Top ten DD turntables of all time?

I've had my Goldmund Studietto w/ JVC quartz-lock motor and SME V arm for almost 16 years now, and wouldn't part with it for anything. I know there are those who dismiss the Studietto, but I'll betcha they've never heard one with a great arm and without the springs. That's right -- I don't think sorbothane was available 16 years ago, but replacing the springs with sorbothane half spheres results in a mechanical system that's almost completely dead (great bass punch and clarity.) Just set it on a wall shelf, which is where all unsprung (and most sprung) TT's belong in my opinion, and you're good to go.

I recently lubricated the platter/motor spindle/bearing with van den Hul zirconium-oxide doped oil and there is absolutely no audible bearing/motor noise -- even at high volume levels playing silent grooves. And the platter speed has always been smooth and dead accurate.

For a beautifully designed website devoted to the DD TT, go to: http://de.geocities.com/bc1a69/index_eng.html

By the way, I seem to recall that the Goldmund Reference is a belt drive TT.

Both twl and cwlondon make valid comments. But in both cases they cover only a portion of the field. Again, for a more complete and comprehensive history of the subject, as well as a detailed technical discussion, I'd like to refer you all to the DD website at:

http://de.geocities.com/bc1a69/index_eng.html

It's thoroughly researched and nicely presented.

A couple of things:
First, I went to check out AA's alleged 'DD bashing' and couldn't find it -- could someone direct me? It's been years since I perused their offerings, so all I could determine was that they had no DD TT's for sale.

Second, it's axiomatic that in mechanical systems, the fewer moving parts the better (the differences between German and British automobiles are a perfect example ;-) "Better" BTW applies to lo-maintenance as well as hi-performance.

That said, the cost and process of implementation become key factors. When it comes to turntable design (and without going into the "characteristic sonics" BD v. DD v. ID), it turns out that the elegantly simple direct drive design can be more expensive to build compared to a belt drive TT of equal performance -- up to a point! (my personal opinion is that Micro Seiki reached that 'point' with their belt drive TT's some time ago) Beyond that point however, throwing more money at a BD design will not IMO result in any measurable performance increase. Why? Count the parts! (Same goes for ID TT's)

So, for speed accuracy and freedom from mechanical artifacts (rumble, vibration, mechanical resonances) and maintenance bordering on 'zero', the DD TT is the ultimate mechanical solution. But you can't "cheap out"! Well, actually, you CAN, but a cheap DD is worse than a cheap BD, and that's where the bad rap came from. In the beginning ;-) you see, it was so inexpensive to produce a reasonably good performing BD TT (Rek-o-Kut, AR, and beyond) compared to a reasonably performing DD, that nobody bothered with DD's after that, except the utterly shameless Japanese, who turned out some amazing machines! Of course they cost more than Western BD's, so for us Westerners, BD's ruled for years. Even the new $300K Goldmund Ref. II uses a belt!

Sonics are another matter, can vary widely, and depend on many factors in addition to the drive design. Sonic accuracy, neutrality, and control are hallmarks of the best DD turntables, but they can be found (occasionally ;-) in other designs as well.
.

Seals,
The later (and better) model Studios and Studiettos, use a JVC PLL quartz-controlled motor. The other makes that T_bone mentions are every bit as good as the Goldmunds.

I bought my Studietto (20 yrs. ago!) because I like Swiss industrial design better than Japanese industrial design; the Goldmund performed well, but not as well as some of the Japanese DD's (like the big Denons) until I replaced the spring suspension with sorbothane. Now its performance is truly sensational!

First, I wanted to let everybody know (if you don't already) that the wonderful site "Welcome at Direct Drive" is accessable again through a new link, which is: http://www.oocities.org/de/bc1a69/index_eng.html

I wanted to expand a bit on Mmakshak's remarks, because they hint at something that seems to be a recurring event in the world of audio: namely that changes in the market often cause the curtailment in developing certain kinds of equipment/technologies that wind up on the back burner, sometimes for years! One such is the direct drive turntable. The belt drive took over the market because the inexpensive-to-produce version of the belt drive TT, like the original AR for example, sounded way better than the inexpensive-to-produce version of anything else. And both DD and idler drive TT's suffered from this situation -- with consumer DD's in particular getting a reputation for lousy performance -- which they deserved ;--) This is not to say that you couldn't find excellent DD's at the time, particularly from Japan, but none of them were what I would call 'consumer' products, and the companies that made them, particularly the Japanese, made a whole range of other products, and so eventually stopped developing DD's because the market wouldn't support entry-level (i.e., profitable) models. That's just the nature of free-market capitalism. But a whole generation of audio hobbyists were never exposed to DD's for that reason, and what they did hear, is that they sucked! Never mind that records themselves continued to be mastered on DD cutting lathes, hmmm . . . .

As a general rule in mechanical engineering design, 'simple is better' IF one can pull it off in the actual product! With renewed interest in vinyl comes a renewed interest in TT's; and as always, new offerings start with the "Neiman-Marcus" models. But with today's advances in materials, electronic control, and manufacturing techniques, it won't be long before a $500 DD turntable hits the market that will provide the obvious benefits of this elegant solution to record spinning. My 2 cents.
.

First, I want to update the link I posted in my 12-14-05 entry (scroll up) for the famous Direct Drive site. That (old) link is dead, but all is not lost! (it is now archived.) I think I'm going to save the whole site to my hard drive, just in case ;~)

The current link is Welcome to Direct Drive

I'm not going to repeat my enthusiasm for the sorbothane-modified Goldmund Studietto. I have two of them now (the second one brand new). I was going to fit the second one with a linear tracking arm (not a Goldmund) but I'm too old now, and the only acceptable arm (AirTangent) is now way out of my price range, so I'll probably list it soon.

If anyone has questions about my passion for the Goldmund DD tables, I'll be more than happy to offer my reasons/opinions ;~) Yes, there are other DD tables I respect (the Nakamichi self-centering Dragon, for instance, or that multi-million dollar TT that Michael Fremer has) but for sheer overall performance combined with decades of consistent and trouble-free ease of use, nothing has given me the satisfaction of my Studietto (which I bought new with an SME V arm in 1990!)

People have asked me why I never coveted the (very expensive) Goldmund Reference turntable? Well, because it's a belt drive! ;~))

.