$800 Cartridge Shootout and Upgrade Path

I’m back from shopping at Holister, Co. and Abercrombie and Fitch. My daughter made out like a bandit: over two hundred dollars in ten minutes, half of which she paid! Not bad I say. And she is so happy about her new winter coat. (There is life, I guess, outside of vinyl, but I know it’s hard to believe, right?)

Letch,

Thanks for the kind words; I, too, appreciate your posting here. Your comments are always welcome.

Your choice between the Quattro Alu and Teres 265 will be a tough one, for there’re both fine turntables. I believe the October edition of Stereophile is carrying an article, written by Art Dudley, about the Quattro Alu. I only skimmed the text. I hate to admit that I spent more time drooling over the pictures.

I once had a suspended turntable, but it wasn’t in the same league as the Basis 2001 by any means. However, I did find it very musical, rich, and warm. In those days, you know when the covered wagons made their way west, I had no idea what PRaT meant, and I only discovered the definition for that acronym recently, I hate to admit. But the type of music I like is not full of fury or bombast; it is lyrical, smooth, and melodic. Later I purchased a direct-drive turntable on the basis of a review by Julian Hirsch. Boy did it every sound crummy, but I really didn’t know any better until now, thanks to Twl, Dougdeacon, 4yanx, and others.

In regards to the Nottingham Spacedeck, Luda, my wife, likes it the best of the ones I have shown her, including the Michell Gyro and the Teres 245. She likes the more traditional look of the Linn.

>>I wouldn't say shallow, I prefer to think I'm sophisticated in that way but it wouldn't be the first time I was fooling myself.<<

I would probably be the last one to call another one shallow, but since I like my equipment to look good, I feel a little guilty because the “really hardcore” audiophiles seem to be focused on the sound; aesthetics seem to be secondary. Well they are not secondary to me. Maybe that’s one reason I could never warm up to equipment like NAD despite the following it has gathered over the years.

I don’t take too seriously comments by others claiming to have Teres-killing decks. How would they know without hearing a friend’s unit or buying one for themselves to compare to their “world-beater?” As for Stereophile, I have mixed feelings. I agree: how can they lump so many turntables into one category? Well, the answer is that they try to compare various units on the basis of memory, whim, bias, personal relations with the manufacturer (e.g., the love-fest with Musical Fidelity), and, of course, advertising dollars. (Yeah, what’s up with putting the Graham Robin on the Gailibier? Oh that makes a lot of sense? Maybe Art should have tried something else, or better yet he should have asked the manufacturer for an appropriate arm and phono cartridge.)

If you need more information about the Schroeder Model 1, you may need to talk with Twl. You will have to examine that arm’s effective mass and its bearing assembly to determine whether it will properly accommodate your desired cartridge. Given you musical tastes, you could start with a Shelter 501, and from there you could try different cartridges. Here’s some data about the Model 1 that you might find useful:

1) Torsion-bearing, magnetically stabilized and damped

2) Virtually no bearing friction, no bearing chatter

3) Dynamic damping of the tonearm-cartridge-resonance through induction of eddy currents, adjustable

4) VTA repeatable and finely adjustable

5) Tonearm wands are interchangeable, available in 8.5 – 12inch length

6) Effective Mass depending on the armwand from 5gr – 35gr

7) Tonearm wands/rods made out of carbon fiber, jacaranda, ebony, acacia, bamboo, pertinax etc.

8) Incognito wiring, single run, other wiring upon request.

http://www.soundscapehifi.com/schroder.htm#model1

With different armwand material and armwand weights to choose from, you should, at least in theory, be able to match the Model 1 to virtually any cartridge. But I don’t know about the cabling or the bearing assembly of the tonearm being able to absorb the energy of a low compliance cartridge, like a Shelter. Once again, you will need to ask Twl.

Thanks Artar1! I'm getting a lot out of dovetailing my questions into this thread.

