AudioCircle
Audio/Video Gear and Systems => The Vinyl Circle => Topic started by: Wayne1 on 21 Apr 2007, 02:27 am
-
Chris Brady is hosting the Colorado Audio Society this weekend.
He is introducing the production version of his DD turntable: The CERTUS
(http://teresaudio.com/certus/certus_460.jpg)
I heard the prototype version and it is quite unique.
Here is a link to more information:
http://teresaudio.com/certus/ (http://teresaudio.com/certus/)
-
Its cool that he is pushing the envelope, but I have to say that my personal opinion is that he forgot his [first] customers when it was convenient to do so. There is no longer any reasonably priced kits/parts. A $17K table is for the rich and takes much of the fun out of it, since anyone can design a good performer for that amount of money.
Sorry, just MHO.
-
Wow!!! $17K for a turntable??? :scratch:
I can buy a bunch of excellent gears for that price. :)
-
Yep, direct drive is a step in the right direction...but idler wheel is where its at:
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=9886)
Buy a Lenco for cheap and DIY a massive plinth (or have someone DIY it for you in my case).
-Jim
-
I wish him luck...but I can't help but think he lost touch with his original supporters.
-
It sure looks impressive. Kudos on the design. :thumb: I have no problem with Teres going upmarket, though I can see Josh's point.
-
That is boat load of $$$. It faces major competition from many upscale established brands...There are more beautiful and competent tables that can be had for lesser dough.... I would take an used VPI with some great arm for a WHOLE less buckets of money...
(http://gon5.audiogon.com/i/c/f/1170682953.jpg)
PS: I would include some sort of controller for something like the above, like the SDS.
:thumb: :thumb:
-
A lot of those crazy high end turntables seem to be exercises in aesthetic overindulgence. You've got stuff like ClearAudio, Vyger, Transrotor and such who slake one's lust for machined METAL and acrylic. More glorious slabs of metal! More icy blocks of crystal clear acrylic! More! More! Yeeeesss!!! And with Teres you can totally get your silky smooth cocobolo and satin finish aluminum fix on. Arrggh! Thicker cocobolo! MORE! Look at that grain! yeeessss!!! Don't get me wrong, I love this stuff, but man sometimes it's so over the top. It's amazing how much STUFF folks have managed to glom onto such a simple geometric concept. I'd snap one up if I had the money, but I don't think I'd be terribly surprised if it sounded as good as what I have. It would still be a centerpiece for worshipping the gods of aesthetics, though that's for sure. Probably get little miniature spot lights to shine on it and such. Or maybe candles. A turntable like that is really a shrine or an altar, not just a gadget for playing a crappy, outdated music format! :wink:
-
"Both the absolute speed and speed constancy are tightly controlled. The speed at 33-1/3 RPM is established at -0.011% +- 0.003% and 0.006% +-0.003% at 45 RPM."
I don't think the two tables you mentioned are getting anywhere near these numbers.
Haven't you heard of Psychicanimal's Creature on Steroids? :weights: Marbles, you can't get more accurate than that!
-
Chris Brady is hosting the Colorado Audio Society this weekend.
Any specifics on the meet, Wayne? I confess that I'm not naturally inclined toward vinyl, but Chris' work is absolutely beautiful, and I'm suffering from audio withdrawal these days! :)
-
Haven't you heard of Psychicanimal's Creature on Steroids? :weights: Marbles, you can't get more accurate than that!
Not for the money...and then a few thousands more. :nono:
For years I've been posting Teres decks were direct drive in drag.
-
Colorado Audio Society meeting at Chris's house tonight at 6:30. A quiet listening session begins at 5:00.
Chris sent out invitations but is always very welcoming. Call 303-466-3614 for directions to his house.
I think upmarket is the place to go. Audiophiles are dyind off and drying up. The wealthy purchase ostentatious products without much concern for value and the up and coming audio prospect has bigger fish to fry such as buying a house and starting a family.
I don't mean to imply that Teres is not good value, but as many of you have pointed out, the savvy audiophile can access very similar performance for a fraction of the cost.
By the way, Chris took belt drive as far as he could before developing a direct drive system which surpasses it. VPI has no place in this discussion.
-
Help me please, my math is not that good. How many Big Macs with fries can one get for 17k (give or take)?
-
I think it's over the top ugly, but I'm not the customer he's targeting...
My sentiments are similar, but to each their own. How many rosewood trees had to die to make this table?
Anyway, I am not really against going up market. It makes sense from a business prospective. I just think he slowly abandoned his initial base. All of his products go more and more expensive as time marched on and now all the new offerings are uber ultra-fi, at least in price tage.
-
As a business person, you go where the money is. A friend of mine sells ultra high dollar audio and he says you work just as hard to make a two thousand dollar sale as you do to make a forty thousand dollar sale. It's easy to figure which approach is more efficient.
-
I just got back from the get together at Chris Brady's. BRJ came with me. This was his first taste of high end vinyl :wink:
Chris has come up with off shoot of his direct drive TT project.
He realized that the market for $50,000.00 (Certus 460 with stand and 2) Schroeder Reference arms and 2) ZYX Reference cartridges) was very limited. He has come up with a prototype RIM DRIVE system using the same technology for the motor and controller that he used to build the Certus.
He did a direct A/B using a Teres 255 with modded Rega 250 and a $900.00 ZYX cartridge. He first played a track with the belt drive, then switched to rim drive on the same TT. He then moved the album over to the Certus.
