Sota or Technics

Mijostyn, Do you have formal training in electronics or are you self-taught so as to have attained a high level of knowledge about electronics?  (Those are two equally valid ways of getting there.)  Because if you don't, and at least one of our private interactions suggests that you don't, then all the equipment in the world is not going to compensate for "ignorance", and I use that term only to denote a situation where we don't know what we don't know; I do not mean or intend to insult your intelligence.  I certainly count myself as lacking in knowledge at a highly sophisticated level even to begin to understand all the phenomena that define audio Nirvana as I experience it.  Yet I too own oscilloscopes, frequency generators, and miscellaneous meters to make me feel I have a tenuous grip on audio reality. 

Soko, What I said, twice, is I don't wish to debate fuses or for that matter anything else.  I used the eternal fuse debate as an example of an instance where two audio devices may sound different and yet not be distinguishable by measurement.  I disagree with Mijostyn's general statement that if you can hear a difference, you can measure the thing that makes a difference. The fuse is actually a bad choice on my part, because two different fuses labeled "1A" for example, and being identical in terms of size and envelope (glass vs ceramic, for example), may in fact measure differently in terms of resistance across the fuse, and there is a small chance that that difference in resistance accounts for the sonic difference that some hear.

"By posting this [in reference to my using the fuse debate as an example of something some people hear but which is not so far measurable, except where the specs of the fuse really do differ], I do not wish to start a battle with anyone who is a fuse fan boy. To each his own."

I do not agree that everything that is audible is measurable. First, we often/usually do not know the connection between measurements and what we hear, although that would probably not trouble Mijo. Second, what about persons that insist that one fuse can sound different from another or that fuses have directionality? I don’t doubt that they hear what they say they hear, but I do doubt that anyone could measure the cause of the phenomenon, except where some boutique fuses do not meet underwriters laboratory specifications for current rating and resistance across the fuse. And if you could measure it with an instrument, you still would not know that the difference in measurement has anything to do with the auditory differences claimed by those who claimed them without doing further tedious experiments . By posting this, I do not wish to start a battle with anyone who is a fuse fan boy. To each his own. I am just using the fuse thing as an example where you may hear something, but it is not necessarily measurable. There are really dozens of such examples I could have chosen.

"Although I am a Rega guy and switched from DD 20 years ago (linear tracking Phase Linear 8000 and never looked back after a $500 Music Hall MMF5 blew it away". I think you’re too smart to believe that you proved something about DD turntables with that experience.

Phase Linear was once the name of a US company that won the Watts wars, back in the 70s when each month brought the introduction of an ever more powerful SS amplifier with ever lower THD measurements, made possible by the use of more and more negative feedback. The Phase Linear 700 produced 700W with something like .00001 THD and sounded like crap.
Contrary to what Chakster seems to be saying, I do think that each of the various drive systems does have a distinctive sonic signature until you get to the very best of each type, where the differences tend to melt away in favor of transparency and accuracy. But just when and where that happens would be another cause for argument. It also doesn’t make sense to me that Chakster would take the position that turntables are not much different from one another, given his devotion to those he has chosen to own, over most others of any type.

 What is a mo-fi  ultra deck? Please enlighten us.

And the beat goes on…

Surfmuz wrote, " It’s a big deal to build nice quiet direct drive motor. Production requires lots of work and investments so it should cost different figures at exhaust."  Can you say what you mean by "quiet"?  Because, as I am sure you know, the DD drive system is inherently quieter than either BD or idler-drive.  The DD platter rests on a bearing, just as does the platter of every other type.  After that, the energy to rotate the platter is purely electromagnetic; nothing makes physical contact with the platter except the bearing.  So where does the unique noise problem come from? In a BD turntable, we have a belt contacting the entire periphery of the platter, able to transmit into the platter any noises coming from the outboard motor, which of necessity is usually spinning its pulley at speeds far in excess of platter speed, making for motor bearing wear, wobble in the pulley, stretching of the belt, etc, etc. Now, one can argue that the belt is compliant, usually, and thus will damp out vibrations that inevitably emanate from a BD motor.  But that compliance makes for belt creep and speed instability. If the belt is made noncompliant, then the noise problem raises its head.

Plus, as Chakster pointed out, Technics has been in the DD turntable business since the late 1960s; they know a thing or two about the requirements for DD motors, and they didn't have to start from scratch in building their latest models, but they did choose to break with their traditional iron core motors and implement a very advanced core-less motor.  Would you care to guess how many of the 1200G, GR, GAE, etc, turntables are sold world-wide, compared to Sota Comets?  I think we can agree that Technics has ample market share to spread out its developmental costs in a way that few other audio corporations can do.
Now, if you want to talk about EMI (as another definition of "noise") emanating from a DD turntable motor that of necessity is placed very close to the rotating LP, that is a fair criticism.  But Technics engineers are not stupid, and they have that long history of building DD turntables on which to draw, which means the motors are shielded from the platter surface by both the platter itself and the motor casing.  One advantage of a core-less motor, as used in turntables, is that it casts its field laterally, rather than in the horizontal direction.
Mijostyn wrote, "Having said all that the RB300 is a better arm than what is on the Technics which is going to be more significant sonically. I have not listened to this Technics but I have never liked the sound of direct drive turntables. My main experience with them was decades ago, I must have sold and set up 100 of them at Luskin's Hi Fi. So, take it what it is worth."  This is too easy.  How can one say the RB300 is better than the tonearm on the 1200G series and then in the next breath say you have never heard the Technics?  Only Mijo possesses such a skill set.  Plus, were they selling a lot of SP10s at Luskins?  I doubt it.  Was the store quiet enough for you to even hear what your customer might have been saying, let alone the nuances of what one turntable sounds like compared to another?  I am doubtful. (To those too young to know, Luskins was a chain of huge busy stores based in Baltimore, MD, with stores also in DC and VA, something like a Best Buy where the product lines were more narrowly focused on home hi-fi.)

As someone else said, you should buy what you like.  If it were me, I would choose the Technics in a heartbeat, although I do have respect for the high end of SOTA turntables.  Even Mijostyn says the major advantage of the Comet is that you can later trade it in on something better.  That's not what I call praise.  Of course, I am biased; I own and listen to four different vintage DD turntables of the highest quality.

Don’t worry about a lack of opinions. Everyone will have an opinion.