Can you ever go back to belt drive?

[Spectral Morn]

I have a heavily modded Technics1200 and a first rate arm on it, suits the deck well, but my AMG Giro destroys it, and its belt drive. In terms of money, both are close regarding the cost of what went into the Technics + the Triplanar arm.

Speed stability is first rate. As I have two set ups, keeping the Technics isn't an issue, so its never been a case of having to move it on.

A Linn not set up like Linn do it is a lovely music maker.

[rmcin626]

Currently I have a belt drive, and looking to change but the decision will be based on the sound produced by the turntable not wither it’s a belt drive or direct drive. For me it’s all about the music, the equipment is a means to an end.

[crimsondonkey]

Massive case of 'it depends'. I've heard and owned good and bad examples of both. Also personal taste comes into things too - my wife preferred the sound of a belt driven Acoustic Solid to a DD Techie SP10, and although I could see the attraction I preferred the Technics most of the time.

Currently have what I hope will be my end game TT in the shape of a Bergmann Sindre which is belt drive on top of an air bearing. It seems to have ended any argument for me about belt or DD.

[Beobloke]

As above, 'it depends' is the key here. Most of the Beobloke turtnable collection is direct or idler drive, but I never feel short-changed or that I'm listening to second best when I use my Gyro SE.

The thing I'm finding difficult to 'downgrade' from is a turntable that can correct for off-centre records!

[thingfish]

Like drinking a fine holy (The finest) wine ........Buckfast

As opposed to a fine Malt.

No contest the Malt wins.

Unless your a tru Celtic Supporter I suppose......Then a Kiss through the pope's jockstrap should suffice.

[Marco]

I think what we have to focus on here, is not the age-old debate of belt-drive vs. D/D, and which 'sounds best', as there exist excellent examples of both, but the fact that Andrew can hear the speed/pitch instability of a belt-driven turntable, no matter otherwise how wonderful it sounds (or indeed ANY belt-drive turntable, in comparison with the greater speed/pitch accuracy of a quality direct drive.

*That* is specifically the issue that needs addressed - not necessarily anything relating to the overall sound of any particular belt-driven turntable, of which I'd agree there are examples of such that can sonically outperform the Technics.

And I'd maintain that Andrew would hear *that effect* (one of wow and flutter, pitch instability, etc) with ANY belt-driven turntable, no matter how otherwise great it sounded, in comparison with any well-designed direct-drive, as it is an inherent weakness in the design of belt-drive. From experience, I can pretty much identify the effect blind, as I fundamentally know what to listen for.

Therefore, given that the effect in question is annoying to his ears, IMO, there is little point in him pursuing the purchase of another belt-drive turntable, only to be confronted yet again (to a greater or lesser extent) by the same problem, and in turn for him to waste more money without addressing the real issue.

*That* is my point, and something I think he should carefully consider before deciding on his next move

Marco.

[thingfish]

And yet thoughts on the Hun beating the Tims this season.....,

[Joe]

I've used all types and have no preference.

I much preferred belt drive, though to be fair the only direct drive I've owned was a low-end Sony.

[struth]

my jbl is dd and it still works very well at aged 40. still original too.

[Ammonite Audio]

I think what we have to focus on here, is not the age-old debate of belt-drive vs. D/D, and which 'sounds best', as there exist excellent examples of both, but the fact that Andrew can hear the speed/pitch instability of a belt-driven turntable, no matter otherwise how wonderful it sounds (or indeed ANY belt-drive turntable, in comparison with the greater speed/pitch accuracy of a quality direct drive.

*That* is specifically the issue that needs addressed - not necessarily anything relating to the overall sound of any particular belt-driven turntable, of which I'd agree there are examples of such that can sonically outperform the Technics.

And I'd maintain that Andrew would hear *that effect* (one of wow and flutter, pitch instability, etc) with ANY belt-driven turntable, no matter how otherwise great it sounded, in comparison with any well-designed direct-drive, as it is an inherent weakness in the design of belt-drive. From experience, I can pretty much identify the effect blind, as I fundamentally know what to listen for.

Therefore, given that the effect in question is annoying to his ears, IMO, there is little point in him pursuing the purchase of another belt-drive turntable, only to be confronted yet again (to a greater or lesser extent) by the same problem, and in turn for him to waste more money without addressing the real issue.

*That* is my point, and something I think he should carefully consider before deciding on his next move

Marco.

I'd add a cautionary note here - I have some classical piano recordings where you can clearly hear speed instability, even on a new Technics deck that is measurably (I have measured it) as precise as any deck can be, because that instability is on the analogue master tape, or the cutting lathe, or both. So, attributing pitch instability in an arbitrary fashion to any particular drive system is being a tad simplistic.