I'm not a turntablist, but it's just that nobody here uses belt-driven TTs. If someone owns a belt-driven one, it's probably not for deejaying. But the only reason why maybe you shouldn't scratch on belt-driven tt, is because it might damage the belt. But they try to sell belt-drive tt to djs, so finally, I don't know.

___________________
aka Ninja Francis

I would hazard a guess at it stretching the belt the more you use it. Personallly, I don't think that belt driven turntables serve any great purpose in life, except expose the thrifty and budding DJs to a wonderful world of music. Belt Driven TTs have a horrid reputation of losing pitch/tempo as the extended use lengthens.

Now, as to why it would be terribly damaging to a scratch artist:

I might guess it is because the motors found in belt driven turntables might not be powerful/robust enough to handle the load it would be submitted to when being continuously changed direction.

My 2 cents.

Maybe the grip between the belt and the motor/rotor will deteriorate with scratching.

___________________
aka Ninja Francis

What exactly would be the purpose of having a slipmat then? Shouldn't this remedy that?

Yeah, but still, you force the belt. But if it works, you just have to keep spinning that way.

___________________
aka Ninja Francis

Its becouse the motor isint strong enough. It wont pick up the record fast enough after your holding down on it. No matter how slippy your slip mat is theri will always be some getting through to the motor. This is why vestex and the stanton 150 that are both designed for scratching have such high torque settings. Besides belt drives are balls, its like trying to mix on a cd player that has a few seconds of delay after you press play

___________________

About.com has a good review of Belt vs Direct drive turntables. If my memory serves me right, audiophiles in fact prefer belt driven because it provides less vibration to the platter. Audiophiles claim that when you have a direct drive, the hum of the motor and its armature going directly through the record does 'something' to the sound quality. While, in belt-drives, since the motor is not directly under the centre of the platter and is seperated from the centre of the record through a belt, it makes the spinning less 'vibrat-full'...

I dont know what I am saying. Google it. Read it a while ago...

I find it strange you say that belt drive gives less platter vibrations... I've always found this is one of the main reasons why it's difficult to scratch on belt drive being that the platter wobbles so much the needle jumps everywhere!

Although this could be just as much due to the belt drive decks on average having much worse general build quality (as they're cheaper decks) than direct drive.

___________________
Stu Cox |

http://stereos.about.com/od/gtgttur...terms=turntable

Not to sure about the credibility behind his publication, but it is an interesting read.

quote:

Originally posted by _-MIl0 Its becouse the motor isint strong enough. It wont pick up the record fast enough after your holding down on it. No matter how slippy your slip mat is theri will always be some getting through to the motor. This is why vestex and the stanton 150 that are both designed for scratching have such high torque settings. Besides belt drives are balls, its like trying to mix on a cd player that has a few seconds of delay after you press play

Wow, after all these amazingly informed *ahem* responses, it's surprising how adamant people are about not using belt drives. The only fault I suspect with belt drives is a lack of torque to get your record back up to speed after scratching/cueing.

Stil, the elitism of audiophiles never ceases to amaze me... platter vibrations my elbow.