Black. But I'm playing it all the time. And I get more impressed with every LP. I should mention that I went from thin, model train oil to Mobil 1 grease and then a combination of the last two. My last choice seems to be the best. When I eventually get around to building the plinth it will be on this site. Just listened to Dire Straits' "Brothers In Arms" and Little Feat "The Last Record Album". I'm hearing things that were not there AT ALL on the Linn. Buggeration. Is that possible ?"

"I fitted my old Fidelity Research FR64s, that my Linn dealer condemned for having worn bearings in 1996. Of course the bearings are fine - some people will say anything to sell a tonearm! First cartridge in is my re-tipped Koetsu Black, again mid-80s vintage. I have had a fantastic evening's listening. The Lenco is everything claimed here and more. As forecast by Jean, there is bass in abundance (not a noted Koetsu characteristic), fantastic dynamics, energy, slam, PRaT, call it what you will, and the detail and clarity are stunning. I have been listening to some serious money turntables over the last few months and the budget Lenco beats most of them - I'm not sure yet whether it's better than a Galibier I heard a few weeks ago but it's pretty close. I'll be better able to comment when I put the DL-103 on the FR64. There's no doubt in my mind that the Lenco is preferable to the Teres 265 and 360, Nottinham Spacedeck and Hyperspace, SME 10, Kuzma Stabi and of course my old Linn."

Now all these fellows who took up the Lenco Challenge in a scientific and fun spirit don't sound too disappointed, do they? Take this fellow's example: "Johnnantais, in response to your 02-20-04 posting: I´m the guy who wrote the VA post you quoted entirely without mentioning your source. I just fooled around with my L78 i just used for 78s and reported my findings at this point. Indeed, with the standard plinth and arm. Not very nice of you to accuse me of suffering from the Dogma that´s obviously becoming an obsession for you. But i´m a good sport and i take up the challenge! I´ve been fooling around with Thorens TT for ± 2 years, stuffing them with damping materials, building heavy plinths etc. I´m already mailing with Tjoeb about the Decca arm(I´m living in the Netherlands, they´re round the corner!). And i´m going to make a plinth, MDF, birch multiply, we´ll see. One question, do you keep the original springs? With the foam inside?" Now check out his website at http://members.home.nl/fmunniksma/lencol78.htm

Ummm, I've been meaning to ask, why do you persist in calling me "Johnmathias", is it some secret code?

Egad I'm being teased into paroxysms of rage! I will long mourn Listener magazine, and still admire Art Dudley for daring to stand by musicality as identifiable and more important than mere information, even if his Linn LP12 could use training wheels! That's another recommendation to add to the list, a used Linn LP12 for a good price, upgradable later if he so wishes. After idler-wheels, servo-controlled DDs (but good ones like my Sony 2250) and classic 3-point suspension belt-drives like my Scottish Ariston RD11S are my favourites.

In fact, Linn Sondek, VPI, Galibier, Teres, Amazon, Nottingham, Forsell, Rockport, Walker, Oracle, Sota, Origin, Verdier, Audiomeca, Thorens, Clearaudio, Rega, Kuzma, Michell, Roksan, and Wilson Benesch DO have it all wrong, a case of the usual orthodox dogma not being questioned and everyone blindly following without re-examination. Did ANY of these companies say "Gee, I think I'll try out a Garrard 301, and then a Technics SP10 MKII, to decide for myself which approach I should adopt"?, or did they say "Gee, even if they're better, the cost of manufacturing would be too high and the project too complex and intimidating"? or finally and most likely "Idler-wheel, direct-drive, say what?". The same happened with tubes long ago when solid state was deemed superior and tubes largely abandoned until, hey, someone actually decided to go back and listen and found it actually DOES sound good! Similarly, the world's "best" scholars for centuries believed the sun orbitted around the earth (thank you Ptolemy, you dunce), and those who claimed otherwise were threatened with incarceration, torture and death, which is why Galileo recanted despite the evidence of his telescope, while his peers the professors of Europe cheered the Church on. Centuries before Ptolemy, most cultures around at that time believed the earth orbitted around the sun (for instance the 7th-century BC Pythagoreans, who received their knowledge from the Egyptians before them), orthodox wisdom notwithstanding. So, to sum it up, the long list you provide is meaningless, simple argument by authority, one of the cardinal sins of scholarship (which should be ruled by logic and evidence), and only serves to prove the power of dogma and the willingness of the majority to not question. Though idler-wheels in fact had better rumble figures than the belt-drives of the time, we have been told for years belt-drives "won" because of rumble figures. Belt-drives are cheap to produce, same old story, allow larger profits, and yadda yadda yadda. Even the idler-wheel manufacturers saw the possibilities for increased profits from vastly lesser manufacturing costs (finely judged complex mechanics and massive motors vs rubber bands and tiny little VCR motors) and jumped on the belt-drive bandwagon, abandoning idler-wheel technology. Sometimes capitalism sucks, as today, with reality television dominating the airwaves, and damn that issue of "quality" and "integrity" anyway.