There were a lot of folks there who preferred the sound of the rim drive TT over the Certus.
I thought the Certus sounded "better" but to me, it was not over $40,000.00 better.
The rim drive system is going to sell for somewhere between $1400.00 and $1800.00.
Production versions should be available in about 8 weeks.
I took some photos that I will try to post later.
-
Well I reserve the right to change my mind if he serves up some trickle down technology to the 'people'.
-
Here is a photo of the Teres 255 with the prototype Rim drive motor.
At the very bottom of the photo is the prototype controller.
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=9888)
Here is a shot of the system we were listening to.
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=9887)
Field coil horns. 108 db 1W/1M. Amps are DIY SET 3.5 watt mono blocks. Mercury vapor rectifiers :D
-
Wayne,
Many thanks for the Teres report.
I've got a Teres 255 and it looks like that could be a good upgrade for me.
I've been thinking lately too that the belt drive system is holding the rest of my 'table back a bit. Actually, it has been more than thinking, it has been hearing.
Question for ya: how would you compare the 255 with belt drive vs. the 255 with rim drive?
-
capo,
I own a 255 as well.
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=1846)
It was most interesting listening to the differences.
In comparison to the Rim drive system, the belt drive was looser in the low end and had a pronounced resonance in the mids. The demo track was Linda Ronstadt with the Nelson Riddle Orchestra. Her voice was very "shouty" with the belt. Imagine your voice with your hands cupped in front of your mouth. It was that sort of sound.
The rim drive had more body and was "tighter". All in all in was a noticeable and a worthwhile improvement.
The direct drive was quite a bit "cleaner" sounding. Maybe a bit too much for my tastes. I do like vinyl to have some "flavoring"
-
Wayne,
Well, that is very cool news.
Also, I didn't know you had a Teres.
By the way, I changed belts from the regular mylar to the slighly thicker McCormick's holographic mylar belt recently. I found that a nice improvement.
That is the thing about the belt. The sound is just so sensitive to any changes made to the belt material, tension, what the drive motor is sitting on, you name it...
Still, my Teres is a great musical tool!
Bill
-
Very cool Wayne & Chris.
I've got a 255, but I changed the platter to an "extra" plywood platter that Chris had lying about. I painted the plywood black since it was the best match to my Bloodwood 255.
I really look forward to early reports on this rim drive update.
-
Her voice was very "shouty" with the belt. Imagine your voice with your hands cupped in front of your mouth. It was that sort of sound.
So we are talking about turntables worth several grand and you have to imagine a sound with cupped hand ... :icon_twisted:
-
did both TT's have the same tonearm and cart for the comparison?
-
In Wayne's picture, I see the belt drive unit and rim drive unit both on the same wooden slab.
So most likely the belt was just taken off and the rim drive pushed up against the platter to do the comparison. Easy.
In that case everything else would remain the same, including tonearm and cart.
Wayne, correct me if I am wrong!
-
capo,
You are correct about the belt vs rim drive comparison.
Same table, arm and cartridge. Different drive mechanism.
The DD was completely different arm, cartridge, and everything else. The step up transformers and phono stage were the same.
-
capo,
You are correct about the belt vs rim drive comparison.
Same table, arm and cartridge. Different drive mechanism.
The DD was completely different arm, cartridge, and everything else. The step up transformers and phono stage were the same.
Now this is interesting...looks like the rim drive system may be adaptable to other turntables?
-Jim
-
The Technics SL1210 has a wow and flutter measurement of .01% (click on "technical specifications") (http://www.panasonic-europe.com/technics/products/product_detail.asp?range=turntable&prodid=SL-1210MK5) compared with the Teres measurement of .011%. That makes the Technics .001% better...
...for $16,500 less!
Boo-ya!
no, that's not exactly true - the use of the most significant digit means that the technics wow/flutter may actually measure at 0.014%, & it would meet its spec. but, it's still nothing to sneeze at... :wink:
doug s.
-
The Technics SL1210 has a wow and flutter measurement of .01% (click on "technical specifications") (http://www.panasonic-europe.com/technics/products/product_detail.asp?range=turntable&prodid=SL-1210MK5) compared with the Teres measurement of .011%. That makes the Technics .001% better...
...for $16,500 less!
Boo-ya!
no, that's not exactly true - the use of the most significant digit means that the technics wow/flutter may actually measure at 0.014%, & it would meet its spec. but, it's still nothing to sneeze at... :wink:
doug s.
It may measure .014%, or it may measure .010%, .011%, .012%, or .013%. All for $16,500 less than the Teres. Do you believe it's possible for anyone to discern the difference between .014% and .011% wow and flutter in a blind listening test?
i agree w/your measurement analysis. re: your question - nope, i don't think anyone could discern the difference between 0.011% & 0.014% w/f. just clarifying a point about use of significant digits in measurements. :green:
doug s.
-
What kind of torque does that motor have in comparison to the old idlers?
-
The 0.011% specification for the Teres direct drive refers to speed accuracy which is completely different than wow and flutter. Think of speed accuracy as the average speed and wow & flutter as how much the speed deviates from the average. I have no idea what the wow & flutter spec is for the Teres Certus is but it would certainly be substantially less than 0.01%. More important is the point that has already been made that the difference between 0.011% and 0.014% probably would not be audible. That is not to say that two turntables that have the same spec would sound the same. But it's generally accepted that wow & flutter specs have poor correlation with good sound.
