Teac Tripath - thoughts to date

sleepkyng · « **Reply #40 on:** 24 Sep 2004, 06:11 pm »

ok, mark, sorry this took so long!

ok, first off, i have somewhat deep tripath experience (relative of course)

i have had about 6 months experience with the griffin powerwave, and about a month with the teac and sonic impact.

my system is posted on the database so you can get a good idea of what i am limited to.

First and foremost, the teac is a class or two above both the sonic impact and the powerwave.

In all aspects it is better. The highs are less shrill and digital sounding, the bass is tighter and the overall imaging and spacing really stands out as much improved.

I've owned an old pioneer solid state receiver and an asl wave 8 monoblock setup, so while my audio experience is limited, i do know the characteristics of ss and tubes.

i think digital has the potential to fill the nitch that hybrids seem to come up short on. the teac is decidedly warmer than the pioneer and closer to the wave 8's, tho not quite as colored and warm.

i would put them more on the musical side as opposed to the reference side.

I do wish that the psu on the teac was better and have considered getting it modded (oh wait, i have NO money

)

i have put maybe 90 hrs into the teac and i'll update when i'm at 150hrs

cheers

mcgsxr · « **Reply #41 on:** 3 Oct 2004, 05:26 pm »

Sleepkyng, thanks for adding your first impressions, it is interesting to hear what others think, in their systems, compared to their gear.

Please do update us, when you reach a milestone in the break in, I am guessing you will reach it soon, for me it was around 130-140 hours or so.

Now, about that PSU, yes, it does seem to be a weak spot, and there are people to help with that...

I know that Wayne is getting closer to completion on the mods for mine 2nd Teac, and I look forward to a/bing with my stock one, later in the month.

Having read the good reviews of how the eval board sounds with Wayne's mods, I am getting more and more excited! Bwanagreg did a good write up of what he hears, in the Critic's Circle.

Hey geofstro - any update on the Horns with the Teac, or are you not there yet?

Mark in Canada

geofstro · « **Reply #42 on:** 3 Oct 2004, 06:13 pm »

Mark,

I'm embarrased to say, I still haven't got around to hooking up the Teac with the Horns

I've been more concerned about warming up the Teac in the system with the ProAc's and warming up the JVC on the system with the Horns.

The reason is, I wanted to hear the sound of both systems changing over time as the amps warmed up and if I'd swapped them over in midstream, so to speak, I'm afraid I would lose the fix I was getting on the sound of both.

Rest assured, though, I will be swapping them in a week or two.

Both amps are, I believe, now warmed up to optimum; but I'll be travelling over the next couple of weeks.

Will keep you posted.

geoff

mcgsxr · « **Reply #43 on:** 3 Oct 2004, 07:36 pm »

Makes perfect sense, trying to sort out the changes that were happening in each system, without complicating things by mixing parts up!

I look forward to what you hear, and I will report what I hear with the modded Teac, and some Horns not far from my house, once that amp comes home...

Have fun, and have a great time traveling!

mark in Canada

geofstro · « **Reply #44 on:** 29 Oct 2004, 02:48 pm »

Recently I swapped the JVC ES1L and the Teac between my two systems. The JVC is now in the system driving ProAc Super tower speakers and the Teac is driving the Horn Shoppe horns.

I made this swap about two weeks ago and it has given me greater insight into what I perceive to be the relative strengths and weaknesses of each amp.

Not only are the systems different, the two rooms are also very different when it comes to their sonic properties.

Previously, when I had the Teac hooked up to the ProAc system, the first quality that immediately struck me was its Timbral accuracy, following that I noticed how extended the highs were compared to what I had been used to. When I hooked up the Teac to the Horns about two weeks ago, what immediately struck me was how free the sound seemed from the speakers. This was not really what I was expecting. I'd been using first of all the Fi X then the JVC with these horns and I would have expected both of these to be greater soundstaging champs than the Teac. In this system though, I would have to hand the Timbral accuracy award to the Fi X, since overall it sounds so natural on most instruments.

