sunil@ut-ngp.UTEXAS (Sunil Trivedi) (06/27/85)
One person (actually the guy who sold me the turntable) told me that
direct-drive turntables were the 'in things' in the turntable world.
Another guy (after my purchase) told me that belt-drive turntables
are back in style. It may be a little too late for me since I already
coughed up money, but others out there may be interested in knowing
which is better and which brands shine.
Sunil Trivedi
sunil@ut-ngp.ARPA
\ /
ut-sally netword
\ /
ut-ngp
|
sunilchris@leadsv.UUCP (Chris Salander) (06/28/85)
In article <1920@ut-ngp.UTEXAS>, sunil@ut-ngp.UTEXAS (Sunil Trivedi) writes: > One person (actually the guy who sold me the turntable) told me that > direct-drive turntables were the 'in things' in the turntable world. > Another guy (after my purchase) told me that belt-drive turntables > are back in style. It may be a little too late for me since I already > coughed up money, but others out there may be interested in knowing > which is better and which brands shine. > A good rule of thumb for buying turntables depends on the price range. If you are looking at cheaper models, the direct drive is better, since it is simpler and more reliable. Cheap belt drive turntables are less accurate and reliable. When you are looking at an expensive range of turntables, the belt drive tables are better. When more money is put into the system, refinements are possible with belt drives that allow them to improve upon the direct drive. Low cost, buy direct drive; high cost, buy belt drive.
mike@enmasse.UUCP (Mike Schloss) (07/02/85)
> > A good rule of thumb for buying turntables depends on the price > range. If you are looking at cheaper models, the direct drive is better, > since it is simpler and more reliable. Cheap belt drive turntables are > less accurate and reliable. > > When you are looking at an expensive range of turntables, the > belt drive tables are better. When more money is put into the system, > refinements are possible with belt drives that allow them to improve > upon the direct drive. > Not true. How come radio stations mostly use direct drive. This is what I have always heard to be true. Maybe it is just in the really high end (>$800) that direct drives excel and in the mid range ($200 - $800) that belt drives excel. Seriously though, whichever one you choose should be based on the specs and features and not on your religion (direct/belt). I doubt that in any price range there aren't models of both types that are good.
reid@Glacier.ARPA (Brian Reid) (07/03/85)
Radio stations use direct-drive turntables because they can be "cued" better. A radio station DJ needs to be able to accomplish very tight timing. Dead air is bad. So the DJ puts the needle on the turntable, manually spins the platter until the song begins, then backs off the platter some factory-specified amount (typically 1/4 turn), and waits. When he wants to start the record playing he hits a switch that energizes the motor, and the motor must get the turntable up to speed in 1/4 revolution. Trying to do this trick with a belt-drive turntable would burn rubber. In general radio stations do not care very much about the audio quality of their turntables. In fact, I have been around several that routinely crank up the speed of their turntables 5% so that the music will take less time, leaving more time for advertisements. -- Brian Reid decwrl!glacier!reid Stanford reid@SU-Glacier.ARPA
ark@alice.UUCP (Andrew Koenig) (07/03/85)
> Not true. How come radio stations mostly use direct drive. > This is what I have always heard to be true. Maybe it is just in the > really high end (>$800) that direct drives excel and in the mid range > ($200 - $800) that belt drives excel. I expect that radio stations use direct drive turntables because they tend to come up to speed faster and make it easier to do things like slip-cueing, back-cueing, etc. Also, a radio station cannot ever afford a broken belt while playing a record.
