$800 Cartridge Shootout and Upgrade Path

So as not to totally trash the product, MDF does have uses in audio, speaker cabinets for example. And there are also different formulas for MDF. But one should be judicious in where it is applied. As a former owner of a MDF-based TT I completely agree with the sentiments expressed here regarding its use as a plynth material.

I feel your Salamander pain, DougDeacon. I was using an Architype stand prior to building my own.

I am on a path to get to the decision point Artar is now at. I chose to make my decision between a mid to upper Basis line table and a Teres. I now have the Basis and hope to get started on the Teres after the New Year, if the gods continue to smile on my business. I'm hoping that my own little shoot out between these two makes will answer many of my questions regarding suspended vs. non-suspended, wood vs. acrylic, etc, etc. Since I can't do this in someone's showroom I decided to do it in my listening room. Talk about expensive hobbies. . .!

Artar1,

I have really enjoyed reading your Part 1 synopsis of your decision-making journey; very well written. Thank you for sharing this! I look forward to reading Part 2.

With regards,

Dear Dan ed: If you really want to improve the quality of your music sound reproduction in your analog audio system then you should have to change your phono cartridge for a better one, instead to change your turntable.
So, my advise is that your first step have to be a better cartridge and maybe, if something wrong with you Basis, your second step a new TT: when you want to do this second step, take a look to www.acoustic-signature.com , these turntables beats many of the ones that people mention on this thread at a very confortable price.
Regards and enjoy the music.
Raul.

Yes, Raul. I could use a better cartridge, but I chose not to at this time. I am not unhappy with the performance of my analog system in the least. As a matter of fact, I think it sounds fantastic. My intent is to learn, as you sometimes say, for myself the differences between theories as they have been implemented. I have simply chosen Basis and Teres (don't have it yet, but soon). I could have easily picked two others. Hey, its a hobby that keeps me off the streets and out of the bars.

Salectric,

If there were anyway I could afford a Teres with a dual-arm platform I would, and then the Moerch DP-6 would be placed on the second arm mount. That would be awesome! But I need to exercise a little restraint. This turntable business has gotten me so excited that I can't sleep! Now how strange is that, I ask you? Wow, I need to chill out a little so I guess I will just obsess over the phono stage to distract myself! : > )

Twl,

You know, technical matters are never as simple as they seem, and this certainly applies to the calculation of cartridge resonance frequency.

While I was aware of the two compliance measurements, horizontal and vertical, for a phono cartridge, I did not grasp their significance until you posted. Unfortunately, most tonearm and cartridge manufacturers only provide measurements for the "vertical" plane. ZYX, being the exception to this rule, provides both vertical and horizontal compliance figures. However, I could not find any horizontal measurements for the other cartridges listed in this thread. If I had access to this information, I would have posted it.

Is there anyway to obtain horizontal effective mass figures for tonearms and the corresponding horizontal compliance information for cartridges? And do the horizontal and vertical effective mass readings differ that much for the OL tonearms?

I am in the process of printing out the entire thread relating to the "Strange Tonearm Tweak" that you started awhile back. It looks like a good source of additional information that may prove very useful in my better understanding tonearms and their influence upon the sound.

While I am not trying to become Twl's "Mini-Me," I would also like to use the Denon DL103R as a "backup/workhorse" cartridge as Jphii, Stefanl, C123666, and yourself have recommended. But my cartridge resonance frequency calculations have indicated otherwise, unless I use the "HiFi Mod," which you should think seriously about marketing. So here are my questions:

1) Can the HiFi Mod be used on the OL Encounter?

2) By using the HiFi Mod, will the added weight affect the vertical effective mass figure, and if so, by how much? I realize much of the additional weight is positioned at the tonearm's pivot point, far from the headshell, which means the added mass should not affect the vertical effective mass readings that much. But is this assumption correct?

3) Is the HiFi Mod needed for the OL Encounter to accommodate the DL103R, or will the heavier bearing housing compensate?

4) Can adjustment of the OL Encounter's antiskating force compensate for insufficient horizontal effective mass, or will that simply increase the pressure on the inner groove wall without offering improved tacking and the transmission of musical information/dynamics that may be lost when improper lateral arm movement occurs as a result of the stiff suspension of low compliance cartridges like the DL103R? My guess is the answer is "no."

Thanks!

Twl,

In my last post, I meant to say, "inner- and outer-wall of the record groove" and not just "inner groove wall."

Thanks.

Dan_ed,

I spotted the Aerial 10Ts in your system setup; I just love those speakers. In fact they could be my favorite! Boy am I envious! Drool. Drool. And what a setup you have! Wowy...Wowy!

I just love your rack. Not only is it beautiful, it must be very quiet and absorb all the vibration thrown at it. I just love the birdseye maple and walnut. What a great job!

My current stand is steel and glass. It's okay, but from an engineering perspective, it's not as massive nor does it absorb the energy that your stand is capable of. If I get the time in the future, I would love to replace my current rack with one similar to yours. Keep up the good work!

Mrmb,

Thanks for the information. I have bookmarked the site for future reference. I plan to build something similar in the future, and maybe even replace my existing rack. I just have to convince Luda about it. I may also experiment with different damping material. I could try cork or crushed Styrofoam. But sand is a very logical choice, albeit a heavy one. Thanks again.

Viggen,

The Gyro SE is a great table. Can you tell me a little more about the RS Labs tonearm? Thanks.

Artar1, one of the neat things about the Galibier turntables is that it's so easy to add a second arm. I have both the 12" Moerch and a VPI JMW-10 arm mounted on mine right now. With the Teres I think you have to specify a different base in order to mount two arms.

Dave

Dougdeacon,

Thanks for the compliment regarding my narrative!

I know what you mean about there not being enough dealers available to demonstrate high-quality analog front ends. I guess we are lucky in the Bay Area because we have the Analog Room. They have a lot of nice equipment, but I must point out that they do not carry Teres or Origin Live. : > (

http://www.theanalogroom.com/

I have two systems. One sits in my living room in an open rack. Luda, amazingly enough, didn't object! She uses that system to play her Russian music and I use it when she is watching Russian TV in the family room where my other system resides. Sometimes I find myself in the living room nursing a glass of wine and listening to jazz or classical music as I await my turn in the family room. Lucky for me the family-room TV will disappear soon and will be replaced by a Steward FireHawk screen. Whoopee! In compensation, Luda gets two, or maybe three TVs!

I wasn't aware that MDF rang like a cowbell! Well, I'm exaggerating a little. All of my speakers are made of it to one degree or another, including the chambers that house the woofers of my Martin Logans.

By the way, part two is coming; I just need an opportunity to write it.

