WHY is belt-drive better, or is it?

[emaidel]

I should like to hear from as many AR members who legitimately consider themselves audiophiles (or audio "enthusiasts," or whatever other term you may wish to use) who own equipment that's considered high-end, audiophile stuff, as to what your take is on the claimed benefits of belt-drive over Direct Drive (DD). Sorry, but this automatically excludes any of you using vintage Pioneer receivers and large Advent speakers, but jumps right into the realm of esoterica.

I will always remember putting together the very first DD turntable I'd ever seen (a Technics SL-1500) and being mightily impressed by the new technology, and the heft of the overall turntable/motor combination. DD tables soon dominated the market, and no one can deny their inherent reliability, and the total lack of the need to periodically replace a soon-to-be-unavailable belt.

Still, as DD tables increased in popularity, audiophiles ranted increasingly against them. The biggest two arguments I've heard as to the claimed superiority of belt drive is that DD tables vibrate, and that the DD system robs the turntable/cartrdige combination of bass. I can't say anything one way or the other about possible vibration, but insofar as bass is concerned, I have to admit that my limited experience with my recently-acquired Dual CS-5000 would seem to give that argument a good deal of validity. The bass is so much better defined, and goes so much deeper than anything I've previously owned, that it would seem (though I can't swear to it) that the belt-drive system is the reason.

Certainly the fact that absolutely none of the turntables available from any number of exclusively high-end manufacturers (ClearAudio, Rega, MM, Project, etc.) has either an S-shaped arm, nor is direct drive is a strong endorsement of the straight-arm, belt-drive combination. I'm well aware of the many arguments in favor of a low-mass, straight arm as compared to an S-shaped arm (and I support each and every one of them), but I'd really appreciate a knowledgeable response from anyone as to why the belt-drive system is so popular with audiophiles, and the DD system so reviled.

So, as the thread's title asks, "Why is belt-drive better? And, is it really?"

Looking forward to your resonses! Thanks!

[JohnMichael]

A belt drive ttable's motor does not directly contact the platter. The belt used eliminates most of the motor's vibrations from interfering with the stylus groove interface. A direct drive table has the shaft of the motor as the support of the platter. Any vibrations would be directly transmitted. There are also concerns with the electronics controlling the speed of dd tables. If the table is running slow it speeds the platter up and if fast slows it down. The correction always happens after the error so there are small speed deviations which some find troublesome.

[emaidel]

Thanks for your response. It was helpful.

I also should have inquired as to whether or not "cogging" is something one can actually hear. I know what it is, why folks don't like it, but is it really something audible?

[jrhymeammo]

Here is an interesting read:

http://stereophile.com/turntables/1107gp/

I think the person who needs to chime in here is Dean Martin with his new SL-1200 tricked out by KAB.

Belt Drive offer more organic sound than DD. But I feel like DD offers much steadier bass. But it will only sound as good as music pressed on LP surface.

JRA

[emaidel]

Here is an interesting read:



JRA

That certainly was an interesting, albeit rather long, read. Still, $19,500 for a turntable is now, and forever will be beyond my reach, and that of most of us mortals. Sure is a looker, though.

[jt1stcav]

This is just my opinion, but I would surmise that firms that still build quality DD 'tables today (like Denon and Technics for instance) will constantly engineer and design better ways in eliminating vibrations from the motor/shaft assembly. I'm sure in older, entry-level DD 'tables from Pioneer, Sony, Kenwood, Yamaha, and even Technics, vibrations were transmitted thru the platter, but not necessarily so at the top-end models (both then and now), just as much as inexpensive, entry-level BD turntables (both old and new) have their inherent problems with excessive wow and flutter.

I once owned a TOTL Denon DP-62L turntable that was IMHO dead-on rock steady and extremely stable at both 33 and 45 RPMs with no transmitted vibrations thru its platter that my ears could detect. Financial woes forced me to sell off virtually everything I owned, or I'd still have that DD 'table today it was that good! I'm currently using my dad's '79 Technics SL-1700MK2 that also compares to the Denon's performance in spades! A while ago my brother purchased a new Music Hall MMF-5 mid-level 'table that's highly praised, and slight speed variations could be audibly detected (he eventually sold it).