dsn@tove.UUCP (Dana S. Nau) (07/03/85)
In article <430@enmasse.UUCP> mike@enmasse.UUCP (Mike Schloss) writes: >> >> When you are looking at an expensive range of turntables, the >> belt drive tables are better. > > Not true. How come radio stations mostly use direct drive. I believe the reason radio stations use direct-drive turntables is because they come up to full speed very fast, which is important for cueing up records in quick succession. That has nothing to do with how good or bad direct-drive turntables are in other respects. -- Dana S. Nau, Computer Science Dept., U. of Maryland, College Park, MD 20742 ARPA: dsn@maryland CSNet: dsn@umcp-cs UUCP: {seismo,allegra,brl-bmd}!umcp-cs!dsn Phone: (301) 454-7932
herbie@watdcsu.UUCP (Herb Chong [DCS]) (07/03/85)
In article <430@enmasse.UUCP> mike@enmasse.UUCP (Mike Schloss) writes: >> A good rule of thumb for buying turntables depends on the price >> range. If you are looking at cheaper models, the direct drive is better, >> since it is simpler and more reliable. Cheap belt drive turntables are >> less accurate and reliable. >> >> When you are looking at an expensive range of turntables, the >> belt drive tables are better. When more money is put into the system, >> refinements are possible with belt drives that allow them to improve >> upon the direct drive. > > Not true. How come radio stations mostly use direct drive. >This is what I have always heard to be true. Maybe it is just in the >really high end (>$800) that direct drives excel and in the mid range >($200 - $800) that belt drives excel. professional applications favor direct drive turntables because when a record is slip-cued, most belt drive turntables would stop, even with the felt or velvet platter mat used in these applications. most cheaper direct-drive turntables would slow noticeably too. a professional direct-drive would have as high torque a motor as possible to ensure the platter speed remains constant even when the record is held from moving. my Technics has a sufficiently powerful motor to bring the 2.2 kg (4.8 pound) platter to full speed and quartz locked in under 1 second. not everyone one wants or needs such a turntable in the home. as for, rules of thumb, they are exactly that. there are exceptions to every one. i can think of a few direct drive turntables that rival the Oracle Delphi II and the Linn Sondek, but only a very few, 2 to be exact, and they are just as expensive. Herb Chong... I'm user-friendly -- I don't byte, I nybble.... UUCP: {decvax|utzoo|ihnp4|allegra|clyde}!watmath!water!watdcsu!herbie CSNET: herbie%watdcsu@waterloo.csnet ARPA: herbie%watdcsu%waterloo.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa NETNORTH, BITNET, EARN: herbie@watdcs, herbie@watdcsu
sjc@angband.UUCP (Steve Correll) (07/03/85)
> > A good rule of thumb for buying turntables depends on the price > > range. If you are looking at cheaper models, the direct drive is better > > ...When you are looking at an expensive range of turntables, the > > belt drive tables are better. > > Not true. How come radio stations mostly use direct drive. Radio station DJs want to "back cue" records so as to start precisely where the music begins. Loosely speaking, the technique involves positioning the stylus at exactly the starting point, clamping the platter, turning the motor on, and letting go when you want the music to start. This requires the turntable to stall gracefully, start fast, and deliver lots of torque, wholly apart from questions of fidelity. -- --Steve Correll sjc@s1-b.ARPA, ...!decvax!decwrl!mordor!sjc, or ...!ucbvax!dual!mordor!sjc
andrew@grkermi.UUCP (Andrew W. Rogers) (07/04/85)