Joshua,

I, too, considered the Teres 150/160. I think either one would be a very fine table indeed, and will place you miles ahead of many other tables you could buy. The differences between the 150/160 Series and the 200 Series have to be small. If I were blindfolded, I might not be able to tell the difference. But someone like Dougdeacon or Twl might because of their considerable experience with analog. Later, if you like, you can always upgrade the tonearm making your analog setup even more spectacular.

You know I am not surprised to learn that you were a little underwhelmed by the VPI Scout. Don't get me wrong; I am sure it's a nice table. But I don't always trust what Stereophile writes. Sometimes what they publish seems a bit political, as if they are trying to buy off or placate luminaries of the audio industry or various manufacturers thereof.

When I get the Teres 245 set up, I will let everyone know how it sounds.

Hi Artar,

Regarding the RS-A1, it is imported by Sakurasystems.com. There's a wealth of information on that tonearm on audioasylum's vinyl section. I am attracted to the tonearm's simplicity, but it lacks a cueing/antiskate device which makes most people scared of using it incase they damage the stylus.

There's also two reviews available on the web; however, both the reviewers who are gaga over the tonearm kept the samples gratis of the distributor, so I take their reviews with a pinch of salt if you know what I am saying.

I am waiting for a used one to pop up.

Dan_ed,

Wow, your system is all ready way he-man-like! You could buy a Teres and then you would have two tables in which you could spend the rest of your life trying to figure out which is better. But don't be surprise that the Basis might sound better on one type of music and the Teres on another. This outcome would really drive you nuts. Why, you might even need to make a new rack to house both tables! I know it would be a rough job, but someone has to do it, right? Then you could give us a blow-by-blow description of the shoot-out. That would be great!

Viggen,

Thanks for the information. I found one of the reviews, and I know what you mean. As for the arm not having a damped cuing mechanism, my hands tremble so much that I would most likely end up bouncing the cartridge off the record surface like a basketball. I will have to think about it, but thanks for the tip.

Dave,

Which model do you have and how much is the cheapest one in the Galibier line? They look expensive! But boy are they really cool looking!

Artar1, I have the Galibier Quattro ALU with the PVC platter. This is the "entry" model which presently sells for $3850. I will be trying out the Teflon/Aluminum composite platter shortly. The details of the lineup can be found at www.galibierdesign.com

Dave

Any of the denons in my opinion (dl103s was my favorite)would do a number on the above. In addition, probably one of the best cartridges I have heard is the B&O mmc 2. This would need the adapter to work in standard arm but a real gem. Many would snicker but the sound and engineering are magnificent!

Artar, in response to yesterday's questions, I don't know of any ways to know the horizontal effective mass of a tonearm, other than to get one and check it, or to use a published figure(if there is one available). Sometimes, tonearms have literature explaining their design ideas, and it would be mentioned. That is the case with the OL arms. Perhaps a call to the manufacturer may get you the info.

Now for the numbered questions:
1) The HiFi mod is not needed on the OL Encounter tonearm. It is already satisfactory in horizontal effective mass for low compliance cartridges. Also, the HiFi mod will not fit on it.

2)The HiFi mod does not affect the vertical effective mass of the tonearm, except to an extremely small extent, which would be related to the mass of the weights that is slightly outside the exact center of the tonearm bearing axle. Essentially, it makes no change to vertical mass.

3)The DL103R will work just fine on the Encounter, with no additional mods needed. The heavy bearing housing on the Encounter is designed to provide the increased horizontal effective mass.

4) The anti-skating force cannot be used to compensate for insufficient horizontal effective mass on any tonearm.

Regarding the RS-A1 tonearms, I have heard many reports of good sound from them.

However, I can definitely say that from a design viewpoint it has some very significant problems. The pivot so high above the record is a big problem(geometrically), the pivoting headshell also allows unwanted arm movement to occur right at the headshell, and the lack of anti-skate and lack of cueing are problems.

If it gives good sound, then maybe none of these other things really matter, but I wouldn't use a low compliance cartridge on it. It is not stable, and has a moving headshell which would lose information like the dickens with any kind of lower compliance cartridge, and maybe even a medium or higher compliance one. IMO, it is not a good design.

Twl,

As usual, thanks for your speedy and complete response to my questions. I appreciate it!

It doesn’t surprise me to learn that there is a lack of published information about horizontal effective mass and horizontal compliance for cartridges. Because I will be buying an Origin Live tonearm and I know it will work with the cartridges I have selected, I am not going to pursue the issue any further.

It’s also good to know that the OL Encounter does not need any further modifications to handle low compliance cartridges. But the HiFi mode still looks intriguing, and it’s good to know that it doesn’t affect the vertical mass of the tonearm.

Come to think of it, the bearing housing on the OL Encounter does appear to be on the massive side, which is a good thing. And I would guess that the bearing housing on the OL Illustrious is even sturdier.

I have one last question if I may. Is the Teres 255 worth the extra $350 to get the lead-shot platter?

Thanks.

Part Two: Progress indeed!

No sooner did I get my short list down to two finalists, an urge to find the best price/performance combination took control, and the VPI turntable, once eliminated, found itself back in the lineup. Then I read a review about the Transrotor Leonardo that had my head swimming in luxury as well as audio debt. All the progress I had made earlier was slipping away. It never fails. Anytime I try to make a quick and well-informed audio-buying decision, bouts of doubt, indecision, unabashed ruminating, and excessive flights of fancy always seem to take over. I was stuck again. Somewhat despondent and equally frustrated, I posted a question on this bulletin board that started this thread over a week ago. But instead of asking directly about turntables and tonearms, I decided to inquire about phono cartridges instead.

Asking about the cartridge first seemed a logical thing to do, and if my memory serves me correctly, Julian Hirsch recommended that approach many years ago, back in the audio dark ages of the early 1970s. Julian reasoned, rightly or wrongly, that after one’s loudspeakers, the phono cartridge affects the quality and nature of the music played through one’s system more than any other component. His argument was based upon the very properties of the cartridge itself in which mechanical energy is converted into an electrical signal, which is then feed to the phono preamp and eventually converted back to mechanical energy by the speakers. It was this electromechanical interface that was the defining element of any audio system, more so than the turntable, tonearm, preamp, and amp. Julian further reasoned that the turntable contributed little so long as it was quiet, stable, and rotated the vinyl record at the correct speed. The tonearm only needed to hold the cartridge steady and track the record grooves in a reasonably faithful manner, all of which could be achieved with a little diligence during setup. And we all know his views about amps and preamps, especially solid state ones, sounding identical, or nearly so for all practical purposes.