Twl - Perhaps you could comment more on the Schroeder, I haven't seen much information on what can be accomplished with the various materials for the tonearm. I like the idea of a Shelter 501. And is this arm suitable for someone who is just learning about tonearms? I'm not really a tweaker in that regard. Though I want to learn more.

Any comments about Schroeder in general would be helpful from those with experience hearing one. The data on audioasylum is very positive but not too specific on details.

The Schroeder does have an excellent rep and both companies offer it as package deals with their tables. I'm still wavering on the aesthetics of the tables though. It's a nice choice though. It seems to me that there is plenty of aesthetically pleasing equipment out there so someone cares about those things.

Regarding the Schroeder, it is out of my price range, so I have never used it. I know several people(including Chris Brady of Teres) who used a Schroeder with a Crown Jewel(which is actually a re-named Shelter 501) and liked the combination.
Heavy armwand should be used.

Wow, this thread has come along way from a discussion about an $800 cartridge upgrade to talks about high-end tables and arms! No complaints here, I learn a great deal from threads such as this.

On the subject of shopping trips. My wife spent Saturday at a charity flee market that supports a day program for special needs adults. So she comes home with 3 records! Ok, so two of them were duplicates for me but it really is the thought that counts. This is just another indication to me that she is supporting my audio passion. I may have to start being nicer to her.

In the short two years of my analog rebirth I have discovered that with almost any of the modern tables that I can enjoy just about any type of music. I now listen to nearly everything from Bluegrass to Bach, though classic rock is my base, and I felt that even my former Music Hall did a good job on all of this music. I have learned that dynamics are probably most important when you consider music that might be described as rich and warm. The playback of so many musical passages are enhanced by the ability to provide that immediate tone and beat. You may not notice any deficiency with rock but you most certainly will with classical and even some Bluegrass. Things my old Dual table way back when could not deliver.

So maybe I am just reiterating what Twl has already stated, that you really can't go wrong with any of the better modern tables. If you can accept this then why shouldn't aesthetics come into the equation. We are visual creatures and will probably spend a good deal of time looking at our equipment while we are listening to it.

Twl,

I suspected that the lead-loaded acrylic platter was the start of diminishing returns from a sonic perspective when one goes from the Teres 245 to the Teres 255. The two platters may be difficult to tell apart for the average listener in a short, double-blind test, but I am willing to bet over a long period of time the differences might assert themselves. The lead-loaded platter should provide even blacker backgrounds and, as you have suggested, should rotate at a more consistent speed due to the greater platter mass, assuming, of course, the electric motor has the ability to handle the added weight without overheating. I assume it does, for everything about a Teres turntable seems a little on the overbuilt side.

I would love to hear the wood platters, and in one sense they are beautiful to look at. But I have never really been drawn to that design, maybe for aesthetic reasons. Perhaps there’s too much wood, and I like the combination of the wood and acrylic better than an all wood system. I know my reaction is largely subjective, and I can appreciate the added dampening offered by a platter made from hardwood.

If cost was no object, and for me it always will be, I would opt for the latest Teres model, which I believe is the 360. The Teres 265 is too much turntable for me, but I do appreciate the suggestion. When I first began thinking about the Teres, my mind fixated almost right away on either the Teres 245 or the 255. Now that I have had more time to think about it, I am beginning to lean in the direction of the 255. It’s only $350 more, and if I were to upgrade to this platter later, it might cost me more if I were to include shipping. But you are right, at what point does one stop, a very good question indeed! For me, it would be the 255.

>>I think it is prudent to understand the turntable system in the context of your entire audio system. Is the system going to be able to resolve the added improvements in the front end? If so, then any front end improvements are quite worthwhile, if you can afford them.<<

Nice point! You should be an audio dealer! My speakers are very revealing; they let me hear the differences between two different ICs connected between the amp and preamp, so they would reveal the small differences between turntable platters. The question I should ask myself is not whether I can hear a difference, but what significance should I attach to that difference and how much am I will to pay to get it? It’s amazing how most people, while they can detect a difference between X and Y, lose that ability very quickly once they understand the cost of the upgrade, especially if that cost is exorbitant.