So what's going on? Well, first of all I believe that "freedom from the speakers" sound is to a great extent recording dependent. I was listening to a Music TV channel called Mezzo, with the TV monitor off and they were broadcasting a live feed of a classical concert held at Montpelier and recorded by Radio France. I believe this stream is compressed MPEG2, nevertheless it was incredibly life-like. Subsequently I was a little disappointed to find that this same freedom from the speakers didn't always work quite as well for all of my CD's. Still it does seem better with the Teac than either the JVC or the Fi X in this one respect. A recording of Thelonius Monk from 1964 was really impressive spatially. When I was on the floor about mid-way between the speakers adjusting some controls, the saxophone appeared to be directly above my head. Of course, I don't normally listen in this position and I'm not sure it proves anything; but from the normal listening position, on the right recordings the soundstaging is impressive with this amp. This is especially considering that the Horns are in their classic corner positions, for maximizing base and this isn't the best placement if what you care about most is imaging.

What I think is gong on is that the Teac seems to be pretty much like a plain glass window. It just lets through whatever's in front of it.

I don't mean to suggest that all is perfect with the Teac. Continuing this familiar metaphor of the glass window, I would say, first of all that there are flaws in this glass. Certain areas in the upper frequency spectrum can be uncomfortable to listen to. A bit like listening to slightly splintery glass. When I used the Teac in the ProAc system, I also reported that I often wanted to turn up the sound. Not being quite satisfied that I was getting full dynamic swings or that the system was blooming as it should. With the Horns the Teac certainly plays loud enough and I don't get the feeling the dynamics are compressed; but just as a sheet of glass is hard, there is a feeling that the sound hits some kind of wall or surface. This manifests itself in a kind of ringing effect, especially at the aforementioned higher frequencies.

This is not nearly as bad as it may sound from my description; but it's clear that, at least, in it's stock form the Teac can't yet be described as true 'High-End' for want of a better term. All of what I'm describing here is with using the Fi Y preamp into the Teac with the Teacs' volume pots at max.

I decided for the first time to try the Teac without a preamp and adjust the volume using the pots. The result was that the phenomena I've described above, hardness, ringing became more obvious and difficult to listen to. Which is a shame. because the transparency of this amp and it's neutrality were, perhaps, even more evident. I quickly went back to the Teac with Fi Y. I really hope the mods on this amp can ameliorate these few problems. That would put it up there with the best High-End digital amps, in my view.

Apart from the flaws, I think its ability to let the qualities of what precedes it in the chain through, is what enables it to exhibit those soundstaging abilities I noted at the beginning. It's timbral accuracy is not so apparent on this system as with the ProAcs. I think that's due to the ProAcs having a metal dome tweeter who's virtues shone through with the Teac like no other amp. The extended highs must of contributed to my sense of many instruments sounding more like themselves tonally than I'd heard before. I don't especially miss the highs on the Horns, they seem to sparkle well enough, and I doubt if I can really hear much above the 18khz that I believe the Horns extend to; but somehow I must have been perceiving a greater extension in the highs with the Teac/ProAc combo than I am with the Horns. When I can afford it I may get a supertweeter to use with the Horns.

Now that the JVC is driving the ProAcs I also have a better understanding of what it can do, and my respect for its sound has increased further. I feel that if the Teac can be compared to a Glass window with some minor flaws, then the JVC is like the window being swung open. I say that because the sound with the JVC just keeps coming at you and really blooms. It did this previously with the Horns as well. The only trouble with the JVC that I can detect, is that although the glass is now gone you're looking out through the open window while wearing slightly tinted glasses. Hearing the JVC through the ProAc, though, I also believe it's better at unravelling complex music. I didn't get a chance to try any really dense orchestral music or similar; but I plan to this weekend.

