turntable to grow into

[avole]

Time to leave it, trackside. both Direct drive and Belt drives, not to mention rim drives, can all have speed stability problems, it isn't endemic to any particular type. In the end, it comes down to the engineering.

Unfortunately I don't have any belt drive turntables with me to measure, but I'll post figures for the Lenco L75 when it's up and running if anyone is interested.

[OneyedK]

but I'll post figures for the Lenco L75 when it's up and running if anyone is interested.

Speed stability is very good with Lencos (if they are in top shape), speed accuracy is a different problem...

[Trackside]

Time to leave it, trackside. both Direct drive and Belt drives, not to mention rim drives, can all have speed stability problems, it isn't endemic to any particular type. In the end, it comes down to the engineering.

Unfortunately I don't have any belt drive turntables with me to measure, but I'll post figures for the Lenco L75 when it's up and running if anyone is interested.

I'm not talking about DD vs Belt
I'm talking about a particular DD TT which is available very cheaply and has superior pitch stability to most belt drive TT's and which may be a TT to 'grow into' if the OP finds this important.I'm well aware that there are DD's with horrendous pitch stability problems and there are very well engineered belt drive TT's with good performance in this area. I'll stand by my statement that a lot of belt drive TT's in the low to mid price range have pitch stability issues that I personally can hear on certain types of music - if other can't hear it then so be it and you are blessed with a greater range of TT choices

[avole]

You don't let go, do you, though I note you've changed your original statement markedly statement.

My strictly budget CJ55 measures around the 0.04% mark if I remember correctly, the Rega P3 measures at .04%, the VPI Scout at .02% . The equivalent AT direct drive turntable measures .2%.

You cannot make any definitive statement except to say it is the quality of the engineering. Technics happen to produce top notch direct drives, of that I'd agree, since I have 2.

No matter which turntable drive system, it does pay to look at the figures, as they'll give you an indication of what to expect. The Thorens (the TD160 measures around the .05%) sound good from the outset and can be made to sound wonderful by a bit of tuning and an arm change. The SL1200 can be tweaked, but, frankly, the best one is to put on a quality cartridge, a Benz or similar. Other tweaks don't give a massive lift to what is an already good turntable.

[Trackside]

You don't let go, do you, though I note you've changed your original statement markedly statement.

My strictly budget CJ55 measures around the 0.04% mark if I remember correctly, the Rega P3 measures at .04%, the VPI Scout at .02% . The equivalent AT direct drive turntable measures .2%.

You cannot make any definitive statement except to say it is the quality of the engineering. Technics happen to produce top notch direct drives, of that I'd agree, since I have 2.

No matter which turntable drive system, it does pay to look at the figures, as they'll give you an indication of what to expect. The Thorens (the TD160 measures around the .05%) sound good from the outset and can be made to sound wonderful by a bit of tuning and an arm change. The SL1200 can be tweaked, but, frankly, the best one is to put on a quality cartridge, a Benz or similar. Other tweaks don't give a massive lift to what is an already good turntable.

By letting go you mean continuing to disagree with you - well at least you are now agreeing with me on most points
BTW - you said you owned at TD 150 - can you measure that for WOW with your iPhone app?

[avole]

No, I'm not agreeing at all, you chose to move the goal posts. Your original statement was and remains incorrect.

No, unfortunately I don't have the turntable with me. Am working away from home on a contract, which is why I took the two Technics - one thing no-one has mentioned is that the Technics DDs, even if they do not sound quite as good, are a damn sight more robust than any suspended deck! Will measure the Lenco when I've got it running.

[Trackside]

This was my original statement
"If you are concerned about or sensitive to pitch stability the Sl-1200 is lot better than the TD150 in this department - or almost any belt drive TT. If that doesn't concern you the TD150 may well sound more 'musical' and 'entertaining' but not as accurate as a well set up Sl-1200.
Also you may find with some choices you grow out of them rather quickly
I for instance grew out of a TD150 due to it's pitch insecurity which can't be solved with add on's or upgrades."
I stand by it and have not 'moved the goal posts' - please feel free to comment , disagree or provide factual evidence to the contrary without fear of me telling to to let it go or give up

[avole]

...Never claimed that the SL-1200 is the last word in musicality but if you are sensative to pitch stability (I am - others are not) then belt drive TT's will give you problems.

I rest my case m'lud!

[Trackside]

...Never claimed that the SL-1200 is the last word in musicality but if you are sensative to pitch stability (I am - others are not) then belt drive TT's will give you problems.

I rest my case m'lud!

I stand by that statement as well - thanks for reminding me
Just to be clear - belt drive TT's have problems with pitch stability. Proven in listening tests against well designed DD TT's like the SL-1200, idler drive's and seen in manufacturers specifications and independent tests. Caveat - not everyone can hear it and only certain types of music show it up to those who can.

[avole]

Same comment about crappy DD models, which are notoriously bad for wow and flutter.

I'll repeat for the umpteenth time, it isn't the drive system, it's the quality of the engineering that defines the amount of pitch instability.

[Trackside]

I'll repeat for the umpteenth time, it isn't the drive system, it's the quality of the engineering that defines the amount of pitch instability.

Very true but only if the definition of 'the quality of the engineering' is measured by it's level of performance in this particular area. If it measures well it's good engineering, if it measures badly it's poor engineering no matter how nice it looks or how well it 's made in mechanical tolerance terms or how much it costs.