I'm not dissing BD turntables...if I wasn't on such a fixed income right now, I'd love to purchase a new high-end SOTA or Rega or VPI and experience what others are enjoying as the epitome of turntable technology today! I guess my point is...cheap is cheap! There are poorly designed turntables in both camps with inexpensive parts that give both DD and BD topologies a bad name. You gotta spend the money if you want quality no matter what it is.

Nakamichi back in the '80s made top-flight DD turntables that were cutting edge. And if I'm not mistaken, aren't the pro transcription cutting decks DD? And the very best in consumer turntables seem to be BD layouts. I have no problem with either design. I'd still be perfectly content today if I owned my DP-62L, and I'd love to someday own a VPI Scoutmaster; I go both ways. So, I'd say as long as you want a quality 'table, you'll have to be able to spend the dough for that quality.

[royphil345]

Certainly the fact that absolutely none of the turntables available from any number of exclusively high-end manufacturers (ClearAudio, Rega, MM, Project, etc.) has either an S-shaped arm, nor is direct drive is a strong endorsement of the straight-arm, belt-drive combination. I'm well aware of the many arguments in favor of a low-mass, straight arm as compared to an S-shaped arm (and I support each and every one of them), but I'd really appreciate a knowledgeable response from anyone as to why the belt-drive system is so popular with audiophiles, and the DD system so reviled.

There you go again with statements that are just plain false... based on popular misconceptions of those with little knowledge of high end gear... and that are kind of yesterday's news as well...

The brands you name are more "budget high end". There are direct-drive tables out there that will completely embarrass any of these and NOBODY would argue the fact. Grand Prix Audio, Continuum, Brinkmann, and Teres to name a few... The tables you name are built to a price and the markup is higher than on something like a Technics or a Denon as well. The brands you name spent nowhere near as much on research and development as Technics and Denon did in the '70s and '80, when the money could be made back because many more turntables were sold. Maybe that's why the designs are simpler? Technics has the advantage of using expensive designs and tooling that have long since been paid for. You name a few brands and state that since they design turntables a certain way, it's probably the best way to design turntables... but the brands you name are "budget high end" tables, built to a price and far from the best!!!

"Cogging" and "vibrations" can be measured!!! They're called noise specs and wow and flutter specs. The specs on an average direct drive embarrass many of the tables from the brands you mentioned under $1000.00 or so... People are finally beginning to admit hearing AUDIBLE wow and flutter on some of these tables as well as the speed not being accurate much of the time without mods or buying a "speed box". That's "high-end"? I'll take a reasonably-priced, nicely built consumer piece with accurate speed and great specs, thanks. There are belt-drives with extremely heavy platters and excellent motors that will of course outperform a lower-priced direct drive, but not for the same money... There are direct drives that will outperform those... When you get up to the highest level of belt-drive and direct-drive tables... it probably makes little difference which you choose. A 100 pound platter is going to move at a reasonably steady speed and sink a lot of vibration no matter what's driving it.

Here are a couple articles you may find interesting...

http://www.kabusa.com/myth2.htm
http://www.kabusa.com/myth4.htm
http://www.tnt-audio.com/sorgenti/te..._sl1200_e.html (1st couple of paragraphs very interesting)

Yes, the stator for a direct-drive motor is mounted to the platter. But a good direct drive motor operates completely differently from other types of turntable motors. Nothing but magnetic energy contacts the stator / platter to turn it. Full power is never applied once the heavy platter is spinning. The power is applied without pulling the platter to one side, reducing friction and bearing noise. Comparing direct-drive to belt-drive by stating the motor on a direct-drive is connected straight to the platter causing vibration is overly simplistic and of little merit when the motor types are so apples and oranges... and the specifications never seem to support this theory... These things can be measured and direct-drives almost always test above average compared to belt-drives at the same price point.

There is noise caused by a belt touching a platter. There are modulations caused by a flexible belt being in a drive system. Motors in lower-priced belt drives are far noisier than direct-drive motors. They always run at full power and at high RPMs. They are often mounted to the plinth.