So, surprise, surprise, I'm saying that neither amp is perfect. No great revelation there. My feeling is that the Teac definitely needs some modification to, hopefully, cure those flaws, then it would be a great amp. It also needs a preamp, probably tube. The JVC on the other hand is a great all round performer without any mods and I can't easily imagine what benefits mods would add. I do also have a preference for using it with a tube preamp. For some reason, instruments sound that little bit more natural with a tube preamp and the JVC; but I could definitely live with it without a tube preamp if I had to. It is a little more revealing of detail by itself, so it's a bit of a swings and roundabouts situation.

If I were only going to buy one of these amps and couldn't afford mods I would probably buy the JVC. If I had to buy one amp and could afford mods I'd want to compare a modded Teac to the JVC or a modded Teac to a modded JVC, and that's exactly what I'm hoping to do.

Hope it helps

geoff

lcrim · « **Reply #45 on:** 30 Oct 2004, 12:06 pm »

geoff:
What preamp did you use with the Teac. I'm running it with an AES AE-3, and the ringing sound you mention is absent. I am utterly satisfied with the sound in my living room system. Just a guess but the synergy with this amp seems better with a tube preamp. Frankly, I have no desire at present to have the Teac modded.
I used to have a HT setup there and retained the front speakers. I was trying to trade my Concertino's and cash for Cain & Cain Abbeys. The Teac was an interim solution, the idea was to match the Abbeys with a SET.
Well, I took the preamp from my bedroom system and tried the Sonus Faber Concertino Homes with it and the Teac. I couldn't believe that a $100 amp could sound so right. I have a Decware Zen w/ a Geoge Wright preamp in the bedroom driving Dave Dutil's Parker 95 MKII's. Both systems have the detail, sound staging and correct timberI have found I like. I truly fell into these combinations and I may be done (for a while anyway.

)
Edit:
Just reread your post and see that you have the FiY pre w/ the Teac, my bad. Still , the sources I have w/ the Teac are analog, SACD and the music channels from directv (analog outs) and I don't hear the hardness and ringing you describe. Maybe, your ears are better than mine. Ignorance can be bliss.

Dmason · « **Reply #46 on:** 30 Oct 2004, 05:07 pm »

I agree completely Icrim; The Tripath sounds amazing with a good tube pre amp. When I plugged in a good Joule Electra, the sound became magical, there was immediate synergy. The tubes ground off the edginess one can hear with the highs. I think the Teac is the pick of the litter myself. Have you noticed that it is a BIG 30 watts?

I bet it sounds perfect with the Concertinos, one of my all time favorite speaks. Keep those for the long haul.

geofstro · « **Reply #47 on:** 31 Oct 2004, 12:07 pm »

lcrim,

Please don't misunderstand me. I'm very happy with the Teac. In fact I've ordered a second. The flaws I described I would say are, relatively, minor.

I didn't hear these flaws using the JVC by itself though, nor did I hear it with the Fi Y/Fi X combo. What I'm describing is with CD playback using CEC TLX2 belt drive transport, GW Labs Jitter corrector and Meitner Bidat.

It could be the Teac is so revealing that its showing up flaws with my CD playback, or it could be that the Horns are getting excited in some way within that frequency area.

I realized from your comments I need to listen to records more through this system. I'll do that next week and see if I can figure if this is limited to CD playback.

Thanks

geoff

mcgsxr · « **Reply #48 on:** 1 Nov 2004, 06:20 pm »

Ahh, nice to see some other folks doubling up on their Teac fun!

Great to read all about what your experiences have been, since we all seem to have differing systems, and tastes, so it is cool to see what others think of this little wonder.

The modded Teac from Wayne is heading back to him, for a looking over, after the shipping apes did some damage, during the flight from Colorado to Ontario... Ah well, we will get this sorted out yet.

On another note, I received my CSS WR125S full range drivers this week past, and on the advice of Dmason, stuffed them into a makeshift box to see how they sound. BTW, makeshift in this case means 0.3 foot cardboard boxes sourced at the grocers'...