What heady and naïve times those were to think that the attainment of quality sound could be so oversimplified to the absurd. Gordon Holt and Harry Pearson lifted this fog of simplicity and ignorance in the underground audio press, which went unread by me unit the late 1980s! There is something reassuring and gratifying, I will admit, in simple (but in this case inaccurate) explanations of complex events and interrelationships, especially those that most audiophiles confront when attempting to assemble a musically compelling system based upon component interaction and synergy. We now know that the turntable and tonearm are crucial to achieving good sound. We now know that achieving this sound is not just a matter of steadiness, consistent speed, low wow and flutter, and good tracking. We now know that the preamp and amp have a significant affect upon what we hear. But this new knowledge was subjective and not quantifiable by test-bench numbers, data often supplied by Julian Hirsch and a few others in an attempt to prove sound quality via harmonic distortion, decibels, and RIAA equalization, data that in most circumstances has limited usefulness for the typical listener.

Nevertheless my indecision was getting the better of me so a novel, but perhaps dubious approach was in order. It seemed logical that if I could identify the “right” cartridge, I could then work backwards to the tonearm, followed by the turntable and finally the phono stage. Yeah! That’s it I thought smugly; I will get my answers at last.

Little did I know that I should have started, perhaps, with the tonearm, one that would allow me to use a variety of cartridges, and then work forward and backwards. There’s more logic in this approach because several in this thread have argued that even a modest cartridge, like the Denon DL103R, could produce dazzling results when mounted onto a very good tonearm and turntable. I was told that later I could upgrade the cartridge, but I would always have the benefit of an excellent turntable and arm. Absurd you might think? “No,” I say, for I have heard a Koetsu Tiger Eye Platinum used with a Denon DP-500MX, a combination that robbed that wonderful cartridge of nearly all of its upper-octave air, bloom, and richness. Why on earth would someone use such a combination? Don’t even ask!

So the tonearm was going to be the deciding factor, and there were only two candidates vying to be number one.

To be continued...

This is one of the most interesting threads I've run across! And it's so relevant to my own TT upgrade research! I searched on Galibier since at this point I am trying to decide between the Quattro Alu and the Teres 265. When I started searching my ideas ran between the Basis 2001 and the Nott Spacedeck but as I read more and more I decided against suspended decks(2001) and felt underwhelmed by the Spacedeck though unlike Artar1 I love the look. When I discovered info on Teres and their spin-offs I was fascinated. Like Artar1 aesthetics are very important to me. I wouldn't say shallow, I prefer to think I'm sophisticated in that way but it wouldn't be the first time I was fooling myself. However with these tables I haven't read anyone saying a negative thing about them. I have heard people say that their table would destroy a Teres but it usually seems to be backed by hot air to trump up their purchase decisions and not experience. As for Stereophile ratings, I find too many tables lumped into the same class that don't make sense to me or bizarre comparisons or Art Dudley's use of a Graham Robin on the Galibier which seemed like a poor match. Which is why I seek these forums, to get more data.

Dan_ed, I'm almost tempted to wait till you get your Teres and see what the shoot-out brings! Yr thinking mirrors mine. However I have decided that suspensionless is the way I want to go. I'm looking very forward to yr results.

Artar1, thank you for starting this thread. I appreciate the knowledge that you have shared and the logical approach to this process that you have made. Oftentimes the best questions bring out the best answers and you have done well. I also think your sidebar into the tomfoolery concerning glass and steel is one of the best responses I've read to this issue. Again thanks. I run tubes myself but am not dogmatic about it.

Dougdeacon and Twl I appreciate all that you have two have shared here. It's helping me with my decision. Something Doug said brings me to my own question.

I have been leaning towards the Schroeder 1 (or DPS if that's what it's called now) arm but have not decided on the cartridge. The thing is that while I do listen to a lot of classical(former classical buyer for Tower), I would say that 60% of my listening is to rock, post-rock, punk, free jazz, noise etc. What would be a good match cartridge wise with this in mind? And the Schroeder the arm I should be thinking about? Any info concerning this would be helpful.
Also does anyone have experience with the two tables I mentioned above? I see-saw back and forth between the two as far as looks go but haven't really seen any real comparison as for sound. PVC? Wood? help?
Sorry to horn in, but it seemed like the info and the knowledge is in the neighborhood......

Artar, the lead-loaded acrylic platter increases performance over the plain acrylic, but is only a matter of degree. In my estimation, this is where the curve of "diminshing returns" starts to play heavy into the decision.

Yes it is better, but primarily in refinement. It is not as good as the wood platters, but a little better than the plain acrylic. The speed stability will be somewhat better than with the plain acrylic, due to the higher mass around the perimeter, from the lead shot there.

Basically, if cost is not a major issue, you can get some improvement there. But, if cost is not a major issue, then you could get even more improvement with a 265 or 340. I suppose the main concern is "where do you stop?" You can always get better, no matter how much you spend.

I think it is prudent to understand the turntable system in the context of your entire audio system. Is the system going to be able to resolve the added improvements in the front end? If so, then any front end improvements are quite worthwhile, if you can afford them.

According to the "rules of analog" the TT is the most important part, then the tonearm, then the cartridge. You seem to have this well understood, and it reflects in your selection of products. By improving the platter mass and construction, you can get more for the money spent, than by spending more on the cartridge(for example). But, you are already at a pretty good level with the 245/OL Encounter, and it can surely accept even more capable cartridges than the DL103R. So, in the context of your analog package, the additional platter upgrade would be a "nice thing" but may not be a "necessity". In my opinion, the most limiting item in your analog chain at present is the DL103R. I love the DL103R, and it is truly a great cartridge for the money, but it is not as good as a Shelter 501. I know this from very intimate experience with both cartridges on the same analog platform as you are getting. I'd say that if you are itching to spend some more money, the upgrade to a Shelter 501 would provide a more "balanced" analog system, which would have less limitations overall, because all the items are approximately at the same levels of performance capability. Then, for further upgrades, you could start with a TT upgrade, proceed to another arm upgrade, and then go into the upper stratosphere of cartridges. All of this will cost considerable funds to accomplish.