Of course, our fellow here can still get good sound, which is to say musical, from a carefully-chosen belt-drive, just not as good in many ways (or most, or all) as technologies which provide more stable speed (and thus better rhythm, and better bass, and...). And $2000 sounds like too much for me for a bottom line, but then I already prefer the sound of analogue to the sound of a computer chip. I think you could do very well for just a few hundred bucks, stretch it to $1000 including good tonearm, cartridge and phono stage. Since he does have a phono stage, then another underrated turntable - other than the Lenco ;-) - are the Aristons, specifically the RD11S (in the same league as an '80s-version Linn LP12), which is often for sale with excellent audiophile arm for only $300 or so. And the Technics SL1200 IS a current turntable, which with some tweaks will play excellent msic hassle-free for years. Of course, there's my favourite the Lenco (only if you absolutely MUST have $10,000+ of sound quality for only a few hundred bucks), for those with a hankerin' for DIY, and hankerin' to find out for themselves what all the hubbub about idler-wheel technology is about. Must end with the tried and true Rega turntables, elegant, simple, musical, plug'n'play.

Jeez, the short form then. Once upon a time, everyone in the world, including the world's "experts", believed the sun revolved around the earth. Did this mean the sun revolved around the earth? No. Now, everyone in the vinyl-spinning world believes belt-drive is the way to go, including the world's "experts". Does this mean belt drive is the superior system? By itself, majority agreement, including the "experts", means nothing, the only thing which does mean something are facts in an argument of this sort. And science, which is to say actual testing and comparisons, is the only way to it, or we'd still believe the sun revolves around the earth and be none the wiser (Galileo used his telescope, you can use a Lenco). This is the much the point of my "Building high-end 'tables cheap at Home Despot" challenge, that and reasonable pricing and fun. For those who want to exercise a little thing called "independent thought" and who like hands-on experience, then I invite you to try the Lenco Challenge. Musical results can be had with a variety of technologies and company products, but argument/belief from authority is wrong wrong wrong and should be abandoned by those who don't want to be slaves, which is why I jumped into this thread, as I can't stand willing abdication of brains. Idler-wheel technology is receiving a fair bit of press these days, for a fee in Hi Fi Worlde (who also listen to and compare top-of-the-line direct drives from yesteryear to current high-end belt-drives with "surprising" results, as well as the big Garrards) and for free in 6moons: "They suffer from that common misconception that sociologist Robert Bierstedt (1913-1998) called temporocentrism. It's the belief that the present day represents the pinnacle of achievement for all things and one whereby people equate newer with better. Of course the marketing folks delight in taking full advantage of temporocentrism to sell the next great breakthrough. Sometimes newer is better but often it's just different."

Gee, I didn't see anything ungentlemanly in my reply R f sayles, I hope you can understand my "short form", and I had in fact addressed the gentleman's request, this is an ongoing thread with twists and turns, which is how discussions work, perhaps you could try to keep up and refrain from unwarranted personal attacks. I was answering two posts which were specifically on this thread, I don't remember telling anyone they don't know what they hear, I do however remember saying they rely too much on "experts," my point being that even the experts don't question universal assumptions. As to answering the gentleman's request for a reasonably priced turntable, perhaps you could explain to me where Galibier, SME, Amazon etc. fit in. You'd better show some fairness in your attacks and go after Judy426 and Mimberman as well. "Peace" LOL