The new rim drive motor will be quite easy to adapt to other turntables. The height just needs to be adjusted so that the wheel lines up with the platter the motor simply leans against the platter with gravity providing the proper pressure. The controller has dip switches that make it simple to precisely dial in the correct speed.
The torque for the rim drive motor can also be adjusted via dip switches in the controller. The sound difference from changing the torque is quite interesting with lower settings being smoother and higher settings better controlled and articulate. The motor is capable of delivering considerable torque but what sounds best is probably similar to the vintage idlers.
Chris
-
First, I wish I could have been there, to see these fancy turntables, and hear those horn speakers ( never did like Horn Speakers, oh well. ) but I gather it was about 3,000 miles too far for me to walk :green:
Certainly the show-off turntables are marvels to be admired, the $50,000 Teres, the $90,000. one, and the $330,000. one a friend called me up recently to rant about that someone had announced... Like the pricey Ongaku Amp, there's four products I'll never buy.
What silly people don't get is the LP's themselves were not made to such precision, as seen in these 300 LB. Platters and Turntables, movable only by forklift and costing as much as half-a-dozen Lexis Luxury cars, and all that. And yet there is talk, talk, talk about Wow and Flutter - mostly its gonna come from the record, not the platter, the belt, or the turntable. Ever seen a really non-concentric pressing ? Well 99% of LP's aren't that bad as to be visually non-concentric, but does make one bit of difference if the center shaft is accurate to 0.00001 mm or 0.1 mm, when your record is on drugs ?
And now, for all your high-fallootin, showoff mentalities, lets talk Wow and Flutter numbers. When I measure Reel to Reel tape decks using an MRL Standardized Test Tape, there is a choice or two... You can measure: Wow and Flutter Unweighted; Wow and Flutter Unweighted % peak, or Wow and Flutter RMS Unweighted % DIN Spec, or Wow and Flutter RMS % Weighted, Wow and Flutter RMS % Peak, or Wow and Flutter RMS % DIN 3.15k; or Wow only % weighted, or % Peak, or DIN; or Flutter between 6 and 50 Hz. % Weighted, or Peak, or DIN; or 6 Hz. Flutter % Weighted, or % Peak, or % DIN, or 50Hz. % Weighted, or % Peak, or % DIN.
Each one of those different Wow and Flutter specs will get you a different number. I'm quite sure it is the same with Wow and Flutter in Turntables. And each different Wow and Flutter Test Record will have a different residual Wow and residual Flutter, and will give a different set of numbers. Just as the several hundred dollar Wow and Flutter Test tapes from TDK, AMPEX, and MRL give very different sets of numbers - all other things being equal.
So just throwing out .010%, .011%, .012%, .013%. or .014% Wow and Flutter numbers is really talking out of both sides of your mouth, since you haven't actually specified anything, or defined those numbers within a defined type of Wow and Flutter Spec... % Weighted, RMS, Peak, DIN Spec, octave centered on 6 Hz., octave centered on 50 Hz., or the whole band from 6 Hz. to 50 Hz. etc. Given that there is no one Wow and Flutter standard, you have to talk about one number and all of its precise and relevant definitions, and compare it to exactly the same type of number taken under the same set of conditions and definitions.
Dealing with audio people, is very much like dealing with Hookers. They give you a number, but then it changes from one minute to the next, until you start to define what you are talking about. aa All the non-relevant numbers you have been throwing around here, well they are all MEANINGLESS !!!.
In all probability a $100. Thorens Turntable from 35 years ago, can come quite close to matching these mega-buck wonder turntables. But you don't often see or hear a 35 year old, $100. Thorens with standard factory arm, and a 35 year old cartridge hooked up to mega-buck Preamps, SET Amps, and Horn Speakers that one could not too comfortably, but possibly live in... guess it messes up the feng shui.
Steven L.. Bender, Designer of Vintage Audio equipment
The Technics SL1210 has a wow and flutter measurement of .01% (click on "technical specifications") (http://www.panasonic-europe.com/technics/products/product_detail.asp?range=turntable&prodid=SL-1210MK5) compared with the Teres measurement of .011%. That makes the Technics .001% better...
...for $16,500 less!
Boo-ya!
no, that's not exactly true - the use of the most significant digit means that the technics wow/flutter may actually measure at 0.014%, & it would meet its spec. but, it's still nothing to sneeze at... :wink:
doug s.
It may measure .014%, or it may measure .010%, .011%, .012%, or .013%. All for $16,500 less than the Teres. Do you believe it's possible for anyone to discern the difference between .014% and .011% wow and flutter in a blind listening test?
-
Steven, While I totally agree that this kind of money is utterly foolish to throw at a TT, I do think you are being a bit harsh with the ridicule. Some people just want a designer statement, others genuinely think they get better sound for more money. That's their right no? Figures have been strewn around for years, be it analogue or digital. They gotta say something! can't just say "better" or "best"...I seriously doubt that a 30 year old Thorens sounds as good or better than this deck. Give the guy a break!
-
I don't know nor care anything about measurements. I am aware that somebody has to care in order for me to be able to buy audio products. I notice that a lot of bluster and bravado emerges every time measurements are mentioned in these circles.
