[rcag_ils]

My knowledge in Japanese turntables is very limited, so I see no evidence that the Sony PS turntables are being "sought after", let's assume that they are sought after, by whom? And for what? I know there are couple of tonearms made by Sony are somewhat sought after, that's because they can be mounted easily on other tables, but not those on the PS tables, I suppose you could mount them somewhere else if you really wanted to, but not without major labor involved.

Comes to auto functions, even they claim they have optic triggering, but they still have parts inside that lift the arm and return it. Also parts that lift it and put it on the record.  It's just the law of physics, more the parts, more problems, and more sound degradation. My Philips has optic stop too, all it does is lift the arm and stops the platter, no return, and no auto cueing.

[Wayner]

For "limited knowledge", you have lots of opinions. I didn't get off the tuna boat yesterday, and owning 2 of these decks, makes lots of your comments just plain out in left field. Royphil345 collaborated my comments that the decks are very quiet. For the decks being sought after, see the recent add in Stereophile from Acoustic Sounds. They are looking for the PS-X7 and will buy them.

Also keep in mind that these decks are 30 years old and IMHO have proven themselves to withstand the test of time.

Wayner

[rcag_ils]

It'd be interesting to find out what Acoustic Sounds would pay for something like this.

[neobop]

Direct drive was an improvement for quicker getting up to speed, and nothing else. When I first got my Technics direct drive it sounded superb too, until I compared it with a simpler well made British belt drive.

Some direct drive came with full auto features, which are basically junk.

You're completely wrong about that. The only reason small audiophile companies continued to build belt drive decks was because they did not have the machining and expertise to build a direct drive or idler. In general, a direct drive has better pitch stability. It's no coincidence that the Goldmund Studio and Studietto were sprung, direct drive tables. They destroyed any Brit belt driver of the day. I'm sure they still do. Belt drive was pursued because that's all most companies were capable of building. The reason the Goldmund Reference was belt drive, was because the 35 lb platter was too heavy for direct drive. Goldmund went to great lengths to control the speed. They even had a digital tachometer on the deck.

Why would a company like Teres abandon their super expensive belt drives, in favor of direct drive? The answer is obvious. Why are so many old idlers and the few vintage high end direct drivers so sought after? Could it be that many think they're better? You're comparing one mass market table to whatever you have. In this case, 1 vs 1 = 0.

It's true, in an ultimate sense, that auto functions usually compromise performance to some degree. If a cam is attached to the arm, it can't help. But from what you're saying, I'm quite sure that you're nowhere near the point where this would make any difference. It's the rest of it that makes the difference.
neo

[rcag_ils]

OK, let's collect Technics direct drive, I have two of them.

[neobop]

I have 4 DD tables, but none are Technics. I'd like to get an SP-10. Got one of those?

[rcag_ils]

Nope, what are your DDs?

[neobop]

KD-500
KD-770d
PS-X50
Denon 1200

I used to have a Studietto, but got hard up in the mid '90s. I traded it for a Sota Sapphire and a pile of cash. That was a dark day. I'm only keeping it to use the platter/bearing for a custom deck with a Teres rim drive. Maybe I'll sell a couple of em to help pay for the motor.
neo

[rcag_ils]

I've always thought the KD were trying to perfect the DD by improving the plinth with composite or synthetic material, just don't like the idea that the platter sitting on top of a noise generator and play music with it. Rim drive is a bit different, at least the motor is isolated. DD are for DJ (radio station, not the scratching artists) who desire fast pick up speed and low maintenance, so they could time their commericals better, not for high fidelity.

[rcag_ils]

Why are so many old idlers and the few vintage high end direct drivers so sought after?

Why only a few DD?

[neobop]

It's true that an advantage of using a rubber band to spin the platter is isolation. But there are inherent speed stability problems with the method, as the belt continually stretches and then shrinks back. Some of the better belt drives do a pretty good job addressing this problem, but certainly not the budget models.

You've kind of got it backwards about DD and idlers. It's the old idlers with internal wheels that tend to be rumble boxes. This can be overcome, depending on the model, with maintenance and sometimes modifying the motor mounts (isolation). Where do you think the motor is located on most idlers, in New Jersey?

The Technics 1200 was originally designed to be a consumer deck. It was adopted by DJs because of the advantages, some of which you mentioned. Technics found a niche and then continued to perfect it with that pro application in mind. Back in the '80s I set up (Baerwald) a couple of 1200s for DJs and they were amazed. I visited a club where one was playing dance music. It must have been over 110dB in there. Giant bass bins, horns etc and it sounded like music - no problems, feedback or rumble. That's why they used the 1200. I was amazed at how good it sounded.

I think you've adopted the marketing BS of belt drive manufacturers. Who do you think pays the bills, salaries, for TAS and Stereopile or HFN? You really think they're impartial? You spout commercials like the Petroleum Institute shills for big oil. All these generalizations are just that. I was the TT guy in a shop that sold VPI and Goldmund, along with Sota, Michell, Well Tempered, Oracle, Technics, etc. They all made good decks. I could have bought a HW-19, Sapphire, Gyro, Delphi, for less than half the dealer cost of my Studietto, but it was no contest as far as I'm concerned. BTW, where do you think the motor is located on a Goldmund DD?
neo

[neobop]

Why only a few DD?

