Hello all,
I've been down for the count with a post-CES flu bug ... one of the down sides of having an incredible number of great people pass through our room at the show.
Someone pointed me to this thread, and I wanted to address a few factual questions for your benefit. For the record, we were co-exhibiting with Aydn - the Artemis Labs guys
(http://www.positive-feedback.com/Issue23/ces06dc3.htm).
1. Separate arm pods (Redpoint):
While Peter and I disagreed on this issue, there is no question in my mind that with a proper, rigid turntable shelf, you can make wonderful sound this way. One thing that bothered me about this architecture involved the possibility of accidentally moving the arm pod and changing your overhang adjustment. Toward this end, one of my last acts as Peter's partner, was to design a repeatable, precise spacing system.
This spacing system works very nicely for the 9" tonearm pods - the ones with the scallops. To my knowledge, no equivalent method has been implemented for the cylindrical pods for 12" tonearms.
Dmailer (in this thread) was the last customer to purchase a Testa Rossa style turntable from me before Peter and I effected the Redpoint/Galibier split. He is very happy with the stability of his separate arm pod ... in conjunction with his Schröder Reference tonearm and ZYX Universe cartridge.
2. Dimensional stability of wood as a turntable material:
I'm in no position to comment on its dimensional stability. Whether or not it is possible to produce a turntable base / platter that will outlive you is of no concern to me.
I prefer to achieve my sonic goals with materials that allow me to sleep well at night.
Chris has likely worked long and hard to ensure the stability of the wood and you get to vote with your hard earned dollars.
The question might arise as to how I can endorse Schröder tonearms. Simply put, Frank sources naturally aged wood - wood that has not been kiln dried, but has rather been sitting and stabilizing for decades.
3. The Redpoint Red turntable:
The Model A is powder coated and not anodized. Peter may have plans for red anodizing in the future. It's best to check with him.
4. Verdier (and mods):
I've ceased to support other products with individual motor pod sales. I have learned from my network of Verdier owning buddies that numerous European users are very happy with the TF Acoustics controller.
In a few months time, I'll be able to comment on the efficacy of this conversion.
5. Dynamics:
I don't consider this to be architecture limited (e.g. suspended vs. non-suspended). My suspended Merrill was very dynamic while sounding tonally natural. Many of the British suspended decks are too bright sounding to my ears - even if they do sound dynamic. Certainly, non-suspended decks like Teres / Redpoint / Galibier have plenty "startle
factor". This is another case of execution vs. architecture choices.
6. Commonality between Redpoint and Galibier:
Over time, I'm certain that Peter's and my personal interpretations will evolve.
One of the first steps in this direction for me is the recent development of the Tunable Platter Interface (TPI) ©. I'm sure that Peter has lots up his sleeve too. To the benefit of the consumer, we're all tortured souls who lose sleep ... dreaming up new ideas.
7. Motor controller architecture.
Peter and I have been using the same controller designed by me in 2001- with minor evolutionary modifications being made since then.
While his and mine have minor ergonomic differences, they are the same simple motor controller.
Teres (along with Progressive Engineering, I believe), use the Manfred Huber designed controller which I lovingly refer to as the "Hubermatic".
I built Bob Benn's (Sound Engineering) very first motor controller (http://www.galibierdesign.com/bob_benn.html) - for his Sound Engineering turntable. At the time, I was unaware that I was "developing" for a competitor. The photo above is of a somewhat crude construction - necessitated by the custom implementation. I could not use my circuit board.
When Peter and I set out to thinking about motor controllers, the idea of supporting Manfred's controller design in a commercial product gave us the creeps. I've always favored the simplest solution possible. What may be good for a DIY-er can become a nightmare to support in a commercial context.
For those of you who don't know, Manfred Huber (a stellar fellow from Munich) donated his controller circuit to the original DIY Teres project and subsequently licensed it to the commercial Teres venture. We declined Manfred's kind offer to license the Hubermatic (as I lovingly call it) for our effort.
Instead, we opted for a simpler approach - an LM317T based (and now, it's more robust, LM338T bigger brother) regulator circuit. Nine parts is all it takes. Less to go wrong, and something that can be fixed in your home town with no re-programming of any chips.
This was more of a philosophical approach to simplicity and reliability than it was to outright performance. We felt that a great performing controller that was down for service is no good for anyone.
The more we experimented with belts and batteries in the early days, the more we realized that our approach had no performance drawbacks. 100% reliable? Of course not. Nothing is, but we sleep better at night knowing that we've done our best to reduce the risk of ownership.
There's no single answer that's correct for everyone, and the push-start feature in the Hubermatic is way cool. For Peter and myself, this comes at too high a price, however. Don't lose sleep over this ... that's the job of the manufacturer.
8. Galibier trade-up policy.
This depends on your starting and end points. Talk to me privately.
9. Anvils, clamps, etc.
The new graphite topped platter (Stelvio - Tunable Platter Interface - TPI ©) seems to prefer no clamp, although this is system dependent to some extent. Dmailer has yet to try this, and one other user still likes his Anvil. It's all about choice, and we're exploring alternatives.
Last year, I had on loan a periphery clamp from Bob Benn (Sound Engineering). This effected a minor improvement over an Anvil, and was not IMHO worth the "heart in throat" cost of risking cantilever damage.
I've "been there, done that" with my Merrill and have no desire to put my customer's expensive cantilever/stylus assemblies at risk. I also like to simplify the act of playing a record.
10. Pulley design:
There's a correct design for every belt profile. We've been upgrading our customers' 'tables at no charge since we came out with the new design last June. The improvement is not subtle. I suggest that Teres owners contact Chris too, because if he's achieved what I have, you will be very happy with the results.
Cheers,
Thom