I'm still not buying that any semi-automatic tonearm with a removable headshell is going to automatically be better than let's say a classic SME just because it's straight. Something about making such an overly simplistic, false statement and presenting it the way you do, like it's the root of all knowledge really gets my goat. It has little merit. For instance... a Denon 103 won't work well at all on a low mass arm. A few very respected people in audio claim the 103 simply can't be beat by anything else under $500.00. I'm starting to lean towards maybe believing them. Don't try one on a low-mass arm though...

I'm betting the solid bass and detail you're getting out of the Dual has much to do with the quartz-lock system. Like I said... I'm a firm beleiver that a little speed stability goes a long way towards getting good sound from vinyl. Many of today's lower-priced belt drives are pretty weak in that area. Many lower-priced non quartz-locked belt and direct drives are more easily affected by stylus drag and speed drift. Might just be the similarities between your classic table and a classic direct drive (quartz lock) that are causing you to enjoy the Dual so much rather than the differences.

I'm sure you'll just ignore all the facts and tell me about your 30 years of audio experience again... But, everything above is 100% FACT.

[emaidel]

Who let you out of your cage? I can't believe you don't just crawl into a hole and fade away. Everything you try to say comes from your ill-conceived notions gleaned from those misinformed folks at KABUSA, and most of the turntables (or the manufacturers of turntables) you so bitterly and falsely condemn are beyond reproach. I mean, gimma break! ClearAudio, who makes the most expensive turntable in the world at $100,000 is a "budget" turntable? Have you ever heard the term "common sense?" Apparently not.

I asked for opinions from knowledgeable audiophiles as to which system is better, and why. You don't fit that category whatsoever, and your response was not only absurd, but entirely unwelcome. Thank goodness AudioReview has an "ignore" function. You, my friend, are now officially "ignored," and I will no longer see any of the poisonous, vile nonsense you seem determined to inflict on me because I don't idol-worship your false and silly belief that the Technics SL-1200 (which I have stated repeatedly is a good product) is the absolute, finest, best, beyond reproach, etc. turntable every made. That's not just wrong, it's also stupid.

[jrhymeammo]

I'm curious enough to get a SL-1200 mk2 to actually finding out what all the buzz is about.
I've messed around with SL-1200, but never in my own system, so hard to say.

But I can tell you this for certain. Not matter what TT you have, it's never plug and play like digital gears.

We can talk about all adv/disadvtgs of DD and BD, but we really gotta consider:

*cartridge compliance
*cartirdge and other additional weight
*tonearm mass
*VTF (not the weight counterweight reads)
*VTA
*anti-skate
*proper cart mount.
*proper match of phono pre/cartridge's impedence/capacitance.
*pressing Imperfection
*Record thickness
*W&F, Noise, resulted from recording, mastering, cutting processes.

and etc. before worrying about the spec of TT.

I imagine 99% of Analog lovers, including myself, do not have their gears setup properly. Yet we all prefer to spin our warped wax over flat silver discs..... So what are we to do?

[NoTransistors]

Because the original post concerned 'Belt vs Analog', no one has thrown 'Idler-drive' into the discussion.
As the owner of several of each type [Dual 1249 belt-drive, Dual 1219 and 1229Q idler drive, and Dual 701 D.D., I can tell you that the idler-drive sounds best by far. As these have been well-maintained, the idler-drives exhibit zero rumble.
D.D. is a special animal. Unless it is Quartz-locked, the speed will be constantly corrected by the electronics [as another poster pointed out], and it will sound like it.
The belt really does pull and tug, and these speed variations can be sensed.
I believe that a well-made idler-drive system can be a wonderful thing.

Seth

[royphil345]

you seem determined to inflict on me because I don't idol-worship your false and silly belief that the Technics SL-1200 (which I have stated repeatedly is a good product) is the absolute, finest, best, beyond reproach, etc. turntable every made. That's not just wrong, it's also stupid.