R-xxxx, it was not "experts" who discovered the world was not flat, you miss the point AGAIN: they were, by definition, cranks, since they went against the orthodox opinion which existed at the time. In Galileo's day, the "experts" spent a lot of time and effort working out complex epicycles to fit the observed movements of the stars in a scheme which placed earth at the center. Then the cranks Galileo and Copernicus came along and told them that all those years of belief and effort were wrong (sound familiar?), that if you placed the sun at the centre of the universe then all the movements made sense. It was not only the Church which opposed Galileo, but nearly the entirety of the scholars of Europe. In fact, Copernicus was so afraid of the battle his theory would bring with it that he waited until the end of his life to publish it. And you do not address in any of your posts the issue of an unexamined assumption, and science is FILLED with unexamined assumptions, something which would make scientists nervous should it ever get out. This might lead to a little thing called "independent thought", which would go a long ways to dimishing the unquestioned power of the "experts". Another word for "unexamined assumptions" is "paradigm", and a profound shift in science (or any area of thought) caused by a re-examination and change of fundamental assumptions is called a "paradigm shift". As to Bacon's dicta being quaint, a lawyer's trick, sophistry to defend routine scientific actions denying the results of experiments (often by simply cvalling them "anomalies" and sweeping them under the carpet) to support cherished theories contradicted by them; the increasing reliance on theory with no means of testing them (18-dimensional space which is as relevant and testable as the number of angles which dance on the head of a pin) is an example of the degeneration of science, not its evolution. And as to comparing myself to Galileo and others, this is called an "example", a "precedent", a "comparison". I do not equate myself with Galileo, we're talking record players here. The point is the case of Galileo and Darwin are examples everyone knows, so they understand what I'm talking about: one fellow everyone is now familiar with, says everyone is wrong, and is later declared right, as everyone knows. Should I instead refer to "Dweeble Wainright" who invented a better dough for donuts to make the point for fear someone like you will come along and accuse me of thinking I rank with them? Are we then to always avoid referring to well-known figures in ANY discussion for fear we will be charged with megalomania? No more referrals to Shakespeare in a discussion of literature, because this means you are equating yourself to him, and thus showing your megalomania. Can't have that, so let's make the process infinitely longer, research nobodies no one ever heard of, spend hours and pages of text explaining them, and THEN use them to make a point. These tactics are a standard argumentative device peddled out by scientists and scholars to discredit those whose ideas they don't like: nail them on another cooked-up issue, the history of science is filled with such manipulations. Either you're too dumb to understand the concept of precedent, or you are deliberately trying to represent me in a negative light, and damn that old concept integrity and fairness anyway. As to observation being theory-laden, theory is derived from observations, without observation and controlled experiment we're back to believing horses are impregnated by the wind. There IS no science without observation and experimentation, without them, then it is simple blowing wind, which is my point. In the case of Lencos, they must be compared. And nowhere did I write that the very fact "experts" agree on something is the reason they must be wrong, I used the EXAMPLE of "experts" agreeing on something having been shown to be wrong to suggest they might be wrong in the case of belt-drive, as I have tried to make clear, and thought I HAD made clear, several times: "Did ANY of these companies say "Gee, I think I'll try out a Garrard 301, and then a Technics SP10 MKII, to decide for myself which approach I should adopt"?, or did they say "Gee, even if they're better, the cost of manufacturing would be too high and the project too complex and intimidating"? or finally and most likely "Idler-wheel, direct-drive, say what?"." The same happened with tubes long ago when solid state was deemed superior and tubes largely abandoned until, hey, someone actually decided to go back and listen and found it actually DOES sound good!" Jeez, is it someting in the water, this is turning into a nightmare!

So does this mean that I believe record players are as important as Galileo's work?! Nowhere did I write this, does no one understand the concept of a comparison?!!! Well, let's answer this anyway, because probably the concept of a "rhetorical question" has also faded from the degenerating mind of Western citizens: NO, of course not, but science is science, and evidence (AND logic, an illogical theory is a wrong one) is ALWAYS stronger than theory, meaning if an experiment shows a theory to be false, then that theory is false, this is called "integrity", or do you believe that the principles of science are only to be applied in larger issues of biology and astronomy, but not in other fields of research, and not in lesser points in those very areas of research, or indeed anywhere outside the control of famous scientists?

Finally, if the humble Lenco can humiliate so many highly-regarded belt-drive turntables, as it does when someone actually sits down for a fair comparison, then one must find the reason why (or you could not rock the boat, support the status quo, and sweep the evidence under the carpet, since that Bacon was so primitive in his simplistic beliefs, NOW we're talking modern routine scholarship and science). The Lenco is not a totally stupendous piece of engineering like Albert's Walker is, or indeed even most of its "competitors", in fact it is quite humble, so what can be the reason? This may not be of cosmic significance, but it is EXACTLY what makes science so fascinating, which is why I refer to science so much in promoting the Lenco Challenge, it makes the whole project fascinating and fun, you do understand the concept of fun and fascination don't you? It allows even us little spuds to dabble in and learn about the scientific process, or are you against the general population using their own heads and their own hands to participate in the scientific process to come to their own decisions, rather than allow themselves to be led by the "experts," who will charge them with megalomania should they have the temerity to think they too can apply fundametal principles and come to their own understanding? NOW we get to the theory part you think I've missed in my simple-minded megalomania (or more likely, any port in a storm in an argument): observation shows the Lenco is far better than its simple construction indicates, and what differentiates it from the belt-drives is its idler-wheel system, a system which ruled until belt-drives came along. Now while I am NOT saying this is of cosmic significance, I AM saying that principles are principles, and if evidence at whatever level shows a dominating theory to be wrong, then, especially in an arena which allows so many to participate (this hobby is filled with DIYers, and record players are easily accessible, no lab equipment other than a stereo system required), we should encourage these experiments, not try to suppress them. Should education be limited to children, or are we allowed to continue to learn as we grow older? Or will the scientific world shake and quake becaue audiophiles are tinkering in their living rooms and thinking?!

