Is the Teres a

I read with interest Art Dudley’s review of the Galibier Quattro Supreme in the October Issue of Stereophile. Once I got past his tedious, Brothers-Karamazov-like saga that began the article, I could tell almost immediately by Art’s tone, and his initial use of a Graham Robin tonearm, that he was not enamored with the Quattro. That’s really too bad.

There are a number of really fine turntables on the market today from Galibier, Teres, Redpoint, Verdier, Pluto, La Luce, Transrotor (their high-end models), and Kuzma Stabi, just to name a few. I would even include the Clearaudio Maximum Solution with the Clearaudio TQ-1 Tonearm among these aesthetically pleasing and sonically talented over-achievers. Are any of these turntables the absolute best when compared to the Rockport Technologies System III Sirius turntable and tonearm, the SME 30 turntable with the SME Series V tonearm, the Basis B turntable, or the Walker Proscenium Gold Signature? Beats me. All of these turntables, including the Quattro, are so far beyond my budget it would be like asking me which exotic sports car is the best in the world by having me read reviews about them. And even if I could take these wonder cars for a test drive, I am in no position to evaluate them properly. So it was with Art Dudley and the Quattro Supreme.

What really is the extent of Art’s knowledge? In his review of the Graham Robin tonearm, he openly admitted to having only three turntables on hand for testing, one of which was the Linn and two of which were clearly budget-oriented components. Although the Linn is an okay table for the money, it has not been a world-beater for quite some time. Furthermore, considering its cost for the fully loaded version, it doesn’t represent a particularly good value anymore. Moreover, I am sure most of you have noticed a bias in Art’s writing, which favors British-made audio components, much the same way Harry Pearson loves to ramble on favorably about VPI turntables, as was the case in the latest TAS issue.

“Forget about "correct" PRaT…PRaT is what makes you want to dance, or nod your head, or tap your feet, or wave your arms: it is biological…Only a truly awful musical ensemble…will fail to get the rhythm, and the equipment which fails to retrieve it from a recording is, quite simply, a failure.” -- Johnnantais

Far too much is made of pace, rhythm, and timing; I see this often in product reviews. PRaT, while important, is not the only factor to consider in a turntable. Speed consistency, wow and flutter, rumble, freedom from sonic feedback, reliability, stability, sonic balance and neutrality, musicality, system synergy, ease of use, size, cost, and aesthetics – these are only some of the parameters that need to be considered carefully when one purchases a new table. To use PRaT as the deciding factor as to whether a component is a Class A contender or only an also ran is a gross oversimplification. But apparently that is what Art did. His article showed us his overall lack of experience with turntables of exotic design; it showed us his lack of understanding of the Quattro Supreme in particular; it showed his unwillingness to take the time to give the Quattro a thorough test with a good tonearm, like the Schroder, which did occur after one was provided for an audition that was far too short; it showed his sophist tendencies, his interest in being an iconoclast, his preference for turning a cute or interesting phrase at the expense of a fair and balanced review. Such a review, while useful for prospective customers, is rather pedantic for those who thirst for literary flare.

As for a shootout, I am not in favor of one. It would not give each turntable manufacturer the best opportunity to show off his or her product in a favorable light. What might be more useful would be to create a situation in which manufacturers could come to demonstrate their latest inventions using an audio system of their choosing in an atmosphere that encouraged cooperation, discovery, inquiry, and non-competitiveness. It would be an art/music fair of sorts, not a sporting event in which the crowd lusts for a winner while the loser is thrown to the lions. In my opinion, there would be no losers at such a show, just a collection of turntables offering different sonic and aesthetic values and attributes to meet the needs of a very diverse analog-loving public.

Artar1,
Setting aside the comments on Art Dudley's review and approach to reviewing about which I am in no position to comment, I found your general remarks about TT reviewing, your reluctance to endorse shoot outs as well as inappropriate reliance on PrAT and any particular attribute of analog playback quite insightful. And your taste in high end tables is pretty good too.

.
Atar,
.
Nicely said....
.

Well gee, at least I notice that some are paying attention! I would point out that nowhere have I ever written that PRaT is the ONLY factor to consider in reviewing or evaluating a turntable, but it IS the Prime one. I also write often about detail, dynamics, tonal accuracy and imaging. Extrapoplating I would assume that Art Diudley has never done so either. PRaT is the MOST important factor, since the sense of musicality arises from PRaT, or timing or whichever facet of correct speed you want to talk about. By this I mean, if one has to accept less than perfection and sacrifices must be made, where does one make the sacrifices? I submit that musicality (PRaT) is the one thing that must NEVER be sacrificed. I would also point out that correct timing (PRaT), IS "speed stability, wow and flutter" and the more stable the speed the better the PRaT will be. This is my whole point in my Lenco Experiment, and yes, the Lencos are far superior to the Linns even in my beloved PRaT, though if I didn't have a Lenco which in addition to PRaT also produces world-class detail, dynamics and all the other audiophile paraphernalia which is wrongly placed ahead of PRaT, I would live with a Linn, Roksan or other 'table which places musicality (not simple "smoothness" and information) and thus timing at the top of the heap. The better the speed stability, in addition, the better the information-retrieval, imaging, cartridge tracking (and thus improved sonic performance), "gestalt (musical piece being presented as a piece/whole and not a collection of disparate parts).