A year ago I responded to an invitation to visit Chris Brady at Teres International Headquarters (his basement) and hear the new prototype direct drive he had been working on. Chris demonstrated his best belt drive model against it and there was a very obvious difference favoring the DD. I was impressed because I was aware that the BD that he was comparing is generally considered to be one of a handful of premiere turntables.
To me, how they measure doesn't matter on two counts. Firstly, I choose what I like with no regard for manufacturer claims, and secondly, I choose equipment that I have enough money to buy without a second mortgage. Nonetheless, it was clear that the two tables sounded quite different and it was clear that they both sounded better than mine.
Vintage equipment can surprise me sometimes insofar as it performs better in relation to the current stuff than I would expect. 30 years worth of monthly quantum leaps should have created a larger gap.. There are two flaws that make that deception work. One is the low expectations we have for the vintage gear and the other is the assumption that everything new is better.
However, let's also keep in mind that new technologies do emerge from time to time that change the scope of availibility. The Teres rim drive option may prove to be a case of resurrecting a good idea and making it better with modern tools and technology. I think Mr. Bender is both hasty and harsh to be so dismissive.
I know for certain that the Teres tables are not merely gold-plated turds for rich peoples' mantelpieces as Bender implies. They work well and the wood has a utilitarian purpose aside from its eye-catching cosmetics.
Ferrari could certainly provide the performance it does without going to such extremes of coachwork but much of what Ferrari provides in the way of eye candy, also is incorporated in its aerodynamics and crashworthiness.
So it is with Teres -- the aesthetics follow the demonstrable design superiority.
And, by the way, I was surprised to learn that Chris Brady works a full time job well away from audio and does all his Teres work on the side in his spare? time. I find it amazing that a product so refined and polished comes from a hobbyist rather than a dedicated factory design team.
I second the above comment - GIVE THE GUY A BREAK.
-
Speed accuracy on a '1200 is .005% (stock), if anyone is curious.
And I agree...give Teres a break. Not my cup o' tea either but I admire the workmanship.
-
The Teres business model is obviously a very sucessful one. To suggest that there is something wrong with the ability to market expensive goods is somehow anti-capitalism and anti-business. Nobody is holding a gun to anyone's head and forcing them to spend too much. Such a model does a number of positve things, not the least of which is that it encourages a re-examination of the standards of value.
There was and still is to a large extent, a bias against direct drive turntables in favor of belt drive. It would seem that there are measurables that would tend to favor direct drive and idler drive over belt drive. Those who attended the demo, at least those posting to this board, also heard a difference in the quality of the sound, favoring the non-belt drive units. This tends to break down the accepted audiophile standards in turntables.
-
Well,
I want to try the RIM Drive (the trickled down one). aa I see it as a sign from above for me to try. :lol: :lol: I am looking forward to the announcement.
-
Woodsyi, go get a old Goldring/Lenco RIM drive and save yourself a couple grand :wink:: http://www.lencoheaven.com/
The belt vs. direct drive argument is perplexing...personally, my money is on the $$$ millions spent by the major Japanese electronic manufacturers in the heyday of turntable manufacturing...the late 70's and early 80's. All of the top models were direct drivers...and only their lowest end offerings were belt drivers.
More money, and engineering time was tossed at the development of direct drive at just Technics/Panasonic/Matsushita (not to mention, JVC, Denon, Hitachi, Mitsubishi, Sanyo/Fisher, Sony, Pioneer, etc.) back in that time frame than will likely be cumulatively spent by all the TT makers of today. The market is now too small to devote $$$ millions to the development. Fortunately, a quality and better successor to belt drive was found - direct drive.
The small makers of today don't have the resources to develop a direct drive model for sane dollars. The cost of development can't be overcome by the small numbers of units to be likely sold. So, they must sell for a lot of money for these small makers to recoup their development costs. ( I intend no offense to Chris Brady of Teres with this statement, it's simply inherently true in light of the turntable market today)
As a mechanical device, it has it's vices and demons, of course. But, it has less vices than belt drive when properly sorted.
Anyhow, this is merely my opinion..not shared by all, of course. :peek:
-
I would like to comment on the Teres product direction since some here have expressed concern about it. You guys are correct that we have largely abandoned the lower end of the market. But the reasons why may not be clear. To the point, the main reason why there are no Teres products for less than $3000 is that not enough people were buying them. People often asked me what product in our line-up gave the best bang for the buck. The answer was easy, the model 160. It was a killer table that probably outperformed anything near it's price point... but we reluctantly discontinued it due to poor sales. I don't mean to complain and I think that there are a number of valid reasons that the product didn't work. The $1000 - $3000 market place is very competitive with a number of well established companies with good products and good marketing strategies and frankly we just didn't do a good enough job to compete.
Chris
-
I would like to comment on the Teres product direction since some here have expressed concern about it. You guys are correct that we have largely abandoned the lower end of the market. But the reasons why may not be clear. To the point, the main reason why there are no Teres products for less than $3000 is that not enough people were buying them. People often asked me what product in our line-up gave the best bang for the buck. The answer was easy, the model 160. It was a killer table that probably outperformed anything near it's price point... but we reluctantly discontinued it due to poor sales. I don't mean to complain and I think that there are a number of valid reasons that the product didn't work. The $1000 - $3000 market place is very competitive with a number of well established companies with good products and good marketing strategies and frankly we just didn't do a good enough job to compete.