To the person who initiated this thread, I apologize for hijhacking this thread, I had no idea when I dared to state that since experts in the past had been wrong then experts now might be wrong I would be opening such a HUGE can 'o worms, which I suppose explains why so many (as Copernicus in his day....ooops, not allowed to use "examples", so Frederick Gorbudarian in his day) decide to simply keep quiet. As I wrote far above, I do love analogue (evidently) and applaud your choice in moving ahead to find out for yourself (yes being active in an experiment to come to your own decisions) to see if vinyl rates. I hope this starts a whole new area of enjoyment for you, I know I never stopped loving the old vinyl. Enjoy.

R-whatever, you miss the point as so many others, the experts of any given time were overthrown by what were perceived as cranks in their day, as is necessarily so, which were only in hindsight recognized as correct. Galileo was the crank and all those who taught the sun revolved around the earth were the experts. Darwin was the crank and all those who believed in instant Creation were the experts. If you only exercised that over-used and under-defined concept "logic" you might have seen this. As to under-defined science, I've defined it many times, it's really not very complicated, science, which is to say empirical science, rests on experiment and observation. In turntable terms, this means comparison and listening. Too complicated for you? Here's a litle primer from the days when the modern concept of science (as opposed to blowing wind) was being developed: "There is one science, he says, more perfect than others, which is needed to verify the others, the science of experiment, surpassing the certainty, however strong the reasoning, unless experiment be added to test their conclusions. Experimental science alone is able to ascertain what can be effected by nature, what by art, what by fraud. It alone teaches how to judge all the follies of the magicians, just as logic can be used to test argument." (Robert Bacon) In modern terms, take one Lenco and one high-end belt-drive and place them in the same system, plug them in, and listen and compare. Sorry, I can't make it any simpler than this. Is there a right or a wrong? Would you say that it is wrong to assert that a Galibier is better than a Project Xpression? Is there no difference in quality, no superior system? No? Then I think I'll go shovel some coal in my steam-driven 10-ton car, "combustion engine", kooky idea!

Well I see this thread certainly kept going during my absence, these types of debates will occur again and again, and perhaps thankfully infrequently. Thanks Raul for recognizing my point in referring to the history of astronomy, and for always questioning!: people are blind to fundamental assumptions, which being invisible, are not investigated and not questioned. People respond emotionally and not logically to these comforting assumptions being questioned, as in the end we most of us prefer stability (;-)). Thanks to Musicdoc and Albertporter as well for their support, you're both gentlemen. I can see Albert's point that a true fair comparison between drive systems is not possible due to the integral nature of his turntable (I certainly wouldn't want to touch that animal), and am very grateful to Albert for his support and fun spirit, but I have to say that Albert, you are being somewhat disengenuous (picture finger-wagging auntie gently scolding) in stating that "In spite of my admiration of the Lenco and Garrard idler wheel designs, there is no contest between these and the Walker." Since the Lenco was mounted with a humble stock Decca International (with its stock thick tin wiring and plastic frcition-fit pieces) and Shure V15VxMR while your Walker was mounted with a state-of-the-art air-bearing tonearm, cables and a Koetsu Rosewood Signature Platinum (not to mention other discrepancies) then this statement is hardly meaningful, is it, something which should have been pointed out. I mean, if you were to stage a contest between your Walker and a SME 30 and mount the SME with a Decca International and Shure V15, would people stand quietly by (as they do now) and simply accept your verdict it doesn't even come close to the Walker?

