Someone please help me with this idler drive TT thing.

[Bigerik]

Kind of developed an interest lately in these weird turntables in which the platter is turned by a little rubber wheel. The top three tables in this class seem to be the Garrard 301/401, Thorens TD-124 and the Lenco L75. I am sure that there are others, but these seem to be the most popular.

Sounds wise, from what I have read, they break down like this:

Garrard 301/401 - The bass and dynamics master. Apparently nothing else comes close. Just powers on like a locomotive. Gives up some finess in the highs however to....

Thorens 124 - More sparkle to the highs than the Garrard, if not quite as powerfully dynamic. Build quality second to none.

Lenco L75 - Now this one I am not sure what to think. The comments I have found indicate that when restored and given a monster plinth, the sound is second to none. Of course, these statements were made by fans, so I am taking them with a grain of salt.

Price wise, both the Garrard and the Thorens are getting scary expensive. Thats before and custom plinths, modern arms, etc. The Lenco seems to be still pretty reasonable.

As i said, I am still learning about these tables and these are my first impressions.I would certainly welcome any thoughts or comments.

 

[jcmjrt]

I've spent some time with a 301, and 124 (will be spending a lot of time when I get mine replinthed), and a lot of time with a 401. I also have a Lenco - not L75 but an earlier heavy idler - and ROK B12H waiting in the background. You may guess that since I keep collecting them that I think that there's something special going on here. The SLAM, the dynamics that these TTs provide just isn't easily found elsewhere. From looking at the ROK, I'm thinking that it's going to be pretty nice but I haven't gotten there yet. It was more expensive than the Garrards or Thorens back in the day which is saying something. The fact is that I'm putting it in restoration line ahead of the 124. Some of that may be just recent acquisition and the fact that the ROK is NOS...but it looks like it is SOLIDLY built. The motor is massive. I'm looking to match it with a quality vintage tonearm/tonearm board and a solid plinth. It's going to be given every chance to shine and we'll see what happens...it's facing tough competition with the 401/SME3012. I think that the exploration and development is fun...although I sometimes wish it went faster.
Mario should be able to talk about Lencos. He's done some nice ones - from pics - since he didn't bring it to AKFest so we could see/hear :tongue:

 

[spartanmanor]

Jump in the water is fine!

If price is a factor I would start with what you feel is the most reasonable economic decision. If you like what you hear you will likely be spending more. There are so many tweaks that can be done on these old tables that it is hard to compare A to B. I have three Idler tables two 124’s and a ROK B-12H and they all sound amazing but changes in the arm, cart, and plinth all affect the final sound. All three tables that I have needed work to make them shine. I enjoy fixing these old beauties up but if you are going to have to send it off for a rehab that can add significantly to the cost. If this is the case I would look to pay more for one that is in better shape right off the bat.

For my money I would also add the ROK tables to your lineup. In my opinion they are seriously undervalued at this time.

 

[Sansui Louie]

Well, back in "the day", roughly 1978 - at the peak of the turntable's reign, idler drive was considered to be the poorest performer, then belt drive in the middle, then direct drive at the top. I remember reading this in either a Stereo Review annual issue which listed all the models, with a buyer's guide and general faq, or Consumer Reports, which did essentially the same thing.

Now, that was the impression at that time in history. Mileage today may differ, but it probably has a lot to do with the fact that all my TT's save one (a Sansui 2050C) are direct drive. In idler (aka rim) drive, decent performers rely on mass of the platter to achieve good results. Dual shines in this territory, as their idler drive machines post specs that rival all but the best belt units.

 

[spartanmanor]

Well, back in "the day", roughly 1978 - at the peak of the turntable's reign, idler drive was considered to be the poorest performer, then belt drive in the middle, then direct drive at the top. I remember reading this in either a Stereo Review annual issue which listed all the models, with a buyer's guide and general faq, or Consumer Reports, which did essentially the same thing.

Now, that was the impression at that time in history. Mileage today may differ, but it probably has a lot to do with the fact that all my TT's save one (a Sansui 2050C) are direct drive. In idler (aka rim) drive, decent performers rely on mass of the platter to achieve good results. Dual shines in this territory, as their idler drive machines post specs that rival all but the best belt units.

That is ironic as Stereophile just did a write up In the May 2008 issue on the TD-124 and the author wrote that after almost 30 years of buying and trying tables to find his holy grail the 124 was it. I guess everything old is new again.

