Thorens TD 321 vs JVC QL-7 | Belt driven vs Direct Drive | my Record players / Turntables 

Been thinking of getting myself into vinyl (haven't touched it since I was a teenager in the eighties). Talked to my dad as he isn't using his JVC QL-7. Thinking of attaching a Nagaoka MP-110 or MP-150 to it for the softer sound (fits the music I want to listen to) as I know it needs a new stylus anyways.

Great video. My main turntable (Linn Axis) is belt drive. However I recently bought a cheap direct drive turntable (Rotel RP5300) just to see what it is like. I am quite impressed with the Rotel. The Linn is a far better turntable but I think that is more down to the superior tonearm than the drive system. I use have a Project Essential turntable and that had far more motor noise than the Linn or Rotel. I would agree a good vintage turntable it better than a similarly price new turntable.

You can clean the nicotine residue using a paste of water and baking soda. It works great and doesn't etch the metal as long as you rinse it off well. Of course, that means you need to be able to rinse it which might not work on the tone arm. It does work great for aluminum knobs and faceplate on a vintage receiver.

Nice! Interesting comparison!

Those are beautiful turntables. Love the look of the JVC. I've been thinking of trying out an MC and have had my eyes on the Denon DL-110 but have yet to bite the bullet. Frank

In my experience good quality DDs and BDs are both way better in regard to W&F,SN etc. than vinyl itself can possibly be. And you dont need a vintage top deck or a modern high end deck for that. In the 2nd half of the seventies up to the early eighties both drive system were effectivly optimised even in most middle class models. They mostly were developed further to produce them cheaper and with less material. Where the bran gets purged from the barley is in tonearm/cartridge quality and synergy. Also dampening of the plinth is an issue,but to a lesser degree. Some firms like Sony or Kenwood for example made plinths from artificial stone which are way better than high density particle board. Others focussed on subchassis construction. Anyway,the most important point aside from the drives quality - regardless its principle- is the ability of the tonearm to let the cartridge reach its full potential. Not every cartridge fits in every tonarm regardless that it fits geometrical.

Best way to clean nicotine stains, send them to engineering company that as ultrasonic cleaning facilities; it will save you a lot of hard work getting the parts clean.

Quartz-locked direct drive FO’ LIFE! Peace.

I also have so many old sound system

Hello everyone, I’m inbetween thorens 147 and thorens 321 - can anyone advise on which one I should go for? Leaving the auto lift aside ... which one? Many thanks

Great man

Belt drive is the preferred type of table amongst die hard audiophiles and I definitely prefer belt drive to direct drive any day of the week.

Would you say it's totally subjective whether DD or BD is better? This guy is trying to convince me as to why BD is better than DD.

Interesting and useful video, clear filming and good narrative, but why did you have to have that dreadful racket banging away in the background all the time? Made it painful to watch the video and served no useful purpose whatever! Anyway, made me re-think my prejudice against direct drive as a dj's only scratchbox.

every album is recorded differently

Direct dive was made for radio stations and are now obsolete.It was a durable commercial drive but it does have more noise and flutter. Most DJ themselves bought and recommended belt drive for home use.

thorens will be better