At that time as well, I could not even convince anyone to mount a humble Rega on the Lenco to give it a fair trial by my peers, and so was forced to track down and publicise the extremely cheap Decca International tonearms, which at time sold for 25 euros, which indeed got the ball rolling. When bowled over by the resultant sound, many wrongly attributed this greatness to the tonearm, and not the platform: the Lenco. I started to kick their asses to stop playing with the cheap budget stuff and stretch the Lenco's legs with at least a Rega, which finally resulted in the following comment from an intrepid Lenco-er which got THAT ball rolling: "And yes...it sounds fantastic, blows my STD305D away, quieter background, enormous controlled bass, incredible detail, just altogether jaw droppingly good...and it don't look bad either!." For context, the STD supplanted a Linn LP12. Finally, the best tonearm/cartridge ever mounted - Graham 2.2/Benz Micro - received the following report: "Well, as I indicated previously, we have installed a Graham 2.2/IC-70 cable on our latest creation, an L75. At the advice of Jean, we went whole-hog and mounted my Benz Micro Reference2 Copper, a cartridge custom built by Mr. Lukaschek himself. We have now spun about 15 LP’s with this combination...This is, with doubt, the best combo I’ve ever had in my system and one of the best I’ve ever heard in any system with remotely comparable components. Of course, the slam and pacing of the Lenco is there in spades. I was not, however, prepared for the expansive soundstage which goes well beyond my speakers and into the side yard. There is a ton of detail without being anything close to analytical. The midrange is very sweet and female vocals are just a gas! From those who have used the Graham with other tables, the one very minor complaint of some is a hair bit of lightness in the bass. Not in this front end. I have heard the Graham 2.2 now on about 8 different tables and I’ve never heard it sound better. A real winner in every respect. A spoiler, actually." For context, the fellow's previous 'table, which he subsequently sold, was a Nottingham Spadedeck. I trot out these reports occasionally (and new ones keep coming in) as they constitute the evidence in my experiment/challenge.

At the time you asked me which way to go, and I wrote you "for musicality go for the Decca, for information go for the Rega" (or something along those lines), as I fully understood you had no real interest in pitting the Lenco against your Fabulous Beast but were in it for the fun aspect, and for providing that shining example kudos! Now I am extremely grateful for the support and good humour you provided in the early days of the vulnerable thread (in fact I miss your witty contributions, I still laugh at the "pillow-fluffer" comment), but have to point out that the Lenco has indeed humbled quite a few highly-regarded current title-holders when armed with nothing better than "mid-fi" tonearms such as the Regas and such-like, (and even then someone recently reported a Lenco traded blows in an extremely sophisticated set-up with a SME 30 armed with an exotic MC while the Lenco was armed with the usual budget items). Barring that, if a Lenco armed with a RB300 can stay ahead of a VPI TNT, what can it do if it were armed with a good air-bearing tonearm, such as the Walker's "father", the Maplenoll, or with a sota unipivot such as the Graham 2.2, and a Koetsu mounted to that? I'm not saying it will beat or even match the Walker (though in some ways, such as drive, it might), but as I wrote long ago, if it takes a 40K-$50 belt-drive in order to clearly defeat a Lenco (i.e. if this can only be achieved at ruinous cost), then what does this say about the belt-drive drive system?

Now I would truly like to see such a showdown, I don't think making everything absolutely even is necessary to make the point (and since it can't be done then the point is moot), but I am not going to use my [limited] travel money for such a venture, preferring instead to concentrate my hearing on the sound of belled goats and lapping waves in the Greek hillsides above the Aegean, or indeed beer in the heart of Berlin. I could however someday send an emissary in the form of a specially-built Lenco, or one of the Lenco followers nearer could take their own. If in the process we find that the Lenco has a ceiling of, say $20K equivaklent belt-drive, then we know this and I finally know what the upper limits are. In the process, the idler-wheel is re-instated as a serious drive system with its own set of strengths and weaknesses (which certainly was not the case a year ago, so we have learned something already). The DD afficionados also point to certain strengths over belt-drive (which again exposes weaknesses in the system which it is wiser to acknowledge than wish away if true progress is what we want). Anyway, even the fact this is being discussed is good news, that people understand that something must be tested in order to be fairly judged, and to keep an open mind. Until the next Great Debate, enjoy spinning that oh-so-lovely vinyl all, and I would say always suspect your unseen assumptions (and those of others, such as the chemical/food companies), use that little-used muscle in these days of reality television and Disney-run/corporate-run newscasts, the brain, we have never, EVER, needed it more! Now, back to my lovely Lenco/Rega/Denon for some more of that Baroque, which perhaps the Lenco favours, I'm so obssessed with it these days, gotta love those Eratos! Sorry to those who have hung on so far for such a long post, too late to delete, the smart ones are drinking beer.