Still reading, managed not to choke on your 'phile instincts?

I barely made it, but am glad I did.

Now, it would be outright silly, and pointless to say that they are FANTASTIC like this, etc, since we all can imagine (well, YOU can, I get to hear it...) how these babies are flexing and vibrating like nuts, during bass notes.

All that aside, they are sounding decent, in spite of their mundane enclosures. I am surprised to find that I doubt I will need a tweeter, even though I have read that they roll off around 10-11KHz - I just hear nice top end, lacking a little air of course, but pleasing female voice and piano to be sure.

The bass is severely limited, and I chalk that up to the staggeringly poor enclosure, so it is unfair to comment on that.

The mids. Right, now that sounds just right, even with the boxes droning away.

There is potential here, with the single drivers and Teac combination, and I will strive to conjure up some MDF boxes in the coming weeks, so that when the Bolder teac returns, I am ready to really find out some interesting stuff!

Keep the Teac news coming, good or bad, and have a good listen to whatever you own, it is nice to escape life for a couple of hours!

mark in Canada

toobwacky · « **Reply #49 on:** 5 Nov 2004, 02:34 am »

Would there be any advantage to replacing the switching PS with a linear PS in one of these TEACs? The chassis certainly has enough room for one.

Thanks.

TW

mcgsxr · « **Reply #50 on:** 5 Nov 2004, 02:44 pm »

Well, I am likely not the right person to comment on actually modding these, I am just a happy user - I would ask either Wayne at Bolder Cable, or VinnieR, as both these gentlemen are likely to be able to steer you towards the answer to your question.

I assume that you are asking if it would work well to install a toroidal transformer in this amp?

Mark in Canada

toobwacky · « **Reply #51 on:** 6 Nov 2004, 03:41 am »

I'm also wondering if one could take the coaxial S/PDIF out of a CDP and bypass the preamp boards then drive the digital amp boards directly. Anyone?

GBB · « **Reply #52 on:** 7 Nov 2004, 01:44 pm »

Here are few educated guesses on the topic.

Toobwacky asked "Would there be any advantage to replacing the switching PS with a linear PS in one of these TEACs?"

My answer would be an emphatic yes. The tripath chip sets have a great reputation and based on my use in my system, the Teac is good but not great. I suspect that the power supply in the TEACs is limiting things and that a good linear supply would go a long way towards making them reach the next level.
You'd need both +5v for the digital supply and +28v for the analog supply.

TW also asked "I'm wondering if one could take the coaxial S/PDIF out of a CDP and bypass the preamp boards then drive the digital amp boards directly."

Here the answer is no. Tripath digital amps are different from DACs and only take analog input. Here's a link to the datasheet for the chipset used in the Tripath that gives more detail on operation:
http://www.tripath.com/downloads/TK2050.pdf

---Gary

mcgsxr · « **Reply #53 on:** 7 Nov 2004, 02:16 pm »

GBB, thanks for chiming in, I think I recall that VinnieR has played around with a toroidal transformer with the Teac, but don't know the details.

As for your experience with the Teac, can you help me understand a little more about your system, what you felt the amp did right, and where it fell down some?

Love hearing about other people's experiences - for me, it has worked well, but clearly there are other systems and rooms out there!

GBB · « **Reply #54 on:** 7 Nov 2004, 02:45 pm »

Hi Mark,
Sure thing - I've tried the TEAC in a couple of systems. I've also slightly modified the TEAC per some earlier posts I made. All I did was get rid of the two input coupling electrolytic caps and replace them with one film cap - a generic 3.3uf polypro.

