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.