Teres, Galibier and Redpoint

Hi Dan,

My name is John Pessetto. I meet you at Chris' place during the shootout. I listened to both systems on Saturday and I thought the sound at Thom's place was significantly better. Of course, it is impossible to say how much the tables contributed to the sound at each place.
You thought the direct-drive turntable was hands down the best of all the tables you heard. I don't see how you can make that conclusion. First, I don't understand how you can reasonably say that the direct-drive table was the best table at Chris' place because each setup had a different arm and cartridge. The direct-drive table was using a Schroeder arm and a Universe cartridge, pretty hard to beat. The tape-drive table at Chris' place had a different tonearm and cartridge that was not in the same league as the Schroeder-Universe combination. I know it is alot of work to put the same arm and cartridge on each table. However, I don't see how you can make any meaningful comparisons unless you do. As a result, I don't see how you can say the direct-drive table was better than the tape-drive table at Chris' place, let alone make a reasonable comparison of Thom's table to those at Chris's place. I appreciate the difficulty of making very careful comparisons. I enjoyed your comments until the last paragraph where you state which table is best. I consider both Thom and Chris friends. Both of them are in the business of making turntables. Because they are both in the business, I think these type of comparison can be helpful or harmful to their business. I think it's ok to say which sound you liked best but to say which table was the best under these conditions is just speculation. Thanks for all the work you did and for sharing with us. I know it took a great deal of time and effort to review both systems and share you impressions of what you heard. Thanks

All the Best,

John

Hi John,

I tried to give my "report" based on my impressions after a very long day topped with another 5 hours in the evening. I tried to listen passed both unfamiliar systems (BTW, that was my most extensive session with horns) and just tune into the tables. Really hard to do with a 2 hour break in between unfamiliar systems. I do remember trying to pick out the reported warmth and smoothing of the Teres line and it was apparent on the birch table. The increase in dynamics with the 320 was a bit step up and more to what I rememberd from the Galibier. BTW, I still believe that one day I'll find out that the Galibier definitely has the better resolution.

Perhaps if I had started at Chris's and then gone to Thom's, or if I had gone back and forth a time or two I could have come to a more divining statement between the Galibier and Teres sound. I actually may have subconciously, since I have voted with my checkbook for the Galibier.

We'll have to agree to disagree about my stating my impression of Chris's new DD table. I know Thom encourages every one to go a listen to the Teres line as he believes that it plays to the strength of his tables. So I can't see how you would think it is somehow harmful to give an honest impression. You don't agree with me and that's ok. Would you be willing to state what you thought of the new DD Teres? I'd be willing to listen to what you have to say and wish you had spoken up sooner. I did point out that there was a diference in arms and cartridges, but I do believe there was an unmistakeable difference in tempo that the DD had. I don't think the arm and cartridge alone could make up for a perceived difference in speed. Dynamics, most definitely. But, hey, I've been wrong before. If you have read past that one post you will see that I later also questioned what I had heard. Was the applied torque exagerated, overstated, unrealistic? Maybe. I got the impression Chris is not completely satisfied and will be making more changes and improvements as he sees fit. So, perhaps once he's done we can talk some other poor sucker into listening to both the Stelvio and DD and then sticking his neck out and telling us what he/she honestly thought.

Best,

Dan

Hi Dan,

I'm sorry I didn't reply sooner, I should have. Again, I appreciate the time you took to review the two types of tables . I think I was too harsh with my comments. I didn't pick up on the differences in pace and tempo between the DD and the tape drive but that doesn't mean they weren't there. It sounds like you were careful and gave your honest opinion. You can't ask for more than that. Please accept my apology. All we can do is listen and give our opinions. If I get another chance, I'll take a closer listen.

Sincerely,

John

H John,

I do realize that sometimes what we post and how we post can impact someone's business. When ever I post an opinion on a component I do try to think things through so that I don't post something that would be seen as a condemnation. It is very hard to give an opinion or express an impression on the internet and get the point across. Face to face, or at least phone to phone, will always be the best form of communication. Anyway, what I though you were suggesting I had done was what I try pretty hard to avoid. Thanks for posting back and letting me know that I did not slam either Thom or Chris. Appology accepted, but not really necessary.

