Is the Teres a


I have just read Art Dudley's review of the Quattro Supreme (Stereophile, October issue), a table spawned from the basic Teres design. (The friendship, then break-up of the original Teres group is also mentioned as a side story.)

I have no experience with the Teres but the Supreme - a design very similar to the Teres - priced at $6,000 got a "B" rating (actually meaningless, but someone's got to give it some rating because we are a rating-mad people!).

Why doesn't Chris Brady send Art a table so that he could at least give the Teres a good review and exposure?

Art's reference, the LP12, by the way, beat the Supreme in one area: PRaT.

Cheers,
George
ngeorge
All,

It's my humble opinion that passing judgment on construction materials (wood vs. aluminum) is the equivalent of judging a vacuum tube outside of its circuit context. It's impossible to come up with any valid generalizations.

One might ask why I love the wooden arm wand on my Schroeder Reference and yet do not use wood in my 'table designs.

Simply stated, tonearms present entirely different challenges to the designer, with the most limiting materials constraint being that of controlling effective mass. Quite the opposite circumstances apply in turntable design, where you can turn mass into your friend if you do it intelligently and damp it properly.

The beauty of this situation is for the consumer. Since Chris and I follow the beat of different drummers, our products are different as night and day. The choices are aesthetic ones - both visual and aural. You will never be all things to all people, and it's foolish to try.

In a fair and thorough comparison, I'm confident that both Chris' and my best effort would handily relegate many of the S'phile Class B and Class A components to the trash heap. I'm hearing this from my customers, and I've performed demonstrations which have proven this to me. I'm sure that Chris has had the same experiences.

I'd really get a kick out of an after hours comparison at the Rocky Mountain Audiofest next month - involving perhaps a Galibier, Teres, Basis, and Clearaudio. I doubt that Chris and I would get any takers for such a session, because Basis and Clearaudio have nothing to gain. However, if enough attendees request such a session of one of the large exhibitors running Basis and Clearaudio (hint, hint), it could happen.

Regarding Art's review with respect to PRaT (and color for that matter), if you read Art's review of the Graham Robin from last year, you'll note that he is describing the Robin tonearm when he describes the Supreme. This becomes clear when he writes of his brief experience with the Schroeder Reference.

Truth be told, I didn't know that Art would get the article to press so quickly. The intent was to have him work through the Robin, RB300, and his Naim Aro. I was in the process of trying to hunt down the Naim rep to get a mounting pattern for Art's (quirky to say the least) arm of choice. The day I received the draft of the article was the same day I received his Rega armboard from my machinist.

None of this is to make any excuses, and my expectations were realized by getting Art (a low-mass kinda guy if there ever were one) to get all hot and bothered over my rig. Did I expect to convert him? Not in a million years.

Cheers,
Thom @ Galibier
Hi NGeorge,

I'll suspend the Teres love fest (temporarily of course!) and address a couple of your followup questions/points:

---
"What I'm saying is that it would be great for the everyday guy (who's part audiophile, part insecure audio geek and part know-it-all) to read about his gear, in this instance, a turntable, on the pages of Stereophile."

I've only been involved in the higher end of audio for a couple of years, and in high end analog for 13 months, but I can say with a complete lack of insecurity (and a wealth of know-it-all) that Art Dudley's credibility as a vinyl components reviewer leaves much room for improvement.

In May he reviewed the ZYX R1000 Airy cartridge, which I own. He did a commendable job but he missed some things due to the limitations of his equipment. He made other errors due to his oft-stated preference for components with something called "PRaT", an error he apparently repeated in his review of the Quattro.

His equipment-based errors in the Airy review were caused primarily by the tonearms he used: Ittok, Ekos and whatever flavor of Rega is on his P3. None of these arms has a particularly credible height adjustment. The Airy has a microridge stylus that is sublimely sensitive to VTA. On my rig, arm height changes as small as .007mm make the difference between the Airy sounding "nice" and sounding astoundingly solid and dynamic, precisely the attributes AD said he missed in the Airy. The arms Mr. Dudley used are simply incapable of being adjusted to get the most from this cartridge.

FWIW, I'll add that reviewing a reference caliber cartridge on a Rega P3, as Mr. Dudley partly did, is rather like reviewing Z-rated racing tires on a Jeep Cherokee. There's nothing wrong with my Cherokee, but it's no Porsche 911.

AD's oft-admitted preference for components with "PRaT" virtually disqualifies him for reviewing reference quality components IMO. Pace, rhythm and timing are - or ought to be - provided by the musicians, not the reproduction equipment. If AD likes colorations that's his privilege, but he shouldn't go parading them in public while masquerading as a high end guru. That deceives the people he's supposedly serving. (I'd retract the above if by "PRaT" he simply meant that the Quattro failed to maintain rock steady speed during dynamic passages, due to stylus drag for instance. I doubt that's the case however, particularly since there's no reason to believe his LP12 would do any better and every reason to believe it would do worse.)

There is much wheat among the chaff in 'Stereophile' reviews. AD's Airy review contained many commendable insights along with the errors I mentioned. Unfortunately, the people best able to sort the one from the other are the least likely to need the review. :-(

---
"...both the Supreme and Teres 340 share the same philosophy: no suspension, mass based. The Supreme's platter weighs 75lbs (!) against the 37 lbs for the 340.

Is this the way to go? As heavy as it should be to be a good turntable?"

All other things being equal I suppose that might be so, but of course they never are. CB already pointed out the many significant differences between a Galibier and a Teres. It's more than just mass: 75 pounds of aluminum/teflon/lead are not necessarily 2.027x better than 37 pounds of cocobolo/jatoba/lead. Different materials handle resonances differently. In addition, no turntable I've heard of has a motor controller that equals the Teres. Every other controller regulates the speed of the motor. Only the Teres self-regulates the speed of the platter, which is what really matters of course.

Oops, I'm back to the love fest. Oh well!
Thom:
I very much appreciated your post, both in message and in tone. I was not planning to attend the "Rocky Mountain High" but if the comparison seesion to which you refer can be realized, I'm there. It is something I'd PAY to hear!
Doug: Nice to hear someone else point out the critical nature of speed control/stability. Too often overlooked among talk of materials.

As far as PRAT goes, everyone seems to have their own definition. I would think that if anyone is referring to PRAT in the context of a table, they are referring to the table's ability to convey the "PRAT" as exhibited by the musicians in their work (as you mention), and not wishing for same conveyance to be "colored". Then again, I could be wrong. ;-)
Hi,

For me, a humble vinyl guy (I only have the Basis 2000), PRaT would be a Basis 2000 with the RS-A1 arm.

If I still had the 2000 with the stock RB300 arm, then, definitely, there's no PRaT.

I do hope the Rocky Mountain High shoot-out come to fruition. I'll be waiting, with abated breath, the outcome of a Quattro Supreme/Teres 340/Basis Work-of-Art/Clearaudio what-have-you High Noon.

Will it be messy?

Cheers,
George