Ready to try vinyl

Dear friends: I think that Johnnantais is right in many ways and I agree with him in many issues.

His Gallileo, Bacon, etcc references, are a way to dramatize a fact that the 99% of the people " can't see it " or does not " want to see it ".

Opalchip do serious statements about what exactly is the job of a TT for to know what can we expect from a TT : +++++ " What exactly does a turntable do? It's a platter spun by a motor that we put a record on. The ABSOLUTE BEST thing it can do is turn at an accurate, highly constant 33rpm and not impart any vibration to the lp. It cannot "add" anything positive to the playback. " +++++

Any one of you have to agree with those statements, especially: ACCURATE AND HIGHLY CONSTANT SPEED ( 33/45rpm in the short and long run ).

Here the idler/DD TT's beats any belt drive design ( including the Walker ). I own four belt drive TTs, three SP 10MK2, two DP80s and one DP75 Denon's. In the past I was owner of: SP10MK3 and a Denon DP 100 ( please don't ask why I don't own today these two TTs. I don't want to remember it ).

The idler/DD servo TTs are dead steady on the rpm issue. The motor in the DD TT is really a tour de force, at least in the DD models that I own.

The pitch in the music reproduction in a home audio system is the most critical subject for a right musical appreciation. Any small variation in the TT speed change the pitch and change totally what we are hearing.

The problem in the belt drive systems is in the belt drive it self ( not in the small motors that are using ), all kind of belt drive materials: kevlar, nylon, silk, rubber, etc., have the tendency to stretch ( every single second that are in use ), is this tendency to stetch what do almost impossible to mantain a constant speed. The DD drive servo TTs don't have to fight with this critical issue and don't have that little speed variations that the belt drive have: especially in the short run, that is where really is important. Now, it is not only the stretch tendency on the belt drive system what is a critical issue there are other critical issues in a belt drive systems, like: changes in the room temperature, changes in the room humidity, the pulley and platter friction with the belt, the pulley/platter build imperfections, etc...

This single subject: " ACCURATE AND HIGHLY CONSTANT SPEED ", ( where everything the same ) do the difference between a belt drive system against a DD system, where the DD system beats the belt drive system.

Johnnantais don't have to go so far away: the best TT system is the Rockpor Sirius, this 70K+ " baby " use a DD system: wonder why? Don't you think that if the " experts belt drive system " was the better Rockport would had choose it?

The three belt drive systems TTs that are in my current audio system are very good on the speed issue but aren't perfect: I'm checking every day and some days after/before every listen record the speed variation.

There are many issues of the why's many of us and all the " reviewers/experts " are using belt drive systems: but this situation is only circunstantial and does not means that the belt drive system is better than the direct drive system, because it's not.

Regards and enjoy the music.
Raul.

Dear Albert: I think that I don't explain the speed issue in a right way.

+++++ " : ACCURATE AND HIGHLY CONSTANT SPEED ( 33/45rpm in the short and long run ).

Here the idler/DD TT's beats any belt drive design ( including the Walker ). " +++++

If I can remember the Walker speed accuracy is 0.002%: a really splendid figure, but the SP 10M2 is half that of the Walker: 0.001% and the SP 10MK3 is only 0.0001%.

I agree with you on your statement: +++++ " The Walker represents the pinnacle of this engineering... " +++++

But that is not the point. My point is very simple:

" A Walker DD system beats a Walker belt drive system ", if only for the better speed accuracy of the DD design.

Albert, this is part of what I already post and maybe you loose to read:

+++++ " This single subject: " ACCURATE AND HIGHLY CONSTANT SPEED ", ( where everything the same ) do the difference between a belt drive system against a DD system, where the DD system beats the belt drive system. " +++++.
You can note: ( where everything the same ).
Your statement that the Walker is superior to a standard Lenco is out of place: of course that is superior.

I know that I don't have your wide experience with hundreds of TTs ( like you say ) and my reference to Walker TT was not against the Walker or against any Walker owner like you. As I told you my point is a simple one.

Regards and enjoy the music.
Raul.

Hi Albert: I think that I can't explain me or you loose my point:

+++++ " " A Walker DD system beats a Walker belt drive system .. " +++++

That's all.

I'm not a fanatic of the " numbers ", I only take care about where they are critical and in a TT that number is critical and ( EVERYTHING THE SAME ) push the balance in favor of the TT with the best number. Simple as that.

Albert, you post:

+++++ " Many pieces of equipment that are excellent on paper do not necessarily sound excellent. " ++++++

and I agree with that, but I insist: that's is not the point. Sorry.

I don't want to open the door for a direct comparison between the Walker an a SP 10MK3/MK2 up-graded. But we can do it, if you want.

I have two plinths/frame for my Denon's/Technics, one from solid green marble ( 40+kg ) and one from solid natural onyx ( same weight ), btw: beautiful frames.. I have a neumatic suspension footers for those plinths. The plinth function not only like the frame TT but it is the arm board too. I can mount any of my SAECs tonearms or I can do and additional hole for other tonearm. I have a vacuum hold down platter mat for the Technics TT. You have a KRSP and I have another one. Maybe some one that is reading this thread can borrow us a SP 10 MK3, but if not the SP 10 MK2 is ok.

Albert tell me how, when and where do you want to do it.

Regards and enjoy the music.
Raul.

Dear Albert: I think that if everybody have the right attitude to do that " learning exercise " about the importance of speed accuracy, we will " have " something.

+++++ " . Any comparisons would be between the Walker package.. " +++++ " If anyone want's to challenge the Walker in a "dollar for dollar" match against the Technics, I concede defeat ..." +++++

Albert, the issue is not the Walker and is not a Walker challenge. This is not my idea and I don't think is yours, right?. No body wants to compare a 40K TT against a 1K TT: this will be totally unfair.

Before we can go-on there is one subject that is really important for to do a critical evaluation on TTs and that critical subject is the TONEARM/CARTRIDGE combination: is has to be the same. Albert we have to find how we can run the Walker with a different tonearm. If we can solve this issue, I can give/put two samples of the same tonearm.
There are other issues that we have to solve but I think is better if we solve one by one.

Other thing that I would like to have on this " exercise " is the direct Jeans participation: what do you say Jeans?.
Btw, I think that the ideas/help of anybody in this forum will be happy welcome.

Albert I want to clarify something: +++++ "What got this thread off center were comments that appeared to support the idea that speed accuracy was so important that it surpassed the "whole package" approach... " +++++

I never post that idea, I post : +++++ " A Walker DD system beats a Walker belt drive system .. " +++++

Albert your move.

Regards and enjoy the music.
Raul.

Dear Albert: +++++ " If you don't like my equipment, one of my members must have a speaker you approve of, " +++++

You and any one in this forum know that your speakers and you friend's speakers are great ones, no question about.

Maybe where is more important for our " analog exercise " is first in the phono preamps and second on the amps. But these issues are for our second/third move.

Regards and enjoy the music.
Raul.