Direct drive vs belt vs rim vs idler arm

Just my 2 cents, but I have to agree with Albert, that all three are capable of excellent sound but when executed correctly i'd have to vote for DD. My current setup is a Technics SP 10 in a slate plinth and what you hear is a substantial increase in pace and drive probably secondary to the DD's ability to transfer the motor's torque to the platter and maintain it without issues of stylus drag etc. My prior turntable was a VPI TNT.
The BD manufacture's have, in their way, acknowledged the issue by their efforts to upgrade the BD systems all of which are designed to increase torque transfer and decrease belt compliance.
The VPI platform is an interesting microcosm of the issue. Prior to the introduction of the rim drive option they upgraded the belt material making it stiffer and less compliant which improved pace and drive. A few hearty souls even took it a step further modifying the table to allow for the use of Mylar tape in place of the belt, which improved things even further. The rim drive, when properly executed, takes it further still. Their rim drive though is kind of a hybrid DD, as the motor is connected to the rim drive via a belt.
Happy listening

I think of "rim drive" as a variation on the idler-drive theme, nothing to do with DD. Only, unlike the classic idlers, there is no discrete idler wheel in the energy pathway, which in my view makes rim drive more likely to transmit noise into the platter.

Zd542, IMO, the SL1200 is a "nice" turntable, for the money. And by all means, give one a try. But I think you need to go farther up the ladder (or farther back in time; either one) to get a good idea of what the best of DD turntables can do.

As stated by various posters above, implementation and execution is key. Idler drives, in my experience, unquestionably require the most work to get right, but if properly rendered are simply brilliant. Rim drives, unfortunately, face certain unavoidable hindrances and I have yet to listen to one which compels me to believe otherwise. After having the pleasure of owning several SP10Mk3's, Mk2's, Garrard 301, Lenco and Micro Seiki, and spending extensive time evaluating each, it becomes rather obvious to conclude all respective drive types have their own merits and strengths. Subjectivity, rather, individual preference comes down to the listener.

Zd542
Lewn's response above is correct re the 1200.

Regarding the flagship models of the Japanese companies I am referring to the vintage tables of the 80s.

All the best,

Whatever the table, it should have a robust drive. If you look at the vintage machines that have really garnered a following, you will see that they all have that in common: the SP-10, the Garrard 301, the Empire 208, the Lenco...

Wimpy drives seem to lack soundstage focus. My theory is that they are constantly off-speed, always correcting. This causes the arm to sway back and forth slightly due to skating forces. This is one of the reasons analog tape has such a following. But 'tables can have the consistency needed; you just have to have that robust drive.

If the ones mentioned so far the Technics SP-10 is by far the best in the drive department, but it also has one of the worst plinths. That is why you will see anyone serious about the table using some sort of hopped up custom plinth for it.