Letch,
While I have not heard any of the Teres models, I did seriously consider the 255 before deciding to buy the Galibier instead. Some of the factors that led me to choose the Galibier were: (1) some concern over the long-term dimensional stability of the Teres wood base (and even more so the wood platters of models above the 255), as opposed to the solid aluminum of the Galibier ALU, (2) I had heard the Platine Verdier set up with the same tonearm I would be using (a 12" Moerch DP-6) and was very impressed with its sound quality, and the Galibier seemed more similar to the Verdier than did the Teres, (3) the Galibier accomodates 12" arms and it also allows two tonearms to be fitted easily, (4) I read a number of accounts of problems with the Teres motor controller, and I was skeptical of the whole servo control concept---the Galibier and Verdier use a very simple DC regulator which obviously works well without any servo control, (5) the Galibier especially with the optional Teflon/aluminum platter is very massive, and mass seems to matter with a non-suspended table, (6) the Galibier seemed to me to be more cutting-edge in terms of platter technology (a lot of work went into the the Teflon/aluminum composite using lead shot and oil to damp vibrations) and drive belt technology (I believe Thom Mackris was using the wide tape before Teres), (7) I like the looks of both the Teres 255 and the Galibier ALU tables, but overall I preferred the look of polished aluminum which nicely matches the Moerch toneram, (8) I really like Galibier's philosophy that everything they make should be an "heirloom" product that will so longlasting and reliable that it can be willed to your heirs---this was consistent with my desire that my new turntable would be my final table and would be flexible enough to accommodate any tonearm or cartridge changes I might make in the future, and (9) perhaps most importantly, I had and continue to have "good vibes" in all of my conversations and email exchanges with Thom Mackris---Thom is committed to making his customers happy with their purchase. Others have had similar things to say about Chris Brady at Teres, but I talked to Thom first and never felt any need to look further.

I guess the bottom line is that this is a great time to be in the market for a new turntable and we are all lucky to have companies like Galibier and Teres to choose from. In an ideal world, we would be able to go to our local dealer and hear all of the various turntables, and indeed then be able to bring several home to audition at length. In the real world, however, we have to make some decisions based on less than perfect information. I'll confess to having had some concerns about buying any turntable without ever having seem or heard it, even with Galibier's 30-day satisfaction assurance, but I am completely satisfied with the decision to buy a Galibier.

Hope this helps.

Dave

I think that when we are discussing the sonic performance levels of these turntables, and even including such high-end comparisons as the Verdier(and others have even compared against Walker!), it is obvious that any of these selections is in the very high performance category. Thus, any of these brands is going to provide extremely satisfactory results for the money spent. We are talking about personal preferences and slight variations that some may prefer over others.

Obviously, these small variations in sound are what ultimately will make our decision for us in this category, but I seriously doubt that any of them would be an unsatisfactory one.

Just the fact that there are some companies which make turntables that compete at the highest levels, and cost little more than entry level products, is a very good trend indeed for analog lovers.

I considered many of the same turntables under discussion above, and ultimately decided on the Teres. However, it is quite likely that I would have been similarly satisfied with a Redpoint, or Galibier, or maybe even some other options. Any table in the league of a Verdier that costs under $3k is a very good thing, as far as I am concerned. It makes any table costing over $10k seem to be very challenged in cost/benefit assessments.

That is why I made the selections that I did. I had a budget, and wanted as close to the best as I could afford. Thankfully, there were these high-value options that I could select from, which provided performance that was very close the the top and cost in my budget range. I felt the same way about the arm and cartridges that I selected. Over-achievers all. That is the way to make the most out of your analog buck. Sometimes you have to go into the experimental products from smaller companies, in order to get a price/performance ratio like this, because they sell at lower cost to try to break into the market. It can be risky, but it can yield great sonic rewards for the money, if you make the right decisions.

Hi Artar1:" first the cartridge, I could then work backwards to the tonearm, followed by the turntable and finally the phono stage. Yeah! That’s it I thought smugly; I will get my answers at last. "
You are right:the cartridge is the first item to choose in the analog rig, you have to put all the money you can where the music is: at the source/phono cartridge. There is nothing that you can do for that the signal that comes from the cartridge has an improvement: in a perfect world ( that does not exist ) the better that you can do it is: not degraded that signal.
Then you have to choose the best tonearm that match with that cartridge for to try to have the less degraded signal. Next the phono stage ( this link is critical ( well all is critical )and can do more harm to the signal than a TT ), TT, cables and platform.
For others reasons but Mr. Hirsh was right on this subject.
About turntables, I know that for many of you a " beautiful view " is important but I think is more important the performance of that turntables, fortunatelly today we have a lot of turntables for to do a good choice: SME ( the 10 ( for example ) price/performance ratio is exellent ), Transrotor, Avid, Acoustic Signature, Brinhkman, Acoustic Solid, VPI, Wilson benesch, Thorens, Roksan, Eurolab, Basis, etc...., all these and many more has models for differents budgets.
I recomended to you that take a look to Acoustic Siganature, btw take a look to everyone.
Now, if all of you are serious about MUSIC the only Denon cartridge in what you can think is the : DLS1. The 103, 103R,103S, are really a mediocre ( very bad ) performers at any price in front of: MUSIC reproduction.

Regards and enjoy the music.
Raul.

I have to agree with Tom here. I had a budget (that I blew all to hell) and wanted to get the best bang for the buck. By being able to build my own plinth for the Teres, I saved a considerable amount of money. And I am extremely happy with the end result. I also believe in the "rules of analog" as Tom states them: TT, then arm, then cartridge. I understand why you wanted to do the cartridge first, but I went the opposite direction. That's all a matter of opinion. But, so is everything else here.

So I started with the Teres, 2 different Rega based arms, and the 103r. The more I listen to other setups with high dollar arms and cartridges, the more I am amazed by how good this low-dollar rig sounds. I've got a buddy with a full-blown LP12 setup. He can't believe how much better my rig sounds, considering I spent about 25% of what he did. And our electronics are very similar, both of us being of the tube school. I think his next purchase will be a mass-loaded table, after he takes a beating on the Linn. He has finally seen the light!

I know people who spend shitloads of money on their analog rigs. I'm trying not to. In fact, the best "analog" purchase I made was my Supratek. More so than the RCM, which I also believe is essential. As much as I hate to say it, that may be the only thing I agree with Romy, I mean Raul about, the phono stage being critical. It has made more difference than other single change so far.

While I will one day have a Schroeder arm, the only other thing I may change is my platter. And only if I build one myself. The 103r stays, not because it's only $250, but because I like the way it sounds. If it's good enough for Frank Schroeder (one of these days I'm going to get a keyboard with an umlat), it's good enough for me! I think I value Frank's opinion a little more than Romy's, I mean Raul's. I'm not an idiot, I know there are better cartridges out there, but the important thing is, once again, I like the way it SOUNDS, and it is a great VALUE. Of course, if the right deal comes along, well, this could all be changed!

Like Dave said, it's a great time to be in the market for a new turntable. There are some great choices out there for relatively small money. And for various reasons we have definite TT "camps" here on the Gon who champion what we like and think others will too. Without this advice here, I probably would not have what equiptment I do, and spent more time and money finding what I like. And dealing with people like CB & TM makes it even easier and more enjoyable. Do you think any of the "big" TT companies care about your opinion? VPI excluded, as I know they go out of their way for their customers. The nice thing is, they let us have a lot of money left over to spend on vinyl. After all, without the black plastic, what's the point?

It is a simple question to answer, and can be easily proved.