Chris
cool, & understandable. now, when are you going to do a good enough job? :green:
doug s.
-
In the era of Japanese statement turntables, there was no competing technology (yeah, I know, you think there still isn't) and millions of low end models were sold which subsidized the R&D on the top units.
Chair Guy is incorrect about the Japanese making only low end belt drive. Yamaha, Luxman and Micro Seiki are three companies I know of that continued to offer a high end belt drive option.
Also, I think that analog is largely purchased by old timers who have long since passed the entry level. Add to that the dominance of Rega in both price point and prevalence, and you have too steep a hill for a part time start up to climb successfully.
In his efforts to be gracious and self-effacing, Chris Brady is being too hard on Chris Brady. Why does everybody want to kick this guy? I like him.
-
The small makers of today don't have the resources to develop a direct drive model for sane dollars. The cost of development can't be overcome by the small numbers of units to be likely sold. So, they must sell for a lot of money for these small makers to recoup their development costs. ( I intend no offense to Chris Brady of Teres with this statement, it's simply inherently true in light of the turntable market today)
It does take a substantial investment to develop a direct drive motor. But it is not as big of an investment as some may think. Of course I have to recoup some of the development costs and that is added into the price of a Certus Turntable. But the development costs really are a small portion of the overall costs.
A lot of direct drive tables were developed in the 70's and 80s but most of them were not that good. Listening to them showed that the topology was promising but the overall result was just so-so. I think that the problem was the inexpensive implementation and not the topology. My experience leads me to believe that it's both difficult and expensive to get direct drive right. Since there is zero motor to platter isolation even minute flaws can present major sonic problems. I know because I ran into a bunch of them. Because of the unforgiving nature of direct drive I don't anticipate that anyone will be able to produce a true high end direct drive motor that is also low cost. Even though I am a major fan of direct drive I still think that if the budget for the motor is less that say $500 belt drive will deliver superior results.
After we wrapped up the Certus design the next project was to figure out how to bring the price down to a more affordable level. I spent months looking over the design trying to figure out where to cut costs without sacrificing too much quality. In the end I decided that it was a no-go. In order to cut costs sufficiently it looked like the performance would be compromised to the point where it would fall behind our best belt drive motor.
Thats where rim drive came in. Having given up on a low cost direct drive I started looking more seriously at rim drive. I see rim drive as being in between belt and direct drive. It's more forgiving because there is at least some motor isolation but far less than with belt drive. The cost to implement a good rim drive setup ended up being significantly less than our direct drive. Not as good overall but it looks to be a high value proposition.
Chris
-
Even though I was a critic, I appreciate your no bs reply. :thumb: By the way, what made you quit selling components individually? Do you allow previous customers to still upgrade? Like say a previous owner wants a newer platter?
-
Chris, thanks for your forthrightness on all of this :thumb: It's really great.
I've long wondered why the Japanese makers of the direct drive tables ladled their units with small, too light and ring-prone platters :roll: The platter weight, damping abilities and platter mat may well be as, or more, important than those on belt drivers. For belt drivers, as they are better isolated by nature - you use massive/dead platters for rotational inertia (so you minimize stylus drag and the like).
Perhaps their price points were dictated largely by the 'market'....that something more substantial back then couldn't be sold.
For Direct Drives, as the platter (and mat) functions as the only buffer from motor noise and vibration...it's equally important. Yet, the vast majority of direct drives from that era had platters weighing well under 5 lbs...and all that I know of where steel or aluminum with only a rubber mat offered as additional buffer. The better rim drives from an earlier era, had more substantial platters to help guard against this.
The Technics SP-10 Mk. III (not Mk. II or oroginal) had a relatively massive platter...the rest of the Technics line made do with 4 lb ring-prone, platters that were not even oversized (direct drivers still benefit a bit from additional inertia applied to the outside platter upon rotation). The 17oz Technics Supermat helps damp it, but not near as much damping is used as it should be.
If you, or anyone, has a direct drive there you can use as a donor.....go get some 'damping compound'...the type of spray they typically use in autosound applications on the ring-prone metal surfaces to make the car quieter. A can of Dupli-Color UC103 (fast drying formula) cost about $8 in auto parts stores. Spray liberally on the underside of your direct drive platter...the sonic results will be quite pleasing :) Pair it with a good dead mat to further damp the platter...but one in which doesn't overdamp the record of life (I use an old Audioquest mat with some Herbie's damping dots as record interface).
The effect of the damping spray ( you can also or alternatively use Plast-i-Clay on the underside of you have clearance...and, unlike belt drives, you don't have to worry about platter wobble if it's not 100% distributed equally/perfectly on the underside).
These are inexpensive upgrades to address direct drive's major failings (in mass produced units)....damping as much motor vibration before it reaches your cartridge body :wink:
-
Chris,
In an idealized world of perfect implementation, would a TT with 3 independent motor/belt system perform better than one with a single motor/belt? If so, how would it compare to Certus or Rim Drive you are developing?
-
By the way, what made you quit selling components individually? Do you allow previous customers to still upgrade? Like say a previous owner wants a newer platter?
We still sell individual components, always have. Just follow the components link on our webpage. We have motors, bearings, clamps and VTA adapters available. What has changed is that we currently do not have any platters that are for sale separately. The reason is simply that they are in short supply and we want to make sure that we have platters to sell with our turntables. We have always offered customers an upgrade path.
