Idler vs Belt vs Direct Drive (merged topic)

[tresaino]

Aha, I see some of you picked this old thread up again!

You said, "In terms of rythm, slam, plasticity and three-dimensionality the EMT 930 remained king. The Raven had no chance. In terms of delicacy, air and detail the Raven won the battle, we all agreed on that. You see? It all depends what your priorities are, but be aware of the tradeoffs."

Why do you think this result happened? Why do you believe there must be tradeoffs?

Mosin, I do not have a full explanation of the “why”, but I’m convinced the combination of stronger motors (compared to belt driven tts) and lack of elasticity (no belt) plays a role here. I’m also convinced that you have drawn your own conclusions, as your decision to build idler-wheel turntables must be based on a thorough technical analysis of the issues involved here. I would look forward to read them here.

Regarding the "tradeoff", in my view one can indeed push in both directions: push for more detail and finesse with idlers, as I did with my EMT, or push for more punch and dynamics with belts, as did Thomas Woschnik with the Raven. However, pushing the envelope is one thing, reaching the ultimate on both fronts is another. One needs to settle with a compromise, a top-quality compromise, but still a compromise.

Salut b_gasik, nice to see that we had somewhat different perceptions from the battle, at least in some respect. I hope you allow me to stick to my own conclusions. And hey, it is important that both of us remain satisfied with what we have. The Raven remains a top belt drive, no doubt.. but, in all honesty, let me add the following and share it with our friends here: I had the Raven on my very short list for a second turntable and was about to order one! I had listened to the Raven once at your place, then again at the manufacturer’s house in Germany, but I wanted to hear it one more time before ordering it. This is why I came up with the idea of doing this comparison under as strict conditions as possible, and I’m glad you accepted the challenge. But, honestly, after the comparison I simply lost interest in the Raven. Why? Because the differences in terms of detail and finesse were not as big as I had expected. The only other turntable that would have made it to the top of my shortlist for a turntable with detail and finesse would have been your big Thorens with the Schroeder arm – but there we didn’t compare. Apples and oranges, Yin and Yang: in my view, if one doesn't seek both then there is no need for two turntables (unless one is a collector, which I'm not).

In any case, I’m glad we did this comparison, it was great fun and I also realise not many of us have a chance to experience something special like this.

[mosin]

Hi again tresaino,

I respectfully disagree this time because I have heard turntables that offer a level of performance which leaves them indistinguishable as far as to the drive type. In an A-B test with those, I do not believe the listener could conclude what drive type was in use. So, it may surprise you that I believe it is possible to meet all the goals with either a belt or idler. The design challenges are quite different with each, however. Personally, I prefer to work with idler mechanisms because I am more comfortable with the particular set of challenges associated with idlers. Still, I reserve all options to think outside the box.

To ...

I believe I may have stated the question wrong. I will be considering how to state it better, but the points you address do not really go to my intention in the post.

/Win

[b_gasik]

Salut b_gasik, nice to see that we had somewhat different perceptions from the battle, at least in some respect.

Hi

i'am now testing an idler turntable, the lenco L75 who is far better than the garrard 301.
I hear the same difference between the raven and the emt.

For his price, the lenco is unbeatable

regards
Bruno

[starterwiz]

Awesome stuff. But i have a really stoopid newbie question. All those arms, and no TypeV? Or is that showing my ignorance?
I wonder if the combinations have more to do with the differences than any specific difference.
I have spent 30 years searching for the elusive perfection in sound, and am constantly amazed with systems that should suck, yet perform exquisitely. I can only conclude that it is the combination of all the parts (including the room and the mood) as a whole that count.

[tresaino]

I respectfully disagree this time because I have heard turntables that offer a level of performance which leaves them indistinguishable as far as to the drive type.

Your observations mosin are both interesting and challenging, and I respect them. Let us take note that our respective ‘conclusions’ are based on different comparisons and experiences. I would go as far as to admit that a certain amount of preconception, based on personal listening experiences over the years, may have played a role, for all of us who were involved. My experiences so far with belts (Kuzma, VPI, Thorens, Linn), idlers (essentially Garrard 301s and EMT 930s) and belt-idler combinations (Thorens 124) however do point in the direction I spelled out above.

I would be interested to know what equipment (turntable + arm + cart combos) you compared to come to your conclusions.

In an A-B test with those, I do not believe the listener could conclude what drive type was in use.

Our A-B comparison was not a blind test but it was clearly audible. I am convinced that b_gasik, myself and the third person present at the event would be able to quickly recognise which drive was used, also in a blind test. Well, certainly now, because the ‘open eyes’ test is already behind us and we know what to expect.

So, it may surprise you that I believe it is possible to meet all the goals with either a belt or idler.

Yes am a bit surprised but this is interesting. Does this mean that you don’t think there is a need to find compromises in some areas? That would surprise me even more. Anyhow, it would also be interesting to hear other idler wheel equipment makers on this one.. for idlers Loricraft and VPI (the latter only to some extent) would come to mind. If any of you have contacts with them please explore this further.

Startewiz I have nothing against SMEs, b_gasik may have his views on this one. I do however fully agree with him on the qualities of FR64 and FR66 tonearms. By the way, he must have already irked the Garrard aficionados in here with his Lenco discovery.

the Koetsu Black was not a normal version, as b_gasik could explain in more detail.

