Post your turntable setup...can't get enough of those spinners!

Re: the different sounds of turntables.

This is a VERY basic and generalized (stereotypical) breakdown. I will always insist sound depends more on implementation (how the table goes about fulfilling its design goals and what components it's paired with) than a particular philosophy, buuuuut...

Mass loaded:
The pros of this approach tend to be a very solid and commanding sound, power, etc. Think of words like hard. Grunt. Heft. They also offer good insulation for the various inner workings of the turntable, which helps safeguard against vibrations that originate from within the turntable itself. The sound can thus be detailed and rich. The cons would be the sound possibly being glassy and rigid. Some might find their pace more sluggish compared to lighter designs. They're also more sensitive to placement and vibrations from outside sources.

Suspensions:
This varies widely depend on the type of suspension, but they are often characterized as having a softer and more subtle type of sound compared to their hefty brethren. Think more stereotypical 'analog' sound. Pros would be offering more stability from vibrations, both from within and from outside sources (like speakers). Cons would be a possible blurring of information, not being able to dig as deeply into a record compared to mass loaded designs. I mean, in the simplest of terms, you're resting your music on a sponge versus a brick.

Skeletal designs:
Or the "less is more" approach that tends to be favored by British designers like Rega. The idea being that if vibrations are a problem, make sure there's less there to vibrate. Alternatively some say minimal designs more effectively cast off vibration. The result at the very least tends to be good pace and timing. On the higher end models using this approach the sound is clean and nimble. Cons would be more or less lacking the heft and solidity of heavier turntables. Diminished richness. Lack of command. Also they can be way more vulnerable to vibrations from outside sources if they lack a good suspension system, so you need to provide a really stable foundation.

Now getting into drive systems... that's a whoooole 'nother can of generalized worms. Belt drive is so widely used nowadays and is incorporated into so many different types of turntables, that's it's pretty dang near impossible IMHO to attribute a personality to belts in general. Especially because you have so many different materials available (threads, tapes, etc.). Also you can have a single belt, two belts, or many!

TBH the biggest pro of a regular ol' belt drive (whatever that may be) is cost effectiveness. It's probably the most affordable way for a designer to have a drive system that doesn't add too much vibration into the mix. Most old direct drive motors were poorly implemented for instance and just didn't offer the isolation that a separate motor on a basic belt driven model would. So yeah, belt drives tend to sound pretty dang good in the price range most reasonable people would consider not-insane.

The biggest problem with belt drive is two-fold. First, belts can slip. I don't mean like slip right off the platter, but rather very tiny slips as they pull the platter from one direction. This results in inconsistencies in rotation and a drop in accuracy. Additionally, there's stylus drag: those grooves in the record contain information in a very tactile sense, and the more complex passages of a record can cause the stylus / needle to slow down as it tries to "wade thru" it. Like you're marching along, and suddenly you encounter a swamp. Belts have a harder time maintaining a consistent pull to get you thru that swamp.

Solutions to these issues that belt designs have come up with include: different belt materials (string, for example, tends to slip more than a flatter tape), having multiple belts to pull the platter from different angles, and even having computers that monitor and try to compensate for these changes.

Ultimately, IMHO, an idler or direct drive system is going to be able to spin the record more consistently, resulting in a more pitch perfect sound and a better sense of "PRaT" (not to be a prat myself with such Linn-go). It just has better control, and I think on a very intuitive level it makes sense. Unfortunately there are always trade offs. Direct drive is going to reintroduce the old problem that belt drives were meant to solve in the first place: vibrations. Noise. That's why high end direct drive systems tend to be so expensive... the engineering required to bring direct drive up to contemporary snuff is costly.

And then there are the alternative approaches of magnetic and rim drive, more contemporary solutions that I'm sure Shaizada has much more experience with than I do. From my own admittedly limited experience, these approaches offer a good middle ground between the benefits of other drive types. Rim drive seems to be an especially cost effective solution. Magnetic drive is harder to get right and requires more engineering prowess, so it tends to be the least common of the lot. Though I have a feeling we'll be seeing it more and more in the future.


All that, and I haven't even scratched the surface. You still have a whole plethora of different tonearm designs, different types of cartridges, AC versus DC motors, plinth materials, platter materials and weight and.... yeah. You can see why generalizations about certain design philosophies tend to be harder and harder to pin down.

 

So I have an audition scheduled for this in the coming days....






The Wave Kinetics NVS direct drive TT with Durand Telos tonearm.

Help me.

 

That's a sexy beast. The touch screen doesn't thrill me, but otherwise... Let us know what you think of it, if you can still afford an internet connection after buying it!

 

They have a definite following, but personally I prefer the SME 10/15 and the Origin Live models.

 

SME goes for well engineered suspension designs, with some of the best build quality of any manufacturer. The sound won't have quite the dynamic pizzazz and grab-you-by-the-crotch low end as some other designs, but it's very hard to fault otherwise. It just does so much right, a very easy to live with turntable with enough delicacy and nuance to engage you.

The bigger tables with the longer arms sound noticeably more refined as you move up the rungs of SME's product ladder, but the compact design of the SME 15 is very appealing IMO. Also the bigger tables tend to be a bit overpriced IMO considering you can't even mount two arms. But then I have no right to talk about things being overpriced when I'm auditioning a tonearm that costs as much as a bigger SME table...

Reminds me the most of the later Goldmund reference table. The Air Force 1 has more of a UFO via kitchen appliance from 2040 look to me.