I hope you do get a chance to listen again to both tables as I would have loved to stay another day to do just that. I was hoping that someone else who had attended both events that Sat. would offer their opinion. It was tough to come to a solid conclusion with so many variables involved, and I could really use some confirmation or dismissal of what I thought I heard with the Teres DD. Perhaps we'll get a chance to do this again in some fashion at RMAF.

Just for the record, I have had not thought about these tables or their differences since I sent Thom a deposit to buy the Galibier. I am just that comfortable with my decision.

Ah ... the written word ... it can sometimes be our worst enemy. Ask me how I know this ...

It was surely brave of Dan to try to summarize his experiences of his weekend: sleep deprivation, jet air travel, strange systems, etc. As time rolls forward, I'm sure we'll have more folks posting opinions that diverge by 180 degrees from Dan's - or maybe it's 540 degrees ... when one's head starts spinning, it's difficult to count the revolutions. I look at all of this as an expanding pie, and look forward to more comments - irrespective of which manufacturer "wins" - we all win ... including the consumer.

Not to put words in John's mouth, but he had one other major advantage over Dan ... having more than a casual a familiarity with both Chris' and my systems.

This brings up a consideration about auditioning analog in unfamiliar systems. Last week, I had a discussion with someone who asked me if anyone auditioning my gear ever brings a CD or two to play ... to help in triangulating on my system's general characteristics. No one has done this to date, but I will make a point of suggesting that people do so in the future.

We all know that digital front ends can be as variable as any component in the signal chain. Choice of DAC, grounding strategy, distortions in the form of jitter, variations in the analog output stage can all (to name a few) produce an entire range of sonic pallets. Still, there are some constants about digital that can be instructive in terms of auditioning analog, and this point is a wise one to consider.

-----

One thing to come out of this thread is the reinforcement of an alternative distribution model - what David Robinson of Positive Feedback calls "Craft Audio". I prefer the term "Artisan Audio", as the former term connotes basket weaving to me. The concept is valid however, with people like Nick Doshi (who built Doug's preamp) garnering a grass roots following. This model is by no means a new one, but public discussion makes it more "real".

To me, the relevant aspect of this model is not so much that Nick, Chris, or I are more talented than designers working with larger companies. This may or may not be the case. There are two attributes of this small manufacturing model that have the potential to confer unique advantages however: (a) price/performance, and (b) niche appeal.

The first part has to do with the pricing structure - the fact that every dollar spent on product development translates into fewer dollars at the retail level. The second aspect is that smaller manufacturers can follow their own song, knowing that if they are true to themselves, that their referral network will grow, and that like-minded individuals will seek them out (if you build it they will come).

Please don't take this pricing advantage as anything but a theoretical one. We have all seen too many components loaded with expensive, boutique parts that sound like drek. The small-scale designer could easily be tempted to load a preamp up with $10 Vishay resistors, but at the end of the day, he still has to be (a) competent, and (b) know what music sounds like. I have heard all too many fabulous components which were assembled with what are essentially floor sweepings to know that the chef is as important as the ingredients.

There are quite a few products in the traditional distribution network that are both outstanding performers as well as offering great value. Recently I auditioned a single ended amplifier by Quicksilver Audio - an amplifier in its late stage of prototyping which is projected to retail for $2K. If this amplifier gets the respect it deserves, it will cause the manufacturers of quite a few 5 figure amplifiers to sweat.

I've admired the work of Quicksilver since the 1980's, and finally got to meet Mike Sanders after last year's RMAF - with him having moved to the Colorado Front Range (relocating Quicksilver from Reno, NV last year). My earliest impressions of Quicksilver (dating back to the mid 1980's) were of an honest company which produced products that sold for more than a fair price - a company that always emphasized classical design techniques and values - hard-wiring, conservative operating points, reliability, and support. In short, they're my kind of company. What I did not know about Mike until meeting him is that he has really been working to push the sonic envelope as of late.

I use Quicksilver as an example of a company that offers incredible value while following the traditional distribution model because I have had the opportunity to follow the company - first, from an outside perspective, and now getting to know the man behind the product. Two channel audio is being killed by charlatans (you know who you are), and if honest companies like Quicksilver get their due, then two channel will survive and the music lover will benefit. I think it's safe to speak for Chris that we'd both be honored to be thought of in the same category as companies like Quicksilver.

Cheers,
Thom @ Galibier