In article <9281@Glacier.ARPA> reid@Glacier.UUCP (Brian Reid) writes: >Radio stations use direct-drive turntables because they can be "cued" better. >A radio station DJ needs to be able to accomplish very tight timing. Dead >air is bad. So the DJ puts the needle on the turntable, manually spins the >platter until the song begins, then backs off the platter... > ... > In general, radio stations do not care very much about the audio quality > of their turntables. Nor about their cartridges; the most popular one for radio station use is a Stanton designed principally to withstand constant back-cueing without damaging the tip or snapping the cantilever. >In fact, I have been around several that routinely crank up the speed of >their turntables 5% so that the music will take less time, leaving more time >for advertisements. I had always heard it was to make the music sound livelier... but speaking as one with nearly perfect pitch I find it irritating. (Jukeboxes are also often sped up to force the patrons to feed them more frequently.) AW Rogers
ron@brl-tgr.ARPA (Ron Natalie <ron>) (07/05/85)
> I believe the reason radio stations use direct-drive turntables is because > they come up to full speed very fast, which is important for cueing up > records in quick succession. That has nothing to do with how good or bad > direct-drive turntables are in other respects. > -- Actually, the main reason is that they are more durable. Actually until very recently, most radio stations used rim drive turn tables. -Ron
thomas@utah-gr.UUCP (Spencer W. Thomas) (07/05/85)
In article <500@grkermi.UUCP> andrew@grkermi.UUCP (Andrew W. Rogers) writes: >In article <9281@Glacier.ARPA> reid@Glacier.UUCP (Brian Reid) writes: >>In fact, I have been around several that routinely crank up the speed of >>their turntables 5% so that the music will take less time, leaving more time >>for advertisements. > >I had always heard it was to make the music sound livelier... but speaking >as one with nearly perfect pitch I find it irritating. This is also very annoying when you finally go out and buy a record, put it on your turntable, and it sounds wrong! Of course, if you have a speed control on your turntable, you can just turn it up to the correct speed again :-) -- =Spencer ({ihnp4,decvax}!utah-cs!thomas, thomas@utah-cs.ARPA) "You don't get to choose how you're going to die. Or when. You can only decide how you're going to live." Joan Baez
caf@omen.UUCP (Chuck Forsberg WA7KGX) (07/06/85)
The station I used to work for Used turntables driven by a fairly large synchronous hysteresis motor and an idler wheel. They were reasonably quiet, started quickly, and had plenty of torque for slipping. I haven't seen any direct drive turntables with anywhere near the torque that is needed for broadcast disk jockey use. However, it seems to me that there isn't too much audible difference in turntables once you get past $150 or so until you get the Nak with the automatic centering. But for that price you can get a CD player and CD replacements for the off center LP's, unless you really do enjoy Stowkowski. -- Chuck Forsberg WA7KGX ...!tektronix!reed!omen!caf CIS:70715,131 Omen Technology Inc 17505-V NW Sauvie Island Road Portland OR 97231 Voice: 503-621-3406 Modem: 503-621-3746 (Hit CR's for speed detect) Home of Professional-YAM, the most powerful COMM program for the IBM PC
ark@alice.UUCP (Andrew Koenig) (07/07/85)
> However, it seems to me that there isn't too much audible difference in > turntables once you get past $150 or so until you get the Nak with the > automatic centering. But for that price you can get a CD player and CD > replacements for the off center LP's, unless you really do enjoy > Stowkowski. I wish. It seems that the CD makers are more interested in producing the twelfth version of Vivaldi's Four Seasons than in putting out less common works, even some of the better-known ones. For example, the following well-known things are not yet available on CD: any Joni Mitchell except Court and Spark any Ry Cooder except Bop 'til you Drop anything by Gentle Giant any Beatles except Abbey Road Bach's English and French suites for harpsichord Brahms' piano quintet in F minor, Op. 34 Either of Brahms' string sextets and on and on and on. It is true that if you are starting a system now, you can just buy a CD player and buy discs as fast as you can afford to and not worry about running out of things to listen to. But if you want to hear specific pieces of music, they had better all be warhorses.