Pick your favorite $5k cartridge and tonearm, and put them on a Rega 3 or some other $500 turntable. Play it.

Then put a RB250 and a DL103R($250 + $250 = $500) on a $5k turntable, and see which sounds better, musically. And, which makes more difference.

The prices are the same, but on one system the cartridge/tonearm is maximized(and turntable minimized), and on the other the turntable is maximized(and cartridge/tonearm minimized).

The question of "order of importance" will then be solved.

I'll leave the conclusions to whoever tries it.

I've done this many many times, and am 100% confident of the outcome.

Very well said, again. Too bad there are those that can't see it.

Like Twl said, it's easy to demonstrate and I've done exactly what he described - though mostly by accident. I ordered my Teres, OL Silver and Shelter 901 all at the same time, but the cartridge showed up first. Being as impatient as any other little kid with a new toy, I mounted the 901 on my old low-fi/mid-fi rig, an HK/Rabco ST-8.

It would be difficult to imagine a less suitable rig for a 901 than that, though I think Artar 1's friend with the Koetsu Tiger Eye Platinum/Denon DP-500MX gets the prize for most absurd pairing. At any rate, the 901 sounded damned impressive compared to the ADC XLM MkII that it replaced, duh, but only when it was mounted on the Teres/OL did it really perform near its full capabilites. On the cheap rig I wasn't hearing more than 1/3 of what the cartridge was capable of. For the few weeks until the Teres arrived, I had paid $1500 to hear $500 worth of cartridge.

The table/arm/cartridge hierarchy should not be overdone of course. Once you get to about a $4K table (Teres 265), the diminishing returns curve really flattens out. At that point your next multi-thousand $ upgrade will buy the most improvement if spent on a top quality arm. Going from a $4K Teres to a $6K Teres will be audible of course, but less so than going from a $1K arm to a $3K one. As Twl advised above, it's important to maintain balance. "Table first" does not mean "table above all else".

Salectric
Thanks for the insight. It is most helpful. Because of my budget I would be getting the PVC platter but perhaps I could stretch. I am trying to buy a turntable that I will be happy with for a loooooooong time since I am looking at going back to school and don't foresee making any money for the audio hobby for the next six years. So I am trying to upgrade my system to something I could live with for awhile. Because of the large amount of vinyl I have (and still accumulating) the analog front end is paramount. Now I'm leaning more towards Galibier.......

Thanks for your kind words, Artar. I like the 10t's also, but they are power hogs and have pushed tube amplification out of consideration. It can be done, but not at price I can afford.

I completely agree with the fact that the turntable makes the biggest difference. I have experienced this recently when I purchased a turntable, tonearm and cartridge. Then an opportunity came along for me to move up the same turntable line so I simply moved the arm and cartridge to the new table. I was amazed at how much more detail and bass was being pulled from each LP with the same cartridge and arm. The dynamics just seemed to wake up. This is one reason why I am choosing to keep my current cartridge and I can completely understand why Jphii would chose to stay with his. A good table will allow what might be thought of as lesser arm and/or cartridge to perform at their very best, which may be quite good. I'm sure if I took my Vector/Benz and mounted them on my old MMF 7 I could be led to think that the Vector was not worth the money I spent.

I am very encouraged by the number and by the quality of posts being made here. It tells me there is a very genuine, and perhaps spreading, interest in all things vinyl. Just look at the number of very fine quality turntables and tonearms available today, maybe that’s a strong indication of an interest in vinyl that will not die despite the proliferation of the digital format. Turntables are even being used at my daughter’s high-school dances even though CDs still predominate there. Nevertheless, it shows that vinyl is here to stay and has a good chance of growing.

I have to run now. My daughter wants to go shopping and won’t let do anything else until we do. : > (

I guess that’s what I get for being indulgent!

Letch,
If you go with any Schroeder below the Reference, one advantage of a Teres would be CB's arm height adjuster. If optimizing SRA turns out to be important for you it's a much better solution than the set screw and sliding post method.

Some of Salectric's Galibier/Teres distinctions are worth a second look:

the Galibier accomodates 12" arms and it also allows two tonearms to be fitted easily,

A Teres accommodates 12" arms just as easily as a Galibier. Both brands have free-swivelling armboards. A two-armboard Teres is available, though it is a special order. Galibier does win that one.

I read a number of accounts of problems with the Teres motor controller, and I was skeptical of the whole servo control concept

I had a controller problem a few weeks after I received my Teres. CB overnighted a completely new motor/controller unit, which gave me the $100 Signature upgrade for free. I'm not personally aware of any controller problems since the Signature and Reference series came out last year. Even if Teres closed its doors tomorrow, the readily available schematics and parts list make it possible for any electronics technician to repair or even build a Teres controller from scratch. The benefit of self-regulating platter speed is obvious, DC motor speed creep will never be an issue. The music is always in the same key at the end of a side as it was at the beginning! ;-)

It seems that a Teres/Galibier decision must usually be made on aesthetics, budget and these relatively few features differences. No one who's heard both has said that either sounds clearly better than the other. Maybe Dan_Ed should add a Galibier to his Basis/Teres shootout. Go Dan go!

Sure thing, DougDeacon! To all, I am now soliciting donations for my "Dexter's Analog Lab" project. :')

Doug,

Thanks for muddying the waters! Kidding. Actually one of my concerns was that the Teres height adjuster would be a major plus. I am not that proficient with fiddling around with tonearms yet and while I had considered a Basis Vector (with the adjustment option), I just heard so much good stuff about the Schroeder that I felt that perhaps I should make the plunge with that arm. I am less concerned with the cartridge. I feel that I can work up to that after the fact.

Thanks for the info on the motor, that was a concern. I have a friend who lives in Colorado Springs so perhaps a visit with him is in order so that I can go hear both tables since they are both conveniently located in that area. I am less concerned with the arm situation since I'm blowing the bank with just this table and arm.

Not that these tables are cheap but it does seem that at their price point that they are SOA solutions that compete with the best.

I wonder how many of us would have to donate to get Dan_ed the Galibier for the three-way shoot-out......

I’m back from shopping at Holister, Co. and Abercrombie and Fitch. My daughter made out like a bandit: over two hundred dollars in ten minutes, half of which she paid! Not bad I say. And she is so happy about her new winter coat. (There is life, I guess, outside of vinyl, but I know it’s hard to believe, right?)

Letch,

Thanks for the kind words; I, too, appreciate your posting here. Your comments are always welcome.

Your choice between the Quattro Alu and Teres 265 will be a tough one, for there’re both fine turntables. I believe the October edition of Stereophile is carrying an article, written by Art Dudley, about the Quattro Alu. I only skimmed the text. I hate to admit that I spent more time drooling over the pictures.

