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
What do you mean by "official one", George?
Dan_ed

Hi Dan,

Joe's table is home-made, isn't it? I was wondering if it sounds like Chris's.

Regards,
George
Thanks for the clarification, George. I'm curious about this point also since I am in the planning stages of doing my own Teres. (I'm not quite ready to start ordering parts, maybe in October. I need to finish building my stereo rack first.) I do know based on Joe's posts that he is very happy with the results he has gotten.

I see by your system listing that you have a Basis 2000. I have a 2001 and plan on keeping it even after I add a Teres-based turntable to my system. Right now I like the idea of playing with the suspended vs. non-suspended concepts and hearing for myself what the differences are. It would be much harder for me to do this if it weren't for the DIY concept of the Teres.

Here's my .02:
I understand why you are looking for a mag write up or shootout, but I don't think that one would really answer your questions because you would still be relying on someone else's opinions. Reviews might help you narrow the field but I would stop short of using them to argue the validity of any tables' superiority. The only real way is a side-by-side comparison. As we all know you would still probably not get a consensus on which is the better table.
Doug, Joe, Larry, Thanks for the kind words. It's certainly a nicer and more honest ego boost than any review from some mag. Teres Audio is a for profit business, but my primary motivator for running the business is rewarding interactions with customers like you guys.

George, Yes the Quattro takes what came out of the Teres project to another level. But so does the Teres 150, 160,245, 265, 320 and 340. All of these tables are vastly different from the original Teres project incarnation. But it is incorrect to assume that the Supreme and a 340 sound similar or that they would get the same rating. You point out that both are suspensionless and high mass. Of course all turntables that share those characteristics will have some similarities. However, the material differences (hardwood vs. aluminum) have a huge impact on sound. I know what these materials sound like. An aluminum turntable simply will not sound anything like one made from hardwoods.

It interesting to note that in recent comparisons between a Teres 340 and a 320 the contribution of the aluminum rings and feet in the 340 can be heard. As a result we are evaluating a 340 where brass has been substituted for all of the aluminum parts (not to mention a new 60 lb. platter). If all goes well it will be shown at the Rocky Mountain Audio Fest.

BTW: the Quatro Supreme platter weighs 32 pounds. The base is 75 lbs (vs 95 for the 340).

Chris

Guys,

Yes, I made my own. But, I used the Teres design, acrylic platter, bearing, motor & controller, clamp, and battery pack. The main difference between mine and a stock 245 is the plinth. I also built a sub base a la 340, but it is not connected the way the factory one is. It basically serves as a high mass (maybe 30# Brazilian rosewood ((Madura)) shelf for the TT. Oh, I also went to VHS tape, and for some strange reason I like it better than the mylar.

I may be going out on a limb here, but I'm guessing my plinth sounds better than the "standard" one. I have 25 pounds just in lead shot in it & the arm board. There is also a solid piece of Macassar ebony inlaid (structually, and for sonics, not just for cosmetics) in to the top. It is also at least an inch thicker, and wider around the exterior shape of the plinth. Also, the arm board is solid ebony with lead loading. I also have a couple of other armboards in the rotation.

As far as the weight of the two companies' platters go, each is arrived at in a different way. Teres: Wood. Quattro Supreme: Metal & Teflon. Both use lead loading. As we all know, there are different sonic outcomes to each approach.

I guess my personal opinion (yes, my PERSONAL opinion} is that the Supreme is one butt-ugly piece of work. I have not heard one, and it may sound exceptional. But, if I was going to dump six grand on a TT, it would be a Teres. I don't even really like the acrylic plinths compared to the wood Teres, but I still bought 2 of them in a moment of weakeness (I love that sale page)!

Sure it would be nice to have it raved about in Stereophile. But the day I ever let that influence me over the informed opinions I've learned to trust here on the 'gon is the day I buy Bose.

BTW, Larry: Very well stated! I won't miss the next time.

Joe
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