The two systems I tried were:

1)Biamped system. This system uses Edgarhorns >500hz and some homebrew transmission line speakers <500hz. Its very much a customized system with lots of homebrew equipment. The transport is an Audiomeca Mephisto. DAC is either a homebrew nonos or highly modified Art DIO, preamp is a homebrew transformer coupled 417A tube preamp, with electronic crossover and Threshold S200 for the bass and Sun Audio Vt-25 for the highs. Here's a picture:

Substituting the TEAC for the Sun amp was a noticeable step down. The sound seemed to have lost some transparency and the soundstage was reduced. There was also some noticeable background noise - not quite hiss but it was noticeably less quiet than the tube amps.

2)This is a more conventional system, but also quite a bit of homebrew. Sources are either a modified Kenwood KT-7500 tuner or Micromega Drive 2 transport and another highly modified ART DI/O. Preamp is a passive homebrew effort based on the TX-102 transformer volume controls and the amp is normally a Crown K-2. Speakers are homebrew transmission lines with Cabasse woofers and MB Quart tweeters. Here's a picture of the system:

I also compared the TEAC to some Flying Mole digital amps in this system. Again, I found that the TEAC lost out to the Crown or the Flying Moles in transparency and an overall feeling of you are there. Since these speakers are less efficient, I didn't get hear the noise as much from these amps but the background still didn't seem as "black" as with the other amps. Maybe its just a synergy thing, or maybe I didn't give them enough time to burn in but the TEACs just haven't grabbed me.

I hope this helps put my comments in perspective.

---Gary

mcgsxr · « **Reply #55 on:** 7 Nov 2004, 02:57 pm »

Exactly what I was after - great shots of the systems, and good description of what other gear it was up against, and playing with.

Nice Micromega by the way, I was hot for one of those for 10 years, even during the horrow stories about the transport mech...

Glad that you shared your thoughts, and systems. I appreciate hearing about it.

GBB · « **Reply #56 on:** 7 Nov 2004, 03:04 pm »

I bought the Micromega roughly 10 years back used on the web. If memory holds up I bought it from the late Steve Ziipser of Sunshine Stereo down in Florida. It worked great - for a while and then started having the notorious reliability problems. I called the US distributor for Micromega at the time and they sent me a new EEPROM for the drive, claiming that might be the cause, but it had no effect. Eventually I read that the real problem was lubrication or lack thereof and I opened it up and oiled the sled and that seemed to do the trick. Last year, the laser died and I had to replace it and but now it seems to be working good as new again. I also added an upgraded clock from LC audio a few years back, which I think improved things but ones memory can play tricks.

---Gary

toobwacky · « **Reply #57 on:** 13 Nov 2004, 07:07 pm »

Got the TEAC amp. Out of the box it's far better than I was hoping for. The descriptions I've read on these boards of its sound are all spot on. At its price this thing is a gift... THANK YOU TEAC!!!

As an efficient, 30 wpc, 3 channel amp, you'd expect the maximum power consumption to be over 90 watts, but according to the literature and the amp's back panel, power consumption is 45 watts (5 watts idle). Does this mean the maximum, total audio power this thing can deliver to speakers is something less than 45 watts?

What gives?

mcgsxr · « **Reply #58 on:** 13 Nov 2004, 08:42 pm »

First of all, I am so glad that you have found the Teac to your liking - it sure does it for me, but there are reports around from those for whom it was not their thang!

Welcome to the club!

As for the confusion about the info on the back, I am not sure what to say - actually, here is an example of why I am not sure what to say.

Let's take a regular receiver - the Yamaha RXV-1500 for example - a current model and capable of pushing 7x120wpc according to their website - by my math that is 840 watts. On the rear of their receiver, it states "500w". So, what is the deal there?

I assume that (for whatever reason) it is never just simple math, for how these things work.

In any case, I mostly don't care, since the darn little Teac sounds so good!

Let us know a little more about what partnering equipment you have, and how things proceed!

mcgsxr · « **Reply #59 on:** 13 Nov 2004, 08:42 pm »

Oh yeah, if you want to have a look for yourself at the Yamaha example I am using, here is the URL to the rear of it.

http://www.yamaha.ca/av/Receivers/Back_Panels/RXV1500_Back_Panel.jsp