I once had a suspended turntable, but it wasn’t in the same league as the Basis 2001 by any means. However, I did find it very musical, rich, and warm. In those days, you know when the covered wagons made their way west, I had no idea what PRaT meant, and I only discovered the definition for that acronym recently, I hate to admit. But the type of music I like is not full of fury or bombast; it is lyrical, smooth, and melodic. Later I purchased a direct-drive turntable on the basis of a review by Julian Hirsch. Boy did it every sound crummy, but I really didn’t know any better until now, thanks to Twl, Dougdeacon, 4yanx, and others.

In regards to the Nottingham Spacedeck, Luda, my wife, likes it the best of the ones I have shown her, including the Michell Gyro and the Teres 245. She likes the more traditional look of the Linn.

>>I wouldn't say shallow, I prefer to think I'm sophisticated in that way but it wouldn't be the first time I was fooling myself.<<

I would probably be the last one to call another one shallow, but since I like my equipment to look good, I feel a little guilty because the “really hardcore” audiophiles seem to be focused on the sound; aesthetics seem to be secondary. Well they are not secondary to me. Maybe that’s one reason I could never warm up to equipment like NAD despite the following it has gathered over the years.

I don’t take too seriously comments by others claiming to have Teres-killing decks. How would they know without hearing a friend’s unit or buying one for themselves to compare to their “world-beater?” As for Stereophile, I have mixed feelings. I agree: how can they lump so many turntables into one category? Well, the answer is that they try to compare various units on the basis of memory, whim, bias, personal relations with the manufacturer (e.g., the love-fest with Musical Fidelity), and, of course, advertising dollars. (Yeah, what’s up with putting the Graham Robin on the Gailibier? Oh that makes a lot of sense? Maybe Art should have tried something else, or better yet he should have asked the manufacturer for an appropriate arm and phono cartridge.)

If you need more information about the Schroeder Model 1, you may need to talk with Twl. You will have to examine that arm’s effective mass and its bearing assembly to determine whether it will properly accommodate your desired cartridge. Given you musical tastes, you could start with a Shelter 501, and from there you could try different cartridges. Here’s some data about the Model 1 that you might find useful:

1) Torsion-bearing, magnetically stabilized and damped

2) Virtually no bearing friction, no bearing chatter

3) Dynamic damping of the tonearm-cartridge-resonance through induction of eddy currents, adjustable

4) VTA repeatable and finely adjustable

5) Tonearm wands are interchangeable, available in 8.5 – 12inch length

6) Effective Mass depending on the armwand from 5gr – 35gr

7) Tonearm wands/rods made out of carbon fiber, jacaranda, ebony, acacia, bamboo, pertinax etc.

8) Incognito wiring, single run, other wiring upon request.

http://www.soundscapehifi.com/schroder.htm#model1

With different armwand material and armwand weights to choose from, you should, at least in theory, be able to match the Model 1 to virtually any cartridge. But I don’t know about the cabling or the bearing assembly of the tonearm being able to absorb the energy of a low compliance cartridge, like a Shelter. Once again, you will need to ask Twl.

Thanks Artar1! I'm getting a lot out of dovetailing my questions into this thread.

Twl - Perhaps you could comment more on the Schroeder, I haven't seen much information on what can be accomplished with the various materials for the tonearm. I like the idea of a Shelter 501. And is this arm suitable for someone who is just learning about tonearms? I'm not really a tweaker in that regard. Though I want to learn more.

Any comments about Schroeder in general would be helpful from those with experience hearing one. The data on audioasylum is very positive but not too specific on details.

The Schroeder does have an excellent rep and both companies offer it as package deals with their tables. I'm still wavering on the aesthetics of the tables though. It's a nice choice though. It seems to me that there is plenty of aesthetically pleasing equipment out there so someone cares about those things.

Regarding the Schroeder, it is out of my price range, so I have never used it. I know several people(including Chris Brady of Teres) who used a Schroeder with a Crown Jewel(which is actually a re-named Shelter 501) and liked the combination.
Heavy armwand should be used.

Wow, this thread has come along way from a discussion about an $800 cartridge upgrade to talks about high-end tables and arms! No complaints here, I learn a great deal from threads such as this.

On the subject of shopping trips. My wife spent Saturday at a charity flee market that supports a day program for special needs adults. So she comes home with 3 records! Ok, so two of them were duplicates for me but it really is the thought that counts. This is just another indication to me that she is supporting my audio passion. I may have to start being nicer to her.

In the short two years of my analog rebirth I have discovered that with almost any of the modern tables that I can enjoy just about any type of music. I now listen to nearly everything from Bluegrass to Bach, though classic rock is my base, and I felt that even my former Music Hall did a good job on all of this music. I have learned that dynamics are probably most important when you consider music that might be described as rich and warm. The playback of so many musical passages are enhanced by the ability to provide that immediate tone and beat. You may not notice any deficiency with rock but you most certainly will with classical and even some Bluegrass. Things my old Dual table way back when could not deliver.

So maybe I am just reiterating what Twl has already stated, that you really can't go wrong with any of the better modern tables. If you can accept this then why shouldn't aesthetics come into the equation. We are visual creatures and will probably spend a good deal of time looking at our equipment while we are listening to it.

Twl,

I suspected that the lead-loaded acrylic platter was the start of diminishing returns from a sonic perspective when one goes from the Teres 245 to the Teres 255. The two platters may be difficult to tell apart for the average listener in a short, double-blind test, but I am willing to bet over a long period of time the differences might assert themselves. The lead-loaded platter should provide even blacker backgrounds and, as you have suggested, should rotate at a more consistent speed due to the greater platter mass, assuming, of course, the electric motor has the ability to handle the added weight without overheating. I assume it does, for everything about a Teres turntable seems a little on the overbuilt side.

I would love to hear the wood platters, and in one sense they are beautiful to look at. But I have never really been drawn to that design, maybe for aesthetic reasons. Perhaps there’s too much wood, and I like the combination of the wood and acrylic better than an all wood system. I know my reaction is largely subjective, and I can appreciate the added dampening offered by a platter made from hardwood.

If cost was no object, and for me it always will be, I would opt for the latest Teres model, which I believe is the 360. The Teres 265 is too much turntable for me, but I do appreciate the suggestion. When I first began thinking about the Teres, my mind fixated almost right away on either the Teres 245 or the 255. Now that I have had more time to think about it, I am beginning to lean in the direction of the 255. It’s only $350 more, and if I were to upgrade to this platter later, it might cost me more if I were to include shipping. But you are right, at what point does one stop, a very good question indeed! For me, it would be the 255.