You can't use a cheap motor and a rubber band to power a DD. That's it in a nutshell. You want to see some of the very best available today? Check these out - scroll down to Saskia.
http://www.oswaldsmillaudio.com/Products/turntables.html

[royphil345]

I've always thought the KD were trying to perfect the DD by improving the plinth with composite or synthetic material, just don't like the idea that the platter sitting on top of a noise generator and play music with it. Rim drive is a bit different, at least the motor is isolated. DD are for DJ (radio station, not the scratching artists) who desire fast pick up speed and low maintenance, so they could time their commericals better, not for high fidelity.

You keep calling direct-drive noisy, but show me a belt drive in the same price class as a Technics 1200 with -78dB noise specs. Noise specs are measured. They are not a matter of opinion. They are fact. Trying to deny this is just pointless. There's a huge difference between motor designs and a motor that applies just enough power to continue turning at 33 1/3 RPMs vs. a belt-drive motor buzzing away at high RPMs.

[rcag_ils]

I don't really want to continue this argument, it can go on forever.

A budget belt drive beats a budget DD, end of argument.

[TheChairGuy]

I don't really want to continue this argument, it can go on forever.

A budget belt drive beats a budget DD, end of argument.

rcag_ils....your comments here have taken the topic aside from the intent...and I applaud Wayner for looking away while it does.  But, I cannot any longer.

Your comment(s) have been intentionally provocative and member neobop picked up the cause in defense.  OK, it's still been mostly civil...but, you left with one last parting shot here.  Let that be the last and move on. 

It is unkind to essentially tell fellow vinylphools that listen to direct drive decks that they don't hear very well

Please don't respond....just, don't respond.

Regards, John / Facilitator The Vinyl Circle

[Letitroll98]

The Sony came in yesterday and I've been doing a little polishing on it, though it really didn't need much. The seller did a marvelous job packing it, as it came thru perfectly.

Whew, thanks John.  Anyway, sorta back on topic while including the argument, Wayne, don't you think DD's ship a lot better than belt drives?  Having the spindle locked down by the motor just makes everything so much more secure I would think.   

[Wayner]

OK, these are my TT shipping rules:

1. Never ship with the platter in place. Remove it and bubble wrap it, put it under the deck.
2. Remove the counterweight. Wrap that in bubble plastic and put it also under the deck.
3. If it has transit screws, install them. (make a note that they need to be removed before playing).
4. remove or tape down any 45 RPM adaptor.
5. Use a twisty-tie to anchor the tonearm to the arm rest.
6. Wrap the entire deck in bubble wrap.
7. Ship in an extra large box, using Styrofoam to fill gaps (under, over and around) , use Elmers glue to glue the flaps together. This makes the box ultra strong.
8. Pray.

Wayner 

[neobop]

The table has one very interesting quirk. When it's time to align the cartridge, you can't get the que lever to go down, even if you remove the power from the deck, the arm will return and the que will go up. It's like it is haunted. I suppose Sony engineers thought that the park position of the tonearm should be with que up, and so it is, and it can't be over-ridden. Now the PS-X5 can. You just put into manual mode and kill the power. So the end result of all of this is that I had to install and align my cartridge for the X7 in the X5. Of course, this is kind of a no-no, but hopefully, Sony held tight tolerances. They both have the same arm specs for spindle to pivot distance (200mm) so it shouldn't be a problem.

The X7 instructions are for a 49mm overhang (gauge), measured from the back of the headshell where it contacts the coupler. My guess is that gives you a Stevenson-like alignment. Knowing your preference, I would guess that you're around 52mm and angled slightly? The eff mass is said to be only 10.5g. That's pretty amazing, as it's not all that much more than the headshell alone? The only thing I found that doesn't look that great is the eff length - 216.5mm - a little more than 8.5". The arm specs are from the VE tonearm database, and could be wrong. The 49mm overhang gauge measurement is from the owners manual.

If it sounds good, that what counts. Good luck with it.
neo

[Scottdazzle]

OK, these are my TT shipping rules:

1. Never ship with the platter in place. Remove it and bubble wrap it, put it under the deck.
2. Remove the counterweight. Wrap that in bubble plastic and put it also under the deck.
3. If it has transit screws, install them. (make a note that they need to be removed before playing).
4. remove or tape down any 45 RPM adaptor.
5. Use a twisty-tie to anchor the tonearm to the arm rest.
6. Wrap the entire deck in bubble wrap.
7. Ship in an extra large box, using Styrofoam to fill gaps (under, over and around) , use Elmers glue to glue the flaps together. This makes the box ultra strong.
8. Pray.

Wayner 

I'd add one more thing to Wayner's excellent rules.  Double box after you pack it according to Wayner.  Home Depot sells styrofoam insulation sheets that can be easily cut or broken to go over, under and around the inner box.  I think this step increases the odds of an undamaged shipment significantly.

[Wayner]

The X7 instructions are for a 49mm overhang (gauge), measured from the back of the headshell where it contacts the coupler. My guess is that gives you a Stevenson-like alignment. Knowing your preference, I would guess that you're around 52mm and angled slightly? The eff mass is said to be only 10.5g. That's pretty amazing, as it's not all that much more than the headshell alone? The only thing I found that doesn't look that great is the eff length - 216.5mm - a little more than 8.5". The arm specs are from the VE tonearm database, and could be wrong. The 49mm overhang gauge measurement is from the owners manual.

If it sounds good, that what counts. Good luck with it.
neo

I achived a Lofgren B alignment using 200mm spindle to pivot distance, and that produced a 19.535 overhang, there was ample slot room. I am not knowing what the 16.5mm overhang would have produced either, and I suspect you are right that it was a Stevenson.

Wayner