Anybody with half a brain can see that's not what I wrote. I used some info about the Technics to support my points because that's what's out there. I pointed out that these mystical speed variations and vibrations you like to speak of are measured in the specs and the specs of direct-drive tables are usually better than the specs of belt-drives in the same price-range. This is particularly true in the sub $1000.00 range where the specs on some of the belt-drives in their stock form aren't looking so great for the money these days. I keep trying to tell you that just because a tonearm is straight, it doesn't mean it's of high quality or the best choice for all cartridges and that frankly, you're really out there on that one. I pointed out that direct drive is certainly not "reviled" as you stated and that there are some extremely well respected direct-drive tables out there. I pointed out that your arguments based on a public opinion that's kind of "yesterday's news" instead of facts and measurements are getting stale. Look at all the responses on this thread again. Who's still stuck in that old mindset besides you?

You constantly take unsubstantiated shots at gear you know some of us are into and know little about yourself, using some pretty strong language... and then you play that poor wittle me game when someone has something to say about it. That's extremely xxxxx if you ask me... If you want to be crass like that, be prepared to take some of the same. Whining about it really shows what a spineless weasel you are. It's not at all flattering. I'll tell you you're rude and you're wrong without whining like a girl child about it, trying to gain the sympathy of others. It's called being a man. How old did you say you were? Sad... I don't mind a nice, heated argument. You use words that beg for one and then cry like a sissy when you get it.

You say that I believe the Technics 1200 is beyond reproach when I never even hinted at that... and then you actually go on to say than most of the turntables from the manufacturers you mentioned ARE. You actually said that!!! Well... take a look at some of the specs of what they offer in the same price-range as the Technics... and cry... You accuse me of saying something bizarre that I did not say... and then you actually go on to make that claim yourself!!! You are bizarre!!! You accuse me of presenting inaccurate information and present absolutely nothing to support that... NOTHING. I brought up some very, very valid points to disprove your garbage. Put up or shut up. Anything else is worthless and you know it.

If you want to call something misinformation, pointing out any part of it you think may be incorrect and supporting your arguments like I did would be the way to go... Right? You keep spewing nonsense based on extremely overly simplistic notions that show you don't understand much... and you expect everybody to act like they've learned something, or you melt down and cry when they call you on your BS instead of responding with anything substantial. We all know a response like that means you've got nothing else... You hang around here calling this crap and that "reviled" when it's just not so and you never have anything of substance to support what you say. If you didn't think that would cause some people to find you offensive... you definitely don't know much. Nice meltdown. When you're done throwing your little tantrum and if you ever want to try and prove where I'm wrong with big boy words... I'm waiting...

Oh yeah... Clearaudio was on your list and do get up there into the high end... The higher end Clearaudios don't use a straight tonearm though... Linear tracking. So... you'd have to cross them off your list of companies that consider a straight, low-mass arm to be the best available. They don't. I'm sure their second choice would have been an S-shaped. Like I said... once you start getting into 100 pound platters and good electronic speed control... direct-drive or belt-drive probably makes very, very little difference.

Did you call me silly? Wow... you're scary when you get angry... I bet you pronounce it "thilly"... LOL... I hope you keep me on ignore... Good riddance... ya' wacko, misinformed, loudmouthed, little sally boy.

The last paragraph is offensive on many levels.

[emaidel]

I foolishly viewed this post, even though it doesn't appear on the thread when I open it, as none of Royphil345's others do. I think it speaks for itself. There's no place nor need for any such childish, vicious and personally insulting commentary here on AR. I"m certain any other AR member reading this thread would only feel likewise, and I openly invite any commentary from them.

I'll let ROYPHIL345's postings to me speak for themselves. I think that, should anyone else respond to them, he may not like what they have to say either.

[emaidel]

The purpose of this thread is in the title question: " WHY is belt drive better, or is it?"

I posed such a question because I now own a very fine belt-drive turntable (the Dual CS-5000) and can categorically state that it's the best sounding turntable I've ever owned. While it's certainly not the best turntable available, I think that for the $300 I paid for it, I got a pretty good deal, especially since it included a perfectly functioning Shure V/15 Type Vmxr.