From a business perspective selling parts has not worked out very well. It takes a lot of time and the return is less than with complete turntables. It also makes inventory management a lot harder. The third problem has to do with company image. You can't be a kit/parts company and not have it dilute the brand value for $17,000 turntables.
But I am still a DIY'er at heart and at least for now want to stay in the parts business in spite of the business challenges.
Chris
-
Chris,
These were some of the most enlightening and forthright responses I have seen from a manufacturer. Thanks for being so level headed while some were taking shots at you. Kudos to you! :thumb:
Michael
-
In an idealized world of perfect implementation, would a TT with 3 independent motor/belt system perform better than one with a single motor/belt? If so, how would it compare to Certus or Rim Drive you are developing?
Some time ago I tried using dual motors and the results were poor. Definitely not as good as a single motor. From a theoretical perspective I can't see any advantage to using multiple motors. There seems to be at least some consensus that tables that have options for multiple motors will generally sound best with a single motor. Not a path that I would recommend.
Chris
-
The new rim drive motor will be quite easy to adapt to other turntables. The height just needs to be adjusted so that the wheel lines up with the platter the motor simply leans against the platter with gravity providing the proper pressure. The controller has dip switches that make it simple to precisely dial in the correct speed.
Very cool stuff, thanks Chris! I know its partially bearing dependent, but will it be capable of spinning really heavy platters (i.e., 100+ pounds)?
-Jim
-
Chris, thanks for your forthrightness on all of this :thumb: It's really great.
I've long wondered why the Japanese makers of the direct drive tables ladled their units with small, too light and ring-prone platters :roll: The platter weight, damping abilities and platter mat may well be as, or more, important than those on belt drivers. For belt drivers, as they are better isolated by nature - you use massive/dead platters for rotational inertia (so you minimize stylus drag and the like).
Perhaps their price points were dictated largely by the 'market'....that something more substantial back then couldn't be sold.
BINGO!!! Give the man a Ceegar!
Why cheap platters? Because then the motors could be cheaper and the whole package sold for less. If you want to saturate the market (the Japanese market philosophy at the time), you don't do it with expensive goods, you do it with pieces that everyman could afford. Think about it, there really weren't Technics or Pioneer (or Kenwood, Sansui, or JVC) franchises per se back then (nor today for that matter.) If you wanted to sell these goods, you called the local warehouse, placed an order, and "poof" you were selling hi-fi. Qualifications? None needed! Business plan? Fugettaboutit! "Real" hi-fi stores wouldn't touch those brands or the price wars that came about. So what was the impetus for selling the high quality stuff to "Stupid Americans" ? - which was the philosophy BTW. It's also why you couldn't get repair parts for most tables - they became throw away items.
There were a few tables that had decent mass platters - Micro Seiki, Luxman come to mind. These tables were sold through franchised dealers and did have support. I sold a number of them during the 70's and 80s to people that cared about sonics. Ironically most of the truly heavy plattered tables were belt drive - even the good companies apparently didn't want to spend the time and money developing the proper motor.
I'm sure that if you compared the motors and bearings from the 70s tables to what Chris developed, you'll find that Chris' products are much more robust and designed to work with the loads presented by a massive platter. Of course, that does cost money.
Be careful with that damping compound. If you're not careful you'll throw the platter out of balance and wear out the motor or bearing.
-
As a very satisfied Technics 1200 owner I have a different take on this issue. The development and engineering costs involved in this TT are simply out of range for any small manufacturer. The motor employed, judging by the TT's preeminent status in the "scratching" world is a high quality item. The fact that dealers were unable to charge huge markups for what you could buy elsewhere for list price is one reason why the dealers never liked them. BTW, all the parts for all the Technics 1200 various models are readily available from Panasonic.
-
Hey Bob, thanks for the perspective :thumb:
As there is not much clearance between platter and underlying plinth on my JVC.....I could only spray the damping compound on the underside and coat it with a light layer of Plast-i-Clay (2 sticks or about 0.5 lbs). The benefit was rather large...a nice increase in resolution was the result.
If the motor/bearing can't support and extra 0.5lb, it probably wasn't doing the job to begin with :wink:
-
Direct drive tables of the period under discussion had to support the weight of the platter on top of the motor. Luxman got around that problem by magnetically suspending 75% of the platter weight so that the motor only had to deal with a couple of pounds. I believe Teres is doing something similar.
TCG - I think you were being warned about balance rather than mass with the additional damping that you apply.
My SP-10 has a sub platter and an upper platter which bolts to it. I can detect slight ringing at the perimeter when there is no mat on it. With the Luxman mat in place, no ringing can be detected.
-
FWIW when I decided to build a Teres for myself (no way I could afford Chris's tables) Chris was very helpful to my DIY efforts. I purchased the bearing and motor and he was happy to discuss platter and motor housing design and cheerfully offered suggestions on building the best turntable possible within my budget and capabilities.
He still has design drawings on the site for both the bearing and a base. The motor controller schematic is available as is the strobe disc image. I hope Chris can keep selling parts to DIY folks as there is precious little available for those wanting to roll their own table but I totally understand the concerns over image when selling a product such as the Certus and still offering parts.
Lastly I want to say that Chris is one of the nicest and most genuine guys I've ever met, in or out of the audio business. :) This is not in his defense, it's simply a fact.
