Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/3/84; site enmasse.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!allegra!mit-eddie!think!harvard!talcott!panda!enmasse!mike From: mike@enmasse.UUCP (Mike Schloss) Newsgroups: net.audio,net.consumers Subject: Re: Re: Turntable Controversy Message-ID: <430@enmasse.UUCP> Date: Tue, 2-Jul-85 14:17:18 EDT Article-I.D.: enmasse.430 Posted: Tue Jul 2 14:17:18 1985 Date-Received: Wed, 3-Jul-85 09:43:54 EDT References: <496@leadsv.UUCP> Distribution: net Organization: Enmasse Computer Corp., Acton, Mass. Lines: 20 Xref: watmath net.audio:5222 net.consumers:2495 > > 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.