schley@mmm.UUCP (Steve Schley) (07/08/85)
> > When you are looking at an expensive range of turntables, the > > belt drive tables are better. When more money is put into the system, > > refinements are possible with belt drives that allow them to improve > > upon the direct drive. > > > > Not true. How come radio stations mostly use direct drive. > This is what I have always heard to be true. Maybe it is just in the > really high end (>$800) that direct drives excel and in the mid range > ($200 - $800) that belt drives excel. How come (sic) radio stations use direct drive? Generally, they aren't interested in the sound qualities as much as they are the start-up torque. Direct drive has the near-instant starting torque DJ's need, even on classical stations. Also, without a belt to replace (remember that radio stations are using these things far more than you or I), direct drive can deliver consistency if not audible quality. Just look at all the really top 'state-of-the-art' tables: belt drive sounds better. -- Steve Schley ihnp4!mmm!schley
ben@moncol.UUCP (Bennett Broder) (07/09/85)
>However, it seems to me that there isn't too much audible difference in >turntables once you get past $150 or so until you get the Nak with the >automatic centering. But for that price you can get a CD player and CD >replacements for the off center LP's, unless you really do enjoy >Stowkowski. Not true. There is plenty of difference in quality in the $150 to $500 range. (More, perhaps, than in the higher brackets) A couple of things to look for: 1. Suspension. This is one of the most neglected areas in mid-priced turntables today. Some turntables (the JVC linear tracking line comes to mind) have no suspension at all, others (like the Rega Planars) are excellent in this regard. Deficiencies in the suspension are *very* audible, particularly if you like to dance or listen to music at loud levels. 2. Mats. Many turntables in this price range have ribbed and scalloped mats. The better turntables have flat mats made of a material that couples to the record (and are often supplied with a record clamp or weight). This makes a noticable improvement, particularly with warped records. and the list goes on... The audio fan on a limited budget has an enormous range of options in this price range. Some equipment is designed for the gadget freak. Some for the guy who is more concerned about how is equipment looks than about how it performs. And then there are the bargains: well designed equipment without the frills. Ben Broder ..vax135!petsd!moncol!ben ..ihnp4!princeton!moncol!ben
tmg@nyit.UUCP (Tom Genereaux) (07/09/85)
> The station I used to work for Used turntables driven by a fairly large > synchronous hysteresis motor and an idler wheel. They were reasonably > quiet, started quickly, and had plenty of torque for slipping. > > I haven't seen any direct drive turntables with anywhere near the > torque that is needed for broadcast disk jockey use. > > However, it seems to me that there isn't too much audible difference in > turntables once you get past $150 or so until you get the Nak with the > automatic centering. But for that price you can get a CD player and CD > replacements for the off center LP's, unless you really do enjoy > Stowkowski. > -- > Chuck Forsberg WA7KGX ...!tektronix!reed!omen!caf CIS:70715,131 > Omen Technology Inc 17505-V NW Sauvie Island Road Portland OR 97231 > Voice: 503-621-3406 Modem: 503-621-3746 (Hit CR's for speed detect) > Home of Professional-YAM, the most powerful COMM program for the IBM PC *** REPLACE THIS LINE WITH YOUR MESSAGE *** At KBOO in Portland, we used Technics direct drive tables. Cue the record, back off 1/2 turn, and punch the button. This gave you time to get the table to speed, bring up the fader on one table, bring down the fader on the other, and all with no dead air. At another station that I worked at in the 60's, we used big Gates turntables that required a person the size of a small cottage to clamp. (Hi-torque motors, idler wheels).
jerry@oliveb.UUCP (Jerry Aguirre) (07/10/85)
>Radio stations use direct-drive turntables because they can be "cued" better. >A radio station DJ needs to be able to accomplish very tight timing. Dead >air is bad. So the DJ puts the needle on the turntable, manually spins the >platter until the song begins, then backs off the platter... > ... > In general, radio stations do not care very much about the audio quality > of their turntables. I heard one of the local DJs mention that all their music was really on cartridges, no "Discs" at all. How common is this becomming? Jerry Aguirre @ Olivetti ATC {hplabs|fortune|idi|ihnp4|tolerant|allegra|tymix}!oliveb!jerry
gnome@olivee.UUCP (Gary Traveis) (07/11/85)
