Teres 340, anyone heard / seen one in the flesh

I own a Teres 340 with Graham 2.2 and Shelter 901. Simply fabulous is all that I can say.

I have been listening critially since the first of the month and I am amazed by what I have been missing.

The speed, resolution and simple clarity of everything strikes me as astonishing. The imaging is fantastic and the transparency of the sound is accentuated by the darkness of the background. In fact, I have been very impressed with how low the surface has become in general.

Of course, these impressions represent a combination of all of the components acting as a system in conjunction with an excellent phono preamp properly loading the cartridge, but I believe the Teres provides the platform for the rest to happen.

I was fortunate to be in a shoot-out between the various Teres turntable components in January, and the 300 series tables clearly exceeded the 200 series tables hands down across categories. That was a concensus opinion I believe.

In fact, it was at that time that I decided against any acrylic TT, leaded or not. This sealed my personal decision.

Cello: I am impressed and I am also thinking about Koetsu, but only thinking at this stage.

With regard to the shoot-out, I will give you my own impressions. The arm was the top Schroeder with a 901 cartridge all mounted on the 265 plinth. (Tube amplification and horn/subwoofer speakers). All in all, very high-end. The study was performed at the home of Chris Brady, so I defer to him for the details and follow-up.

The fiirst platter was pure acrylic. I thought it sounded wonderful and better than my VPI HW-MK19 with a SME-309 arm and Grado Reference.

However, the next platter was lead filled acrylic, and it simply sounded better than the plain acrylic in all ways. Specifically, fuller or bigger sound with more resolution. I think were all surprised by the magnitude of the change.

The next platter was the leaded/cocobolo, which was a clear improvement over the leaded acrylic but not as dramatic as the first step. To me the improvement was resolution of low level details and fullness of sound. The transparency was improved and the dynamic range seemed enhanced as I recall.

Next came the switch to the 320 TT, which was a handsdown winner over the 265. It was livelier, bigger sound, more resolution of low level inputs, on and on. Just better in everyway.

The next was the 340, which was like the 320 but smoother and more silky. Now, I would say the answer is more refined than the 320. We characterized the difference between the 320 and 340 as more like the difference between Fuji color (320) and Kodak color (340).

In retrospect, I am glad to have purchased the T-340 because the short duration of my listening did not allow me to appreciate the full-breadth of the T-340 sound. It is like music, the best songs often take a little time to appreciate.

I hope this helps.

Doug:

And, yes the shootout was held at CB's at least in part because I wanted to hear the Teres TT options before I decided on buying a TT. I was fortunate that Chris was interested in doing a full experimental listening. The T-320 will be a clear upgrade over the 265. IMHO, the T-320 and T-340 sound relatively similar but distinctly improved over the T-265, which was fabulous itself. I seriously considered the T-320 but was swayed by the group opinion. As I said before, the T-340 is more refined and the differences are in the low detail. Therefore, I imagine, the high mass TT stand / platform will have much to do with the overall sound.

The problem with these comparisons is that sound which was perfectly satisfying at the time becomes woefully dlacking after you hear a major upgrade. When I came home from Denver, I had to readjust to my TT. It was kind of like going from analog to CD, and you can only imagine the grumbling and longing that went on. Chris and I made the deal in late January, but because of my travel schedule primarily, it was late May before we installed it at my home.

Now I am living and listening large.

Greg