rdp@teddy.UUCP (07/22/85)
This is going to be a somewhat longish article, possibly causing much flame.
If I seem to offend you personally, then reply by maiul, personally, if you
want to add to the discussion, then a followup article is in order. In other
words, let's not clutter the newsgroup with needless junk.
In reading much of the debate in this newsgroup over which KIND of turntable
technology sounds best, or which drivers are better for given applications,
or whatever, it has become apparent to me, a successful, but now retired
consumer audio professional (sales and design), that there is, to paraphrase
Albert Einstein, "a confusion of goals and means". That is, there seems to
be far more interest in HOW something is reproduced, rather than how WELL
it is reproduced, or, most importantly, how well it satisfies ones desire
to listen to music. It disturbs me to note that this tendency has gotten
worse, it seems, in the 5 years or so I have been out of the business.
During my tenure in the audio business, I encountered more quackery, snake
oil salesman, cranks, amatuers, dilitants, and other assorted peoples than
I have before or since. It was one of the prime reasons for my departure from
the business. It is frustrating to fight that sort of nonsense. And it lives
on today!
Regarding turntables, I can speak from a wide variety of experience on many
of the points regarding belt-drive vs. direct drive (I risk repeating myself,
so bear with me):
1. Reliability: Contrary to what radio stations might use, or what
a given technology might suggest, or other things, my criteria
for reliability of a given design is simply, how many units, used
in a manner for which they were intended, are returned out of how
many sold. Given that criteria, belt drive turntables loose by a very
wide margin. This is not speculation, this is simple fact. I can
produce repair tags for probably 3000+ turntables in my time, and
belt drive repairs outnumber direct drive repairs probably 10 to 1.
This does NOT include simple belt-replacement type repairs. The types
of problems are things like uneven bearing wear, motor failures, motor
suspension failures and the like. One of the all-time most unreliable
turnatbles of any description was the sanctified Lynn-Sondek, which,
at the time, classed as one of the most expensive turntables around.
It suffered from bearing failures, motor failures, suspension failures,
wooden base failures, you name it! Next came the Connoseur BD-2,
which had a consistant motor suspension failure, but it was less than
1/8 the price of the Lynn, and did not suffer greatly in comparison
with it.
So, statistically speaking, at any rate, belt drive turntables are
far less reliable than direct drive turntables, when used for their
intended purpose (home hi-fi use).
2. Performance: Simply stated: What's good is good, what's bad is simply
awful. In tests we performed where the subject was unaware of the
selection of turntables he was comparing, no clear superior choice
could be made of one well performing technology over another. This
experiment was performed using highly tweaked Lynns (something I
became very good at doing, knowing their difficulties) vs. Denons
vs. etc, etc,. Performance is as performance does.
3. Features: This is where direct drives have a clear advantage. Many
customers needed multiple speeds and variable pitch for a variety
of special needs. Often the ease that an arm could be interchanged
was of importance. In most of these areas, direct drive won out
handily.
4. Support: No, I don't mean the suspension, I mean how well does the
manufacturer support the dealer and customer base. In all but a very
few cases, high end belt drive turntables are the product of cottage
industry one-off companies. When something breaks, you hope and pray
that they have at least paid their phone bill so you can contact
them. Many a time I have had to spend 6 hours waiting in the customs
area of Logan airport while a motor clears, because the US importer
such and such a turntable has given up the ghost in frustration. Most
of the direct drive turntables come from well established, large
companies with an in-place service and parts supply network. I had
too replace a power supply transformer in a Lux PD-121 turntable
that had been struck by lightning. It took 2 days to get it! It would
take weeks and weeks to get the $50 motor from the Lynn importer
(until I learned the same motor was available for $8.95 from
a Phillips repair center!).
In general, one might come to the conclusion that I much prefer direct-drive
over belt drive turntables. That is only generally so. In the days when one
could get a Connoiseur BD-2 Mk IV for $125, and then spend 10 minutes fixing
the motor suspension perfectly, ending up with one of the all-time quitest
turntables available at ANY price, I owned a belt drive turntable. When
given the opportunity to pick up a Denon at the right price, knowing it
was an excelent performer, I became a direct drive owner. What type of
turntable do I have now? I don't know, but it goes around at the right
speed, it starts EVERY time, it has NEVER broken, and does not impose
itself on the music I listen to. Who the hell cares what mechanism is
responsible for this, as long as it is responsible!
It would seem to me that much of the discussion in this newsgroup more
appropriately belongs in some other group, like net.analog or some such
thing (how about a new news group, say net.audio.I_don't_listen_to_music
or net.audio.pointless_specsmanship :-) ).
The tendency I have discovered is that companies which produce good
products at good prices tend not to spend an overly large amount of time
talking about specs and technology, whereas others tend to spend most
of there effort on black magic, technology, hype, etc.
With the hopes of getting good discussion of hi-fi going, I humbly
submit this to the audio net at large.
Dick Pierceknf@druxo.UUCP (FricklasK) (07/26/85)
--> Dick Pierce Well said, Dick!
kyl@ttrdc.UUCP (Kwing Y. Lee) (07/30/85)
Way to go, DICK! Like to hear more from you on the net.