[capo]

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

[Syrah]

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.

[csero]

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 ...

[Whitese]

did both TT's have the same tonearm and  cart for the comparison?

[capo]

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!

[Wayne1]

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.

[JDUBS]

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

[doug s.]

The Technics SL1210 has a wow and flutter measurement of .01% (click on "technical specifications") 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...

doug s.

[doug s.]

The Technics SL1210 has a wow and flutter measurement of .01% (click on "technical specifications") 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...

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.   

doug s.

[Plink]

What kind of torque does that motor have in comparison to the old idlers?

[cbrady]

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

[slbender]

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 

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") 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...

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?

[shep]

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!

[macrojack]

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.

[Toka]

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.

[lcrim]

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. 

[woodsyi]

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.    I am looking forward to the announcement. 

[TheChairGuy]

Woodsyi, go get a old Goldring/Lenco RIM drive and save yourself a couple grand  : 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. 



 

[cbrady]

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

[doug s.]

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?   

doug s.