 

[Sansui Louie]

It is *indeed* ironic. I got into this at about that point in time - 1978 - when I was a very impressionable 14 year old who lived in the middle of nowhere and thoroughly ingested each issue of Stereo Review, High Fidelity and Audio (I had subscriptions to all 3). The thinking at that time was that idler drive wasn't even a consideration. I think about the only folks marketing idlers at the time were Garrard and BSR. If Dual still made idlers, they did it quietly, whilst touting their belt and DD models.

It's like anything else. There's crap, and there's good build quality and engineering. There's been crap DD tables, crap belt tables and crap idler drive tables. I guess that, more to the point, in the late 70's, the marketing focus in the hi fi world was DD vs. Belt and the idler had been abandoned (albeit for likely no other reason than marketing) by all but the mass-produced changer markets. Kind of like how today the 15" woofer, or even the 12" woofer has been abandoned for tall skinny cabinets with 6 and 8 inch models.

 

[spartanmanor]

Very true there are fine examples and garbage examples in all categories. I have a dual 1019 which I am pretty sure is an Idler. It’s all boxed up at the moment. The build quality was fairly good but in no way a comparison to the afore mentioned tables.

 

[BrocLuno]

With idler drive there is little to separate the motor from the platter except for the rubber tires, so it comes down to initial build and engineering. When Thorens and Lenco built these tables, I bet the held tolerances to a few thousandths at most?

It's much easier to cast a platter for a belt drive by comparison and be off by 30 thousandths and never know it. Much easier to achieve isolation with a belt, so with ease comes a tendency to focus on other parts like cost and production timing, etc.

Not saying there are not good TT's in all formats, but those who built TOTL idlers had to built to tight specs. Those specs show up now as heavy well machined parts that run smoothly. Guess what, that makes the table a performer all these year later. My money is on the Lenco when JCMJRT gets it done

 

[SA-708]

VPI is now making an $1000 idler rim drive upgrade for their turntables, so I guess that idler drive tables are now the "in" thing: http://www.vpiindustries.com/products_rim.htm

The new VPI Rim Drive turns the platter directly using ageless technology for a near perfect transfer of energy. The Rim Drive was created after listening to an old Rek-O Kut turntable using an idler rim drive. The immediacy of the sound that this turntable system produces is amazing. By melding, the old idler rim drive to the new VPI/HR-X dual motor flywheel, VPI has produced a drive system with the immediacy of rim drive and the quietness and smooth rotation of belt & flywheel drive. The platter is driven by a silicone “O” ring on the circumference of a large wheel attached to the flywheel. The flywheel is a noiseless, cog-free source of power. The rim drive transfers this power perfectly.

 

[spartanmanor]

That is interesting that the ROK was the table that they used as a comparison.

 

[hakaplan]

It is *indeed* ironic. I got into this at about that point in time - 1978 - when I was a very impressionable 14 year old who lived in the middle of nowhere and thoroughly ingested each issue of Stereo Review, High Fidelity and Audio (I had subscriptions to all 3). The thinking at that time was that idler drive wasn't even a consideration. I think about the only folks marketing idlers at the time were Garrard and BSR. If Dual still made idlers, they did it quietly, whilst touting their belt and DD models.

Although I wasn't reading stereo magazines, I remember friends at the time telling me that my Garrard 40B was less than desirable. Now they were probably right, but the specific reason they claimed was because of the idler drive. That was considered primitive and inadequate. In fact, that was probably the only decent part of the turntable, the rest being plastic.

 

[shrinkboy]

under the guidance of AK member Mopic5 (a lenco-ologist if there ever was one), i acquired an L78 last year, stripped it of all non-essential mechanisms, serviced the bearing and installed a drop in replacement tonearm, the Linn Basik. you can even use the lenco lock nut and mounting collar with this arm.

some recommend servicing the motor too, but its dicey if you're a newbie getting it back together ...i chose not to because mine made no noise to begin with. remounted in the original plinth, with the springs removed, this unit is a jaw dropping all manual TT. and i haven't even done the big plinth. i will eventually, but man is a great, quiet, stable, deed soundstage. check this site : www.lenco-lovers.com. very similar to AK in spirit, but it is more Euro than us. mopic5 is mariob on that site.

 

[ke4jhj]

My brother bought a ROK B-12 several years ago at a yard sale. He has never tried it out and it's sitting in his garage.:scratch2:

I am going to have to persuade him to get rid of that piece of junk!

 

[Scorpion8]

It is *indeed* ironic. I got into this at about that point in time - 1978 - when I was a very impressionable 14 year old who lived in the middle of nowhere and thoroughly ingested each issue of Stereo Review, High Fidelity and Audio (I had subscriptions to all 3). The thinking at that time was that idler drive wasn't even a consideration. I think about the only folks marketing idlers at the time were Garrard and BSR. If Dual still made idlers, they did it quietly, whilst touting their belt and DD models.