Mike
-
We do not levitation in the Certus, just a beefy bearing. The confusion probably comes from the fact that the Certus uses magnetic damping, an eddy current brake that is used to further stabilize rotational speed. The bearing shaft is 1" in diameter and can carry a load of over 100 lbs. Here is a shot of the Certus motor stator and bearing assembly. The OD of the motor housing is 5.75".
(http://www.teresaudio.com/DD_Motor.jpg)
Jim, The rim drive motor should work with a 100 pound platter but it probably would need to be customized to use a slower startup profile.
Chris
-
I apologize if this ends up hijacking this thread but.....
As a very satisfied Technics 1200 owner I have a different take on this issue. The development and engineering costs involved in this TT are simply out of range for any small manufacturer. The motor employed, judging by the TT's preeminent status in the "scratching" world is a high quality item. The fact that dealers were unable to charge huge markups for what you could buy elsewhere for list price is one reason why the dealers never liked them. BTW, all the parts for all the Technics 1200 various models are readily available from Panasonic.
Well lcrim, have you ever worked retail? Or more importantly did you ever work audio retail during the '70s and '80s? I did. I spoke out of direct experience dealing with various manufacturers. I've heard the claim about "engineering costs" before, and frankly it's just a lame excuse made by those who don't know any better. Matsushita didn't invent the direct drive motor, so the R&D expenses were minimized, and when applied to the MacDonalds school of production, they were, unit for unit, virtually nil. That motor may be used by the "scratching" world, but 1) Honestly, what choice do they have? and 2) Have you compared the 1200 motor to that of an SP10? Trust me, the motor is substantially cheaper than what they could have included.
The crack about huge markups tells me that you have no clue how the retail world works. Most items come with a suggested retail price from the manufacturer. Dealers (at least when I was involved) usually sold with a roughly 10% discount (my customers got that just for walking in the door.) I don't know of ANYBODY that would "charge huge markups for what you could buy elsewhere for list price". If you know of such dealers, please elaborate.
Since Technics, Pioneer, Sansui, Kenwood, and JVC (to name a few) sold through a different outlet scheme, those items typically went out the door with a 25 - 30% discount. Now the only way to make money on those margins was to buy in large quantities (to get the best discounts) and move the merchandise quickly with little expended effort. This is the antithesis of the true audio store. But it is the province of big box stores (SILO in my day and region - Best Buy, Circuit City now), mail order catalogs (J&R and such), and appliance stores that just sold audio as a sideline where qualified sales help isn't necessary and is in fact a detriment. Oh, and forget after sales service, you can't afford it at those margins. Again, are you speaking out of experience?
From 1978 through 1995 I worked for an audio store that actually did servce - kinda rare these days. During that time we took in numerous Technics pieces (since the people that sold them couldn't service them) and tried to order parts. I guess I should apologize; parts were sometimes available, it just took up to a year to get them. The situation was so bad that we eventually told people that if parts were necessary we wouldn't fix the unit. It was either that or piss the customers off while we waited for a shipment. Technics and Pioneer were the worst manufacturers to deal with.
Once again, I'm not basing my comments on the purchase of one table, but rather on years of experience dealing with many manufacturers. Yes, for a very short period (2 months) I sold Technics and Pioneer for the appliance store mentioned above, but I also sold lines like GAS, PS Audio, Yamaha, Denon, conrad johnson, McIntosh, Micro Seikei, Lux, Moscode.... so I feel qualified to compare these companies. I also feel qualified to understand the marketing decisions that drove many of these companies.
I have a great deal of respect for people like Chris who can make a go out of audio in this day and age. (I figured I'd better bring this back on topic) While I'm not going to drop cash on a Certus - everybody has limits, I would like to see a 320 with the rim drive.
-
TCG - I think you were being warned about balance rather than mass with the additional damping that you apply.
My SP-10 has a sub platter and an upper platter which bolts to it. I can detect slight ringing at the perimeter when there is no mat on it. With the Luxman mat in place, no ringing can be detected.
Yup, balance is the potential problem. I doubt you would have sprayed on enough damping compount to affect the bearing, just look at some of the heavy mats that were used - Platter Matter anyone?
Jack - Give one of the carbon fiber or graphite mats a try, they should sound better than the Lux mat.
-
Perhaps all these moves might prompt Matsushita to make the SP-10 again. Wouldn't be too hard for them... aa
-
BobRex,
The spray-on damping compound can't be more than a couple ounces or three (it's a 17oz can and there is plenty left in there). It was applied relatively evenly by eye so it should be fine.
The Plast-i-Clay applied to the underside was all of 8 or so ounces. It, too, was applied as evenly by eye as possible. The cumulative effect of 10 ounces of damping stuff, applied by eye pretty evenly, shouldn't affect bearing wear.
The sonic effect, on the other had, was great. That upper midrange/treble glare that is evident with string, small woodwinds and piano with direct drivers was greatly diminished after the application of the damping.
Leads me to believe there is more sonic benefit to some further damping with a constrained layer sub-mat (between record interface mat and ring-prone aluminum platter) 8)
And, heck yeah, it ain't easy making a living in this high-end audio biz. Anyone that does gets major kudos from me :thumb:
-
At the risk of going off topic as well, I need to respond as a very satisfied owner of a Technics 1200 TT.