Atar1 also assures us that since he cannot afford the top-of-the-line pieces he is in no position to judge - "All of these turntables, including the Quattro, are so far beyond my budget it would be like asking me which exotic sports car is the best in the world by having me read reviews about them" - but then goes on to sing their praises. Based on what, their enormous price tags? Let us bow before these Mighty Creations as they have ludicrous price tags far beyond our reach. These 'tables have all been criticized in various ways, many of them for lack of musical involvement - the SME 30 for one - and whatever strengths they might have, it means nothing if they don't draw you into the musical magic (and not simple HiFi special effects). The reason the Linn still has such a strong following after all these years, even at its inflated price tag when fully tricked-out, is because it is first and foremost a musical turntable, as all turntables should be (but sadly aren't).

I believe that many want to ignore or wish away the issue of musicality, since it can't be designed-for except by the sort of talent we cannot understand or explain (and often by simple accident, or "discovery" which, however, should be recognized and imitated), and which must be recognized. It is far more difficult to trust our instincts and senses and biological and emotional responses (which is what music is all about), than to sit in front of speakers with a check-list: "trumpet clearly audible in left-hand corner, check; echo audible around viola, check; harpsichord audible in right-hand corner, check..." I've said it before and I'll say it again: musicality is not an entirely subjective experience, much as the pundits would have us believe this (so they can sell their over-priced a-musical monstrosities), accurate speed (and by this I mean truly accurate speed, in practice and playing a real LP) being seminal in this regard. If these Big Heavyweight turntables fail to recover PRaT (as any do, I had the Maplenoll Ariadne with 40-pound platter which was less musical than the Athena with the lighter 15-pound platter it replaced), it is because their speed stability is in fact not stable. The heavier platters simply reduce the belt-reaction time (caused by stylus drag which is VERY audible) due to increased inertia, lowering it into the lower frequencies where the timing - or PRaT - resides. The lighter turntables move the speed instabilities up into the higher frequencies, and so lose detail relative to the big turntables, which is why so many audiophiles, trained by the largely detail-oriented audiophile press (easy to describe and look like experts), assume they are superior in every way. The culprit in all these speed instabilities is the belt, being rubber stretches and contracts at frequencies as already described, which is audible. This is why thread drives sound better than rubber-belt drives. But better than these weak little cogging motors and threads aided by expensive band-aid electronics is a well-designed idler-wheel drive with a monstrous but designed exactly and precisely and solely for turntables. Try the experiment to verify my assertions, I've thrown this particular gauntlet down several times over the last year with a 100% success rate so far (even my enemies admitted the Lenco's great sonic prowess and musical power), all are welcome to join and report on the results. Based on my own experience of heavy/massy belt-drives vs lighter belt-drives, I'd hazard a guess that Art Dudley was right in his review, but he committed two crimes: he spoke of musicality as if it were important, and he placed a cheaper product ahead of a more expensive one on musical grounds. I would describe him as a man of courage and integrity, it just happens that only the English still produce classic 3-point suspension turntables which major in PRaT, the 3-point suspension tunrtable being an invention of the American company Acoustic Research. Ironic, eh?

Whether some folks would admit it or not, or whether they'd actually try to disprove it or not, there is a great deal of merit in what Jean has to say. I will not attempt to compare the object of his challenge to any super high-end tables (e.g. a Walker or the like) because I have not done such a comparison myself. But, hey, Albert has a mighty fine Walker and he took the challenge, with a pretty damn favorable overall report, I might add (but not in direct comparison to the Walker, though). I have personally compared a couple of my own creations to a number of what are considered here to be mid-priced tables. Yes, I recognize that PRICE is not an absolute indicator of quality (as I have sadly found out on more than one occasion). However, anyone who has, say, a $2000-$5000 table and is still searching for the MUSIC, you would be well served to give his challenge, well, a challenge before spending another grand on that utopian cartridge or arm. Might not beat EVERY table in this class, but it won't cost you much to find out and I'm wagering you will at least get close, if you let your EARS do the deciding. Of course, it does take a modicum of skills to accomplish and, lacking that, maybe find someone to help. Else, feel free to over spend in comparison to several otherwise well regarded tables! :-)

I will agree that there are a variety of factors that combine to make a turntable PLEASING. I also do not particularly like the term PRAT, because it means different things to different people. It is kinda like some art. You know the old sating - I don't know what it is, but I know what I like. I also know that MUSIC is about MUSICALITY, and I know it when I hear it. Search for it, find it, and enjoy it, regardless of the package! :-)

Of course, this has nothing really to do with a Teres (a fine table) and the subject of the thread, or Art Dudley, a sidetrack in this thread, other than I think his focus on musicality is a good thing (while not agreeing wholly on his reviewing methods).