Author Topic: Belt vs. Direct Drive  (Read 10980 times)

Offline MasterBlaster

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 1100
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • Vintage HiFi of Pittsburgh
Re: Belt vs. Direct Drive
« Reply #30 on: January 08, 2010, 10:08:07 PM »
I love the dialogue going on here. It is purely fascinating read these posts.
Like I said, I just cant help jumping into the conversation at the expense
of seeming like a total noob.  Thanks for putting up with my stupid ass.
HT: Audiocontrol Maestro M3, Sunfire 5*200,  Tannoy Mercury MX , SVS PB-12 Sub

Head-Fi: FUBAR IV Plus DAC, Grado SR225

Living Room: Dynaco ST-70 (R&R work done by NATOE), Dynaco PAS Preamp, Jamo C607 towers, MCS 6710 Turntable

Offline confused

  • Audio Geek!
  • ***
  • Posts: 332
  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Belt vs. Direct Drive
« Reply #31 on: January 08, 2010, 10:11:51 PM »
Master Blaster- Do NOT apologize!!  That was hilarious!
Dale

-Still Smoking!-

Offline Slim-Shaddy

  • CARVER KILLER!!!
  • ******
  • Posts: 1555
  • Karma: +0/-0
  • Tubes are for boobs
    • This is Bullshit
Re: Belt vs. Direct Drive
« Reply #32 on: January 08, 2010, 10:12:37 PM »
No, master... it is soooo hard putting up with you;;;;; dumb ::)
I am confident that an SL-1200 is capable of outperforming turntables of much higher expense with minor modification.

Offline MasterBlaster

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 1100
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • Vintage HiFi of Pittsburgh
Re: Belt vs. Direct Drive
« Reply #33 on: January 08, 2010, 10:19:22 PM »
Hah. Thanks guys  :D
HT: Audiocontrol Maestro M3, Sunfire 5*200,  Tannoy Mercury MX , SVS PB-12 Sub

Head-Fi: FUBAR IV Plus DAC, Grado SR225

Living Room: Dynaco ST-70 (R&R work done by NATOE), Dynaco PAS Preamp, Jamo C607 towers, MCS 6710 Turntable