>>According to the "rules of analog" the TT is the most important part, then the tonearm, then the cartridge.<<

While I understand this general rule, I am still fighting the old dogma propagated by Julian Hirsch. Without a doubt, if the turntable is faulty, audible distortion will become quite obtrusive as a result of inconsistent platter speed, wow and flutter, rumble, and acoustic feedback. On my previous turntables, which allowed speed adjustment, I can remember increasing and decreasing turntable speed in order to hear the very obvious sonic effects. And these tables had an integrated dust cover that caused very obvious feedback when lowered during play. Moreover, if the table is also of poor design, the reproduction of bass notes will be lacking, and pitch definition will be difficult to discern. On my pervious decks, the reproduction of bass was always a major weakness. Because of what you have just said and my increasing understanding of the importance of the turntable and its influence upon the sound, I am more inclined to opt for the Teres 255. The extra $350 spent on the table will pay the largest dividend.

>>In my opinion, the most limiting item in your analog chain at present is the DL103R. I love the DL103R, and it is truly a great cartridge for the money, but it is not as good as a Shelter 501.<<

You are correct, without a doubt. The Shelter 501 will be in my lineup, but there’s something romantically compelling about a top-performing cartridge that costs about $239! Now I know this is another one of my subjective and irrational positions, but no one has to convince me that the Shelter is better. So I might drop the idea of the Denon altogether for the sake of balance.

I like your concept of “balance.” I think creating a balanced analog system is probably the most important goal. Perhaps, it does matter too much where one begins (e.g., turntable, tonearm, cartridge, and phono stage) so long as all of the final elements in the resulting setup are fully balanced in terms of their ability to work together and in their ability to deliver a fine sonic performance. If one cannot establish a good balance, then I like your idea of starting with the turntable first, followed by the tonearm, cartridge, and then phono stage. This approach creates a solid foundation while permitting upgrades to occur later.

>>That is why I made the selections that I did. I had a budget, and wanted as close to the best as I could afford. Thankfully, there were these high-value options that I could select from, which provided performance that was very close the top and cost in my budget range. I felt the same way about the arm and cartridges that I selected…Sometimes you have to go into the experimental products from smaller companies, in order to get a price/performance ratio like this, because they sell at lower cost to try to break into the market. It can be risky, but it can yield great sonic rewards for the money, if you make the right decisions.<<

Right decisions indeed! With your help and with the help of Dougdeacon and Jphii, I think we are seeing, perhaps, a major reduction of risk in trying products from companies like Teres. Your combined experience not only serves as good testimonials, they also provide invaluable experience. As audio prices continue to climb, as the influence of the Internet continues to grow, and with it, the acceptable of buying goods and services over the World Wide Web, and as long as audiophiles like ourselves are willing to share our experiences through a forum like this, I think we will begin to see a shift away from the Sound by Singer’s of the World toward direct marketing companies like Teres and others. Such companies offer us the best in price/performance. This is where I like to shop.

>>Pick your favorite $5k cartridge and tonearm, and put them on a Rega 3 or some other $500 turntable. Play it.

Then put a RB250 and a DL103R ($250 + $250 = $500) on a $5k turntable, and see which sounds better, musically. And, which makes more difference.<<

I Have had the privilege of experiencing the first situation, but the cartridge cost $10,000 (Koetsu Tiger Eye Platinum, which now sells for $13,000), and was placed on a $650 Denon turntable/tonearm combination. While the sky did not fall, much of the air, bloom, richness, top-end extension, and inner detail were missing. It was a perfectly good waste of an incredibly expensive cartridge. However, this mismatch easily beat a $1,000 CD player, which may not be saying very much.