$800 Cartridge Shootout and Upgrade Path

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.