Everything sounds better on this table: the soundstage is wider, deeper and the musical clarity is noticeably improved. There is a significant reduction in surface noise, and an equally noticeable reduction in inner-groove distortion. The bass is also considerably improved now being a good deal stronger, with more "air" around it, and going into heretofore un-heard depths. That says a lot for it, and it's just from my own listening, and comparing it to that which I've heard from the many other turntables I've owned in the past.

While audiophiles have long eschewed direct drive over belt, I rarely ever gave this belief much credence. All of the DD turntables I owned sounded just fine, and seemed to have a good deal of bass, so I just didn't believe the argument. Now, with the 5000, I find that such an argument may actually have a basis in truth, though I have no idea why that may be so - hence this thread.

The Needle Doctor lists many high-end (and ridiculously expensive!) turntables, all of which are belt drive. Most of these tables are so far beyond my reach price wise, that all I can do is look at them and drool, much as I would a Maserati (even though I drive a Mercedes!). That being the case, there then might be still further evidence (or, maybe there isn't) for the claimed superiority of belt drive - hence this thread with the question, "Why?"

Most of those who've posted responses have done so in an attempt to answer the question, but at least one has taken a different approach that's entirely unnecessary. I never bashed another product in my thread, but merely made a comparison based on what my ears tell me. Hopefully, this will be regarded by most AR readers as useful information.

Elsewhere on AR is a fascinating thread posted by some old fart who believes that audio hasn't improved since the 60's. I find reading those posts on that thread highly entertaining stuff. The individual who started that thread deserves all the negative responses he's received since he's made some truly outrageous and ridiculous statements that have angered many an AR member. I don't believe I did any such thing here.

If I replace turntable "A" with turntable "B" in my system, and B sounds better than A, and then replace "B" with "C" and it sounds better than B, then quite logically, C will sound better than A. I've used this logic throughout my lifetime, and along these lines, if my present turntable winds up being turnable "M," and one I owned decades ago was turnable "G," then quite logically, turntable "M" is a considerably better sounding table than turntable "G." That's not especially scientific, but certainly logical.

And so, I look forward to any additional information AR members might be able to provide as to whether or not belt drive is better than direct drive, or in the alternative, that is simply isn't. I know direct drive is far more reliable without any parts to stretch or need replacing, but in my admittedly limited listening, it would seem that there's reason to believe in belt drive having a sonic edge.

[Luvin Da Blues]

Ding Ding Ding...to your corners gentlemen.

[royphil345]

I foolishly viewed this post, even though it doesn't appear on the thread when I open it, as none of Royphil345's others do. I think it speaks for itself. There's no place nor need for any such childish, vicious and personally insulting commentary here on AR. I"m certain any other AR member reading this thread would only feel likewise, and I openly invite any commentary from them.

I'll let ROYPHIL345's postings to me speak for themselves. I think that, should anyone else respond to them, he may not like what they have to say either.

You're the one who has such strong opinions and still no defense for them besides melting down into name calling.

You're the one who wanted to start talking about who's stupid, etc... Well, I can play that game too. And I must say, when push comes to shove, you really suck at it.

I think you're going to find people have very little sympathy for a girly man like yourself who wants to start stuff on message boards and then cry about it like a sissy girl. My God man... Have you no pride at all? It's disgusting. The big-mouthed idiot who goes around starting fights and then running to others for help will always be on his own and look sort of... thilly...

What makes you so sure it's the drive belt that makes the Dual so superior to your other tables? I can't wait to hear that one. I'm sure it's all very scientific... LOL


I am concerned about the need to question someones masculinity repeatedly.

[emaidel]

Sorry, pal. You're on my "ignore" list and I no longer have any desire whatsoever to read any more of your hateful screed. So, why don't you pack up your toys and go home?

[royphil345]

You keep saying that... but it doesn't seem to hold up, just like everything else you claim. Is everything you say a bunch of crap? Why bother... You wanted to start some name-calling crap and now you're still crying about the results. Go cry some more xxxxx... That's screwed up man...


Be careful with language.

[GMichael]

I have been seeing this thread pop up now and then, but have been avoiding it. I wish I didn't give in, and click on it this time.