> >Radio stations use direct-drive turntables because they can be "cued" better. > >A radio station DJ needs to be able to accomplish very tight timing. Dead > >air is bad. So the DJ puts the needle on the turntable, manually spins the > >platter until the song begins, then backs off the platter... > > ... > > In general, radio stations do not care very much about the audio quality > > of their turntables. > > I heard one of the local DJs mention that all their music was really on > cartridges, no "Discs" at all. How common is this becomming? > > Jerry Aguirre @ Olivetti ATC > {hplabs|fortune|idi|ihnp4|tolerant|allegra|tymix}!oliveb!jerry All of the above is correct. The amount of music put on "carts" is determined by how tight their play list is. If they are playing mostly new "hits" then each song is probably sitting in an auto-cueing loop cartridge (cart). There is a beginning of song tape mark that allows the deck to wind around to the beginning of the song after the next song (on another cart) starts going out over the air. If the music that is played is based heavily on requests or a more "free" or varied play list. Then the above method of LP cueing (backspinning) or "slipcuing" (for songs with no dead-band in between) is used. Some stations are starting to use CD's for their programming. PS- The Carts mentioned above are very similar to 8-track tapes except that carts have no capstan pressure roller built into the cassette itself (8tracks do). Gary (hplabs,allegra,ihnp4)oliveb!olivee!gnome (formerly at WBAI, NY)
trudel@topaz.ARPA (Jonathan D.) (07/15/85)
>>Radio stations use direct-drive turntables because they can be "cued" better >>A radio station DJ needs to be able to accomplish very tight timing. Dead >>air is bad. So the DJ puts the needle on the turntable, manually spins the >>platter until the song begins, then backs off the platter... >> ... >> In general, radio stations do not care very much about the audio quality >> of their turntables. >I heard one of the local DJs mention that all their music was really on >cartridges, no "Discs" at all. How common is this becomming? I can tell you from experience that this is NOT becomming common. First of all, cartridges are a continuous loop of audio tape that can only hold about 5-10 minutes of music material. I used to work at several radio stations, and the use of cartridges was only for commercials, public service announcements and also for frequently played songs. In general, these carts wear down after repeated use, physically, and audially (ie their sound quality dropped). In their defense, let me say that I did like think their convenience was a big plus (it was ready-to-play once you plugged it in). I think at any radio station, there is a balance between carts and other material (CDs, records, and regular tapes), and the scales are tipped in favor to non-cartridge material. -- Jonathan D. Trudel arpa:trudel@ru-blue.arpa uucp:{seismo,allegra,ihnp4}!topaz!trudel "You can't fight in here, this is the WAR ROOM!"
dale@wucs.UUCP (Dale Frye) (07/16/85)
In article <2714@topaz.ARPA>, trudel@topaz.ARPA (Jonathan D.) writes: > >>Radio stations use direct-drive turntables because they can be "cued" better > >>A radio station DJ needs to be able to accomplish very tight timing. Dead > >>air is bad. So the DJ puts the needle on the turntable, manually spins the > >>platter until the song begins, then backs off the platter... > >> ... > >> In general, radio stations do not care very much about the audio quality > >> of their turntables. > > >I heard one of the local DJs mention that all their music was really on > >cartridges, no "Discs" at all. How common is this becomming? > > > I can tell you from experience that this is NOT becomming common. First of > all, cartridges are a continuous loop of audio tape that can only hold > about 5-10 minutes of music material. I used to work at several radio > stations, and the use of cartridges was only for commercials, public service > announcements and also for frequently played songs. In general, these carts > wear down after repeated use, physically, and audially (ie their sound > quality dropped). In their defense, let me say that I did like think their > convenience was a big plus (it was ready-to-play once you plugged it in). I > think at any radio station, there is a balance between carts and other > material (CDs, records, and regular tapes), and the scales are tipped in > favor to non-cartridge material. > -- > > Jonathan D. Trudel When I worked at WREK (Ga. Tech) we used broadcast carts for the new regular stuff (usually about 100-150 songs). We also had two 15" Sculleys and a 10 1/2" Revox for the oldies with 30 tapes per machine. It took about 3-4 weeks to go through our entire play list. The turntables were used on the air for the request show on Friday nights but mostly for recording and previewing. I forget what brand they were but I'm pretty certain they were direct drive. I do know that they wore out in 4-5 years (maybe less). Dale Frye @ Washington University in St. Louis P.S. To any WREK staffers: Happy 20th (well almost) and say 'HELLO' to 'Rat' for me. It's been ten years since I slept on the couch. I don't miss it but I do miss George P. and his music.