On the question of listening through a system, most ‘neutral’ A-B comparisons can probably be achieved with headpohones, not with speakers in a room. Both Lukaschek and Van den Hul develop their respective Benz and VdH cartridges listening to headphones.

[Blue Angel]

And so he has Shouldn't there be a place in the sun for both Lenco or Garrard? If the Lenco's are better than the Garrards, in which way. Perhaps I can learn something I didn't know.

blue

[b_gasik]

Awesome stuff. But i have a really stoopid newbie question. All those arms, and no TypeV? Or is that showing my ignorance?

Why, the smeV is the best off ?

regards

[b_gasik]

If the Lenco's are better than the Garrards, in which way. Perhaps I can learn something I didn't know.

All way.
Great to help you.

regards

[Blue Angel]

Hi b_gasik

I'm happy to read of your predilection for Lencos. The cone and idler mechanism is ingenuous. Other than that, I know not much about them and I'll be glad to pick up some wisdom.

Regards

blue

[mosin]

Hello,

I would be interested to know what equipment (turntable + arm + cart combos) you compared to come to your conclusions.

You must forgive me for not bringing attention to one of my competitors. There are a couple of very good belt turntables in the world, however. Then again, you know that. One comes to mind that has uncanny performance for that drive type, though. I suppose my entire point is that some belts are better than some idlers, and some idlers are better than some belts. So, in a test, one should make certain the competitors are matched for their class very well.

In an A-B test with those, I do not believe the listener could conclude what drive type was in use.

Does this mean that you don’t think there is a need to find compromises in some areas?

That is exactly what I believe. One listener pointed out to me that it is possible to have the immediacy of an idler, and also the octave finesse of a belt type. To make an idler exhibit such qualities, all that is necessary is to determine what characteristics of belt and direct drive design allow the transparency and detail to come through, while managing to retain the inherent idler strong points. For a belt, I'm not sure what is required, but there are belt designers who have approached the task with excellent results. Whether they are entirely successful depends to some degree on the astuteness of the listener.

...it would also be interesting to hear other idler wheel equipment makers on this one.. for idlers Loricraft and VPI (the latter only to some extent) would come to mind. If any of you have contacts with them please explore this further.

I don't know what they might think. I do believe my overall approach is different from theirs, however. It is possible they would agree with me, but you would have to ask them.

[starterwiz]

Awesome stuff. But i have a really stoopid newbie question. All those arms, and no TypeV? Or is that showing my ignorance?

Why, the smeV is the best off ?

regards

I said it was a stoopid newbie question.
I am not in the loop at all as far as what works and what is hype.
I currently still use a 3009 III and appreciate the adjustability and low mass of the design. I also appreciate it's limitations.
So I assumed that their best today must be a contender.
It's obvious that I have much to learn. (I am an expert in car audio, but I have not been really into the home environment until of late)
Cheers

[tresaino]

I suppose my entire point is that some belts are better than some idlers, and some idlers are better than some belts. So, in a test, one should make certain the competitors are matched for their class very well.

Agreed. I believe this is what we did in our comparison. To my ears both the Raven and the tweaked EMT 930 are in the top league.

On the question whether there is need for compromises: I continue to believe that every serious turntable, arm or cart manufacturer is aware of the tradeoffs involved in a certain design, hence of the necessity to find compromises. But looking for compromises does not mean compromising the excellence of the final result, bien sur. I guess we’re down to semantics now.

On the immediacy-finesse axis, immediacy never was a problem with the EMT 930. That’s why I pushed the envelope towards finesse, by substituting the standard EMT 929 tonearm and EMT TSD-15 cartridge with better products, substituting the EMT 155 phono preamp with a better product, replacing the plastic platter with a glass one, and adding a sismic base. Perhaps most important (and cheapest) of all was the addition of a Siemens inverter, which allows you to connect the motor in tri-phase, thereby practically eliminating any vibrations stemming from the motor (all EMT 930 motors I have seen vibrated more with the simulated third phase, which is part of the standard design). All of this together added detail and finesse compared to the standard version. Despite this, the 930 could not display the same amount of detail as the Raven. But it was not that far away, and the gains in terms of punch and immediacy are still all there.

[b_gasik]

I'm happy to read of your predilection for Lencos.

It was just a joke. A friend of mine come with his lenco for set-up. I was impressed by the result (regarding my experience with garrard 301 and 401).
So, i find one (30 euros) and i'am now making a plinth and achieve the set-up.

More at : http://www.lenco-lovers.com/forum/

regards

[Foxhound]

I understand that high-end turntables these days are most typically belt drive for two reasons:

1. The rubber belt acts to insulate the platter from any vibrations coming from the motor by absorbing them. Rumble would thus be lessened with belt-drive.

2. The free spinning platter will continue to spin under its own momentum (restrained somewhat by the belt) despite minute start-stops and fluctuations in the motor's speed. Flutter would thus be lessened with belt-drive.

Idler drives would have durability on their side, however. They don't require period belt changes and basically can work just about forever. There are generally more reliability issues with belt-drive.

I know I'm generalizing but would that not be a good basic summary of the pros and cons of the two competing technologies?