It's like anything else. There's crap, and there's good build quality and engineering. There's been crap DD tables, crap belt tables and crap idler drive tables. I guess that, more to the point, in the late 70's, the marketing focus in the hi fi world was DD vs. Belt and the idler had been abandoned (albeit for likely no other reason than marketing) by all but the mass-produced changer markets. Kind of like how today the 15" woofer, or even the 12" woofer has been abandoned for tall skinny cabinets with 6 and 8 inch models.

That was my recollection exactly, from coming into the game at exactly this same point. Everyone scoffed at idler drives, since any motor noise was directly coupled to the platter. Belt drives were the next step up, but almost everyone's belt drives were the basement models compared to their electronic direct drives. Note the best Duals of this time were all direct drive, and the belt drives were lower end "cheapie" models. Everyone had gotten out of idler drive systems by the late 70's / early 80's. Now suddenly it seems like it's one of the gotta-haves in vintage, but you still don't see any new idler drive models being made, do you?

 

[spartanmanor]

That was my recollection exactly, from coming into the game at exactly this same point. Everyone scoffed at idler drives, since any motor noise was directly coupled to the platter. Belt drives were the next step up, but almost everyone's belt drives were the basement models compared to their electronic direct drives. Note the best Duals of this time were all direct drive, and the belt drives were lower end "cheapie" models. Everyone had gotten out of idler drive systems by the late 70's / early 80's. Now suddenly it seems like it's one of the gotta-haves in vintage, but you still don't see any new idler drive models being made, do you?

I am sure this has a lot to do with economics. As stated above it takes precise engineering to do it right. It's easier to use a drive that is easier and cheaper to produce.

 

[jcmjrt]

but you still don't see any new idler drive models being made, do you?

See post #9 above and Teres is doing "direct coupling"....which looks a whole lot like a wheel with rubber on it driving the rim of a platter...and it's their TOTL now.

http://www.teresaudio.com/verus-motor.html

 

[Sansui Louie]

IT may well have been due to economics. It would be very interesting if, via the expertise and fleet of units here on AK, we could do a hype-and-marketing-free side by side comparison between top models of idlers, belt and DD throughout the years and post results of wow/flutter and rumble in a spreadsheet. Maybe an activity at the next AK fest, The Great AK Turntable Drive System Shootout?

 

[Holst]

I have a 1976 Audio Handbook, it lists the Lenco as being quieter than a Lynn LP12 and a direct drive Pioneer PL71.

 

[titanstats]

I still have a Lenco and a Collaro idler TT. Quality on both is good, but it seems they are both heavy on the DIY side of things to make them real performers. Not having a huge knowledge of TTs, I am frozen with fear at the thought of getting on with these two projcts. Can't seem to choose a tonearm -- there are just soooo many opinions out there! At some point this summer I hope to resume work on these, starting with the Lenco.

There are just too many people with enough audio smarts to know better who are modding these tables -- if they were crap, or the end result weren't worth it, I can't imagine that they'd be putting in all the work to make them go. Have you checked out the Lenco-lovers site? Lots of people into doing this full-bore there, and a helpful crew, as well. Good luck on your journey! :thmbsp:

 

[ejman]

I bought a mint Dual 1019 about three years ago for the princely sum of $5. I hooked it up to my office system (Marantz 27 and Paradigm Atom speakers) and was absolutely floored by the amount of Bass and Slam and drive this little system now possesed. This led to a lot of reading and investigating of iddler drive which led to the Lenco 75 which is now my main table. I bought it with the intention of building a big heavy plinth (which I've procrastinated long enough in doing) but it sounds magnificent just replacing the spring mounting system with cones and replacing the original tonearm (which is junk in my opinion) with a drop in Decca International tonearm.

I also have a Rega P3 and would say that I listen to the Lenco about 80% to the Rega 20%. For a while I had the Lenco and the Rega with the same cartridge (AT 450) and there was no comparison the Lenco has far more bass and slam while being just as clear oin the top end as the Rega - also no rumble with either table.

Like other posters here, I also grew up reading Stereo Review and High Fidelity and Audio and am well familiar with the contention at the time that idler wheel technology was obsolete and at the bottom of the heap. Now that I've had a chance to decide for myself I vote with my listening time:

Main system - Lenco L75 (80%) and Rega P3 (20%)
Office system - Dual 1019
Bedroom System - Dual 1219

Direct Drive Quartz controlled JVC ( In closet not in use)
Kenwood Belt Drive (in closet not in use)

Various CD players - Used for background music while doing other things