I was reading over some email exchanges that Mark Kelly and have had, and some things were discussed that are useful to know when it comes to motors.
An interesting point is that a dead quiet, high torque motor might be an awful choice in a turntable application.
A motor is not necessarily better just because it has a lot of torque for its size. Some manufacturers increase stator iron, so they can improve torque numbers, but cogging is often dramatically increased as a result. One very famous maker uses such a motor, probably because of its low cost. I suspect it might pass the Timeline test, regardless. Still, that doesn't mean the product is as good as most consumers are led to believe, although an astute listener can hear it.
Can one obtain a cogless motor? Yes, but the form factor is too small to use in a turntable. There are three-phase motors in some computer drives that exhibit virtually zero cogging. Unfortunately, the technology hasn't been applied to motors of a suitable size for our use.
Fortunately, good motors are to be found, or made. Continuum uses a custom motor that cogs very little, for example. I use another that suits the purpose very well, and some other manufacturers use motors that are excellent for their designs. With some makes there is no rhyme or reason, however. They just copy someone else without knowing why. I am convinced that happens.
My point is that knowing about the specific motor is useful when making these Timeline comparisons because what you see isn't always what you actually get.