My earlier posting apparently needs clarification. I have become very aware of the attitudes of high end audio regarding the Technics 1200 TT line. When you could buy the TT from a DJ outlet for slightly over cost, why would anyone buy it for list? Dealers were and are far more likely to push those units that allow a more generous margin.
Regarding the motor, the facts are that the Technics SP02 had a hi-torque 48 pole motor as it was part of a disc cutting system. This same motor was carried over to the original SP10. The 1200 uses a 12 pole motor because it was designed from the beginning as a playback only machine. Playback only, no cutting, different requirements. That motor and bearing assembly developed by the Panasonic Special Projects group was used in every TT developed with the MKII designation. It is simply not true that parts were unavailable then or now. You can get the full range of parts directly from the Panasonic website today.
-
At the risk of going off topic as well, I need to respond as a very satisfied owner of a Technics 1200 TT.
My earlier posting apparently needs clarification. I have become very aware of the attitudes of high end audio regarding the Technics 1200 TT line. When you could buy the TT from a DJ outlet for slightly over cost, why would anyone buy it for list? Dealers were and are far more likely to push those units that allow a more generous margin.
Regarding the motor, the facts are that the Technics SP02 had a hi-torque 48 pole motor as it was part of a disc cutting system. This same motor was carried over to the original SP10. The 1200 uses a 12 pole motor because it was designed from the beginning as a playback only machine. Playback only, no cutting, different requirements. That motor and bearing assembly developed by the Panasonic Special Projects group was used in every TT developed with the MKII designation. It is simply not true that parts were unavailable then or now. You can get the full range of parts directly from the Panasonic website today.
You seem to miss my point. I'm not talking about now, I'm talking about almost 30 years ago. The situation was different then. At the very least there was no web page to order from. You called up and ordered parts from the wharehouse, then they invoiced you when the parts shipped, or if you didn't have an account you prepaid. So what did we do wrong? I know for a fact that we had a hard time getting parts, not just for tables, but also for receivers, tape decks, and other pieces. Were you ordering parts 30 years ago? If so, then you must have had a connection that we didn't.
You talk about the MKII tables, but what about before that? There was a ton of product shipped before the MKII was made, or was that perfect too?
I personally don't give a rat's behind about the 1200 MK whatever. Look I owned various Technics pieces in the old days - a couple of receivers, a tape deck, parts of the "pancake" series, some speakers (remember the SB7000s?), an sl-12, then 2 (count em) of the semi-automatics with the digital displays. I used these for DJ work long before scratching was popular. I fell for the Technics image lock, stock, and barrel. But then I heard better and moved on.
There are a number of reasons why someone would buy list, but as I said, I gave a discount so your point is somewhat moot. The stores that sold Technics had no clue what they were doing and were frequently doing a disservice to customers. One store used to install Sonus carts on their tables, the cantilevers would collapse 6 months later and the customers would come to us for replacements. So I saw first hand how the stores treated their customers. BTW - I was once one of those customers.
Chairs orginal question had to do with why tables originally came with bell like platters. I explained the pricing reasons and the marketing reasons behind those decisions. I spoke from direct experience selling the product. You may not like it, but I have yet to see you do anything but defend your table, a table that still has a bell like platter. Since you seem to have an inside line to present Technics R&D, why is that still the case? If I'm wrong, then tell me why I'm wrong in the historical context to which my post was written.
-
I'm not sure why either of you are as hot and bothered as you seem to be at one another right now....
For perspective, let's remember this is just a hobby and that Panasonic/Matsushita doesn't care one way or another whether either of you are alive or dead :o
The Technics 1200 doesn't deserve praise 'cause it's not a living being...nor should it be trampled upon as it does indeed work as Technics intended. It is what it is - a Turntable - some like it a lot and others could care less for it.
Just make nice with one another as audiophool compadres and move on :inlove:
John
-
We do not levitation in the Certus, just a beefy bearing. The confusion probably comes from the fact that the Certus uses magnetic damping, an eddy current brake that is used to further stabilize rotational speed. The bearing shaft is 1" in diameter and can carry a load of over 100 lbs. Here is a shot of the Certus motor stator and bearing assembly. The OD of the motor housing is 5.75".
(http://www.teresaudio.com/DD_Motor.jpg)
Jim, The rim drive motor should work with a 100 pound platter but it probably would need to be customized to use a slower startup profile.
Chris
Holy bejeezus, that's a bearing.
:drool:
-
You seem to miss my point. I'm not talking about now, I'm talking about almost 30 years ago.
Almost 20 years ago I could get just about any girl I wanted, did not have a belly nor white hair! :oops:
-
So, Chris...
When we going to get more information on a rim-drive option? What's your plan for it?
-
So, Chris...
When we going to get more information on a rim-drive option? What's your plan for it?
Our plan has been to start shipping rim-drive motors the first week of July and we are on track for that date and may even ship a few units in June. There is a waiting list and it is filling up rapidly.The rim-drive motor will be replacing our current Reference motor and will be included with all 300 series turntables. It will also be an option (highly recommended) for all 200 series turntables. A model 255 with this motor is elevated be competitive with the belt drive model 320! :D There will be an upgrade program for existing customers.
We will also make the motor available separately. We have not finalized the price yet but
should have it pinned down in a week or two.
Chris
-
I got my Verus motor this morning and posted some initial thoughts here:
http://www.audioasylum.com/audio/vinyl/messages/67/675079.html