Is Direct Drive Really Better?

It is too bad that so many shoddy, cheap, direct-drive tables were churned out in the 70s and 80s. Many truly sound terrible and have given this drive system a bad name. Regrettably, most people have not had the opportunity to hear a properly set-up Denon DP-6000, or an SP-10. As these were motor units, the choice of plinth is quite critical. Feast your eyes on the direct-drive museum, http://de.geocities.com/bc1a69/museum_eng.html
here you will see numerous examples of correctly implemented direct-drive tables. Sonically, they offer a very different set of strengths and weaknesses than traditional belt drive units. I own both belt drive and direct-drive tables, but my Micro Seiki MR-711 really brings me a lot of joy as did my Denon DP-6000 and Micro Seiki DDX-1000 before it, and that's what it's all about. No joke.

Above a certain price point, direct drive is the superior technology. But designing and building a good direct drive unit costs a fair bit of change, which is why it was generally only attempted by companies that could amortize that cost over a large number of units--esp. your larger Japanese makers. And they're largely out of the turntable market now, save for a few really low-end units--belted, of course. The most obvious exception is the Technics 1200.

For smaller makers, belt drives are much easier to build well, so that's what they do. At the same time, they've spent the last couple of decades trash-talking direct drive, so a lot of audiophiles have heard that direct drives disappeared because they were inferior. Not so.

I would agree with Pabelson.

When you consider that some of the vibrations on a record groove are measured in the billionths of an inch, the importance of keeping motor vibration out becomes critical. It would seem to me that the cost and engineering of doing this with a direct drive would be prohibitive compared to a well implemented belt drive.

It's interesting that some CD player manufacturers, like CEC, use belt drives on their units.

What I remember about the rise of belt drive at the expense of DD was the feud between Ivor of Linn and Michael of SOTA. It went on for years to the delight of the audio press. It seemed to be staged in much the same way as the WWF feuds. It caused audiophiles to choose sides concerning which suspended table they preferred. VPI and Oracle were also both ascending and the unsuspended direct drive tables were forgotten. A few years later, digital took over.
Now that the belt drives are all going unsuspended, we're again looking at direct drive and seeing that they actually outperform even the most prestigious belts.
This is what I felt when I asked the question but I was wondering what sort of agreement or controversy I might find. So far, I have 1 noncommittal, 2 agreements and someone who thinks I'm joking. What's your opinion?

I think digital belt drives are high end snake oil, but I as most could never find a direct drive table within reason that could compete with a mid priced belt drive table.