Cartridge / Tonearm opinions requested...

I have gotten emails from some Audiogon members stating that they got good results using Shelter cartridges on their WB arms. The WB arms have stabilizers, and should do better than basic unipivots with a lower compliance cartridge. I think you're reasonably safe with the Shelter or Koetsu or WB cartridges. I don't have any experience with the Allearts cartridge.

As far as the cartridge choice goes, that is pretty subjective, and may have budgetary considerations. I think the Shelter 901 is a terrific cartridge and costs far less than any of the other ones you mentioned. If you want to venture into higher-priced territory than that, I would use the Shelter as a benchmark, and audition the others against that, to see if they can beat the Shelter enough to make them worth the extra money. I think you'll find that the Shelter will "hold its own" against just about anything, and is alot easier on the wallet. But, if you find that you like one of the others better, and want to fork over the dough, then at least you've satisfied yourself that you got more for your money by comparing against the high-value cartridge. I've seen people get a little upset when they have bought a very expensive cartridge, and found that the Shelter would have done better for alot less.

I would also add a ZYX R-100 Fuji to your cartridge list. This is a very fine cartridge, about $2k, and is competitive with the Shelter 901. The Fuji is slightly better on small-scale music and the Shelter is slightly better on large-scale music, and the bass response on the Shelter is absolutely first class.

Lasercd,

May I ask what made you conclude that the W-B arm was going to be the arm of choice?

Just a minor correction - Wilson-Benesch is a UK company & not a Japanese one (www.wilson-benesch.co.uk). From reading their philosphy of analog design, it is clear that they are proponents of low-mass design. This is a key point! Teres Audio is a big proponent of mass-loaded design. Everything they make is very heavy! They have very good design principles as does W-B & I'm not critizing any manuf. here - merely pointing out the diff. The ACT 2 arm is designed to go into a low-mass, rigid system. This leads me to believe that the synergies between ACT 'table & ACT 2 arm will be symbiotic & "made for each other" by design. It is not clear that the ACT 2 arm will perform the same way in a mass-loaded Teres design. It might & then it might not. The 2 philosphies are very different. My gut feeling is that the ACT 2 arm is a wrong choice for the Teres 'table. It might give you very good perf. but nowhere near the optimum that the 265 is capable of. Of course, this is my opinion!

A suggestion would be to chose a tonearm from Chris Brady's "tier 1" list. All tonearms there are proven to perform at the highest level with a Teres. I'm sure that you know that SYNERGY is a key part of obtaining top-notch performance. Getting a carbon fibre tonearm for the sake of looks seems to be the wrong method of chosing a tonearm. Again, IMHO!

Not critizing you in any way. Of course, you make the final decision as it is your system & you have to live w/ it. I feel that you might be compromising the TA-265 right from the get-go.

FWIW. I hope you take this in the right spirit. Thanks!

Bombaywalla:

I definitely take your comments in the right spirit and I appreciate your input (same goes for Twl - your insight regarding analog always seems to be spot on).

What I was referring to was the W-B cartridge which is of Japanese origin - not the arm which I know is of British origin. I don't know who in Japan makes the W-B Analog cartridge (the Carbon is sourced from Benz).

Regarding my choice of arms...I really could not decide between the Moerch or the W-B. I was kidding about the carbon fiber but I actually do prefer the look of the W-B over the Moerch for what that's worth. Of course sonics come first.

As far as the synergy with the Teres and W-B...I spoke with W-B's North American distributor. He was not familiar with the Teres table but considered the Act 2 to be more of a "universal" design than the .5 arm which is specifically designed to work in the Circle table. He didn't suggest their would be any compatibility issues with any particular tt design approach. I've had numerous conversations with Chris Brady regarding arm selection. He didn't seem to feel as though there was as much of a difference among the arm choices as there was from jumping up to the 265 from a 255. I mentioned the Wilson Act 2 arm and he didn't voice any opinion that it would be a bad choice. Perhaps he isn't intimate with it.

I haven't ordered the arm yet so I may wake up tomorrow and decide on the Moerch but this is starting to get to me. I'll have to come up with a definitive answer soon.

Looks like I need to do more detective work and ask more questions...

Thanks!