>>I think it is prudent to understand the turntable system in the context of your entire audio system. Is the system going to be able to resolve the added improvements in the front end? If so, then any front end improvements are quite worthwhile, if you can afford them.<<

Nice point! You should be an audio dealer! My speakers are very revealing; they let me hear the differences between two different ICs connected between the amp and preamp, so they would reveal the small differences between turntable platters. The question I should ask myself is not whether I can hear a difference, but what significance should I attach to that difference and how much am I will to pay to get it? It’s amazing how most people, while they can detect a difference between X and Y, lose that ability very quickly once they understand the cost of the upgrade, especially if that cost is exorbitant.

>>According to the "rules of analog" the TT is the most important part, then the tonearm, then the cartridge.<<

While I understand this general rule, I am still fighting the old dogma propagated by Julian Hirsch. Without a doubt, if the turntable is faulty, audible distortion will become quite obtrusive as a result of inconsistent platter speed, wow and flutter, rumble, and acoustic feedback. On my previous turntables, which allowed speed adjustment, I can remember increasing and decreasing turntable speed in order to hear the very obvious sonic effects. And these tables had an integrated dust cover that caused very obvious feedback when lowered during play. Moreover, if the table is also of poor design, the reproduction of bass notes will be lacking, and pitch definition will be difficult to discern. On my pervious decks, the reproduction of bass was always a major weakness. Because of what you have just said and my increasing understanding of the importance of the turntable and its influence upon the sound, I am more inclined to opt for the Teres 255. The extra $350 spent on the table will pay the largest dividend.

>>In my opinion, the most limiting item in your analog chain at present is the DL103R. I love the DL103R, and it is truly a great cartridge for the money, but it is not as good as a Shelter 501.<<

You are correct, without a doubt. The Shelter 501 will be in my lineup, but there’s something romantically compelling about a top-performing cartridge that costs about $239! Now I know this is another one of my subjective and irrational positions, but no one has to convince me that the Shelter is better. So I might drop the idea of the Denon altogether for the sake of balance.

I like your concept of “balance.” I think creating a balanced analog system is probably the most important goal. Perhaps, it does matter too much where one begins (e.g., turntable, tonearm, cartridge, and phono stage) so long as all of the final elements in the resulting setup are fully balanced in terms of their ability to work together and in their ability to deliver a fine sonic performance. If one cannot establish a good balance, then I like your idea of starting with the turntable first, followed by the tonearm, cartridge, and then phono stage. This approach creates a solid foundation while permitting upgrades to occur later.

>>That is why I made the selections that I did. I had a budget, and wanted as close to the best as I could afford. Thankfully, there were these high-value options that I could select from, which provided performance that was very close the top and cost in my budget range. I felt the same way about the arm and cartridges that I selected…Sometimes you have to go into the experimental products from smaller companies, in order to get a price/performance ratio like this, because they sell at lower cost to try to break into the market. It can be risky, but it can yield great sonic rewards for the money, if you make the right decisions.<<

Right decisions indeed! With your help and with the help of Dougdeacon and Jphii, I think we are seeing, perhaps, a major reduction of risk in trying products from companies like Teres. Your combined experience not only serves as good testimonials, they also provide invaluable experience. As audio prices continue to climb, as the influence of the Internet continues to grow, and with it, the acceptable of buying goods and services over the World Wide Web, and as long as audiophiles like ourselves are willing to share our experiences through a forum like this, I think we will begin to see a shift away from the Sound by Singer’s of the World toward direct marketing companies like Teres and others. Such companies offer us the best in price/performance. This is where I like to shop.

>>Pick your favorite $5k cartridge and tonearm, and put them on a Rega 3 or some other $500 turntable. Play it.

Then put a RB250 and a DL103R ($250 + $250 = $500) on a $5k turntable, and see which sounds better, musically. And, which makes more difference.<<

I Have had the privilege of experiencing the first situation, but the cartridge cost $10,000 (Koetsu Tiger Eye Platinum, which now sells for $13,000), and was placed on a $650 Denon turntable/tonearm combination. While the sky did not fall, much of the air, bloom, richness, top-end extension, and inner detail were missing. It was a perfectly good waste of an incredibly expensive cartridge. However, this mismatch easily beat a $1,000 CD player, which may not be saying very much.

Salectric (Dave),

You have made some very useful and valuable points. Thanks for sharing your experiences. You have made many compelling observations in favor of the Galibier ALU, which seem irrefutable. But I would like to explore several points if I may.

I am looking at the Galibier ALU, as is Letch. But unlike Letch, I am not sure I can afford the ALU’s asking price, which is more than a thousand dollars higher than the Teres 255, a turntable that is already quite expensive by many standards. So I guess you and Letch are, or will be, playing on a “higher” field, which is great, of course.

You mentioned that your first concern regarding the Teres 255 was its long-term dimensional stability because its plinth and tonearm mount are made of wood, and not aluminum. Are you concerned that the main turntable bearing would somehow work itself loose inside its hardwood housing over time causing rotational speed inaccuracies and unwanted platter wobble? Isn’t aluminum a relatively soft metal? Wouldn’t stainless steel be a better choice, albeit a very expensive one? Stainless is not only more ridged, but has greater tensile strength along with a greater ability to withstand tarnishing. However, because of steel’s greater mass and density, it may have a greater tendency to ring so a more elaborate damping system would have to be devised, which explains in part why aluminum was chosen. It’s interesting to note that, according to Art Dudley’s review of the Galibier Quattro Supreme ($6,600 as tested), concentric channels are dilled into the bottom of the plinth and filled with lead shot and oil in accordance with a computer model. The oil and lead, no doubt, serve as a damping mechanism to reduce ringing.

Letch, if you are reading, the Galibier ALU uses a solid PVC platter in its standard configuration, minus the added benefit of oil-and-lead mass weighting. Not only that, PVC, as a material, is softer than acrylic while not providing the same tensile and dimensional rigidity. Yet it’s heavier. However, lead can be added to acrylic, as is the case with the Teres 255, to increase mass and to improve rotational speed accuracy. If you purchase a Galibier, you may want to consider the aluminum-Teflon patter for an additional $1,250! Also note that it’s my understanding, according to Art Dudley’s article, the plinth of the Galibier ALU lacks the added benefit of oil-and-lead mass weighting found in the Quattro Supreme, yet another compromise as it were. Without this damping material, the aluminum plinth might exhibit increased ringing, degrading to the turntable’s signal-to-noise ratio. Now whether this added ringing is audible is another matter indeed!

I am wondering whether Teres is still having trouble with the servo control of its DC motor, if they are really using a servo-control mechanism. If the problem is still there, that would be troubling indeed. I wonder if anyone reading this post can respond to this question. Yet, I don’t quite understand your objection to servo control? Could you elaborate, perhaps? The Teres web site describes their DC controller mechanism this way:

“The Teres is best described as a self calibrating fixed DC regulator…The quality of the regulator used with a DC motor has a significant sonic effect. Listening evaluations have shown that even small modifications to the circuit are clearly audible. The Teres regulator circuit has been carefully optimized to provide the best possible sound.

The Teres regulator starts with a high performance regulator constructed from discreet components. This circuit offers far better performance than simple IC regulators that are more commonly used. For you technical types it consists of a precision current source feeding into a shunt regulator. The result is excellent immunity from input noise and extremely low dynamic impedance. This translates into better pitch stability and ultimately better sound.

Building on a capable regulator design the Teres regulator is implemented using only the highest quality components. Component selection was guided by careful listening evaluations where component differences could be reliably identified. This optimized regulator using, Black Gate capacitors, high quality film capacitors and low DCR inductors offer improvements in musicality that is not subtle.”

(http://www.teresaudio.com/i_motor.html)

It’s also interesting to note that Teres offers a lifetime warranty on all of their motors, and they go out of their way to describe the construction of these motors, stopping short, of course, of calling them servo controlled. Nevertheless, one of the first upgrade items I intend to buy will be a replacement motor, along with numerous turntable belts, in case Teres should ever go out of business.

Raul,

Thanks for your kind thoughts and observations. The cartridge is very important, as you have pointed out. I also think that balancing the system, as Twl has suggested, is also important. For me, which I believe it was your suggestion, I will start with the Shelter 501 and put it on an Origin Live tonearm, either the Encounter or the Illustrious.

And thank you for your continued support of the Acoustic Signature turntable. However, I think my heart is set on buying the Teres 245 or 255; I like the look of wood.

Thanks for posting.

Artar1

Artar1, I am not a materials engineer and so cannot comment on your speculations about the various materials. What matters, of course, is the resulting sound quality, and I can vouch for the sound quality of the solid aluminum base in the ALU model. I have no doubt that the Galibier Quattro Supreme would be even better, but that was beyond my price limit. For what it's worth, the designer Thom Mackris says the the platter upgrade makes a much more significant improvement in sound quality than the upgraded base. I will be finding that out shortly when my new Teflon/aluminum platter arrives.

Dave

Jphii,

Because you built your Teres from scratch, it might be useful for some of us if you were to describe the process for us and to comment on the overall quality of the turntable, if you wouldn't mind. I think that would be very instructive and helpful for some of us newbees, like me.

Well, you’re not the only one who has blown his budget all to hell. If you’ve heard of “A Bridge too Far,” right, well my analog saga is becoming “A Turntable too Much!” Let’s see, my budget started out at $3,000 for the turntable, tonearm, and cartridge. Now it’s over five big ones! Help! As of today, I am up to a Teres 255, an Origin Live Illustrious, and a Shelter 501. Why the Illustrious? Hey, I just love that name, don’t you? It looks a little better than the Encounter (I can just see Twl rolling his eyes!), and it has a few more refinements that I like. What concerns me about both the Encounter and the Illustrious is that in some photos it appears that the back end of the arm base is hanging over the edge of the arm board mount, which would be aesthetically unacceptable for me. If this proves to be the case, I will ask Teres to make sure that the arm board mount for my Teres is made larger so there will be no overhang. If they refuse, then it’s back to the Moerch DP-6.

>>I know people who spend shitloads of money on their analog rigs. I'm trying not to. In fact, the best "analog" purchase I made was my Supratek.<<

Right on! That’s one hell-of-a preamp by anyone’s standards! If I had it to do over again, I would buy the Supratek Cortese. But I own a Klyne System 7 line stage that certainly outperforms my Conrad-Johnson PV14L and my Proceed AVP-5. In fact, I have no criticisms of the Klyne so it’s difficult for me to justify taking a $2,000 loss by selling it to buy the Cortese.

Hey, if you like the DL103R, I say go with it. Don’t let anyone talk you out of it. I can certainly support you one that one.

Salectric,

It's great to hear about your platter upgrade! Let us know how it sounds. I think we're all eager to hear.

Artar1

Dan_ed,

It’s always a good idea to be nice to your wife. Luda asked what I wanted for my birthday, which is fast approaching. I said, “How’s about a contribution to my turntable savings account?” She said, Will five or six hundred do?" “Why certainly!” I replied. I am getting closer guys. : > )

My favorite music for vinyl is classical. That type of music was what I bought first in any abundance, and it is what I am buying now despite the fact I don’t have a turntable. It’s a risk buy so to speak, but I feel that I have to get back into the vinyl game in some way. Shoot, by the time I actually get my turntable, I will have about a hundred albums. Now I know that’s a puny record collection to many, but it’s like diamonds to me!

I will have to say that even with rock, vinyl reigns supreme over CDs. Even though I listen to classic music, what got me going toward vinyl was hearing “Gloria” by the late Laura Branigan. The music was so sublime, the beat was so hot, and her voice was so real and in the room with me I literally jumped out of my chair and commenced to flail myself about has if I had become possessed by the Almighty. Wow! Rock was meant to be heard from a vinyl record on a great analog front end. The music I experienced that moment was better than any live concert of amplified music I have ever heard!

ARtar, it sounds like you are really having fun with all this, and I hope you continue to enjoy this process. With the various selections you are choosing from, you are bound to get very good sound.

Just enjoy yourself and get the things that make you happy.

We are just trying to provide some insight that will help you to make your decisions about some of the details.

Regarding your questions about motor controllers, there are some things about DC motors that need to be known. First, they can be the smoothest way to rotate the platter. But, they have no "speed lock" like AC synchronous motors do, and the speed can slow down over the course of playing a record, unless something is done to keep it at speed. This is due to "stylus drag" and it can add up to a significant loss of speed over the 20-30 minutes of an LP side. There have been a variety of methods employed to keep the DC motors at correct speed, and they all have their plusses and minuses. The bottom line is that the heavier the platter is, with more rotational momentum, the less likely that stylus drag will significantly affect the speed. With the heavier platters, even a TT which uses speed controls will not have to engage in compensating pulses to the motor very often, if the platter stays at correct speed in the first place. I have a Teres(as you know) and it even has the lightest platter in the Teres lineup. The motor housing has some LED's on it to show when the speed has changed significantly enough to apply a correction. In fact, the red(correction)LED light never comes on during play. It only comes on when the platter is first starting up, and seeking 33.3rpm. Then the green light comes on and stays there throughout the LP side. So I really don't even see any corrections taking place, because the heavy platter keep it rotationally stable. However, I do know that if something severe happened to the platter speed, that the controller would account for the change immediately. Also, the Teres uses a strobe on the platter to continuously monitor the speed. This is quite different than monitoring motor speed, because if there is belt-slippage, the motor will "see" correct speed, but the platter could be off-speed. We always want to know the platter speed is correct.