I doubt that Teac's engineers got to apply their expertise in this product. More likely the marketing department worked with Hanpin to style and badge a standard OEM product to meet a price point.
Teac TN-300 just say no?
- Thread starter lico
- Start date
- Status
I doubt that Teac's engineers got to apply their expertise in this product. More likely the marketing department worked with Hanpin to style and badge a standard OEM product to meet a price point.
Obviously the $399 isn't some respondents money so it's easy to encourage the OP to spend his money on a table that wont be any advance over what he already has. Like anything else at a certain price point you can only expect so much and these days new $500 or less turntables aren't able to deliver $1,000 or more of performance no matter who makes it. Companies like Teak, Denon Audio Technica go to Hanpin to have turntables built to a competitive price point and still leave them room for a healthy profit without any investment in r&d, paying employees, material and tooling etc with the only outlay of cash for advertising.
lico
Super Member
This whole W&F thing got me thinking. Seems like it should be easy to measure with computers these days. Anyone ever use this software? I need a 3 kHz test record, when my new Teac gets here I'll see how it does vs. a vintage deck.
http://www.tapeheads.net/showthread.php?t=32287
http://www.tapeheads.net/showthread.php?t=32287
lico
Super Member
Update. I think that platter speed app is kind of wonky. Using the PC program I've referenced I am able to get more accurate readings on my Yamaha that make more sense to me. I've measured my Yamaha P-550 at 0.03% RMS speed variation and have it dialed in where I get repeatable results. I'll be measuring the Teac as well, plus a lot of other turntables in my stash. If vintage turntables prove to be significantly better then I have way to measure. Something like this would be a good idea for a thread... post a pic of your turntable and show me the measurements instead of relying on spec sheets 40 years ago or today. We'll see how it goes.
lico
Super Member
I only have a 3000 Hz test record. If you don't use 3150 the RPM calculation will be off. But the speed measurement at 3000 Hz works. The reported variations on it are higher than using the PC app - I think it could be my phones microphone or positioning when I am trying it. Hard to say. All the apps are only to be as good as a phone's or PC clock when measuring frequency I think. Think I'll try running the analog out from a preamp directly into a line in the PC too.
My Technics SL-5200 measured slightly better than the Yamaha P-550. RMS variation in the 0.02% range. I plan on running a few more vintage tables and then the new Teac to see if the Teac is out of family , or just spec'd poorly in the manual. That's all I am after.
lico
Super Member
Any updates on this?
Meanwhile I have dialed in my W&F measurement method a bit, so I can assess my Teac when it arrives. If the naysayers are right, I'll be the first to report. My table had a mixup in shipping/availability - now due to get a Cherry one next week instead of the light wood.
To measure W&F I use the aforementioned software and connect a turntable to a Behringer UFO 202 preamp (USB to the PC). I dial in the speed as best I can, pop on the Stereo Review test disk, a play the track. Visually monitor the reported max RMS value over a 10 second interval by the software.
Some numbers
Yamaha P-550, best average is 0.037%, spec'ed at 0.015% per owners manual
Technics SL-5200, best average is 0.028%, spec'ed at 0.025%
Pioneer PL-51A, best average is 0.064%, spec'ed at 0.06%
The numbers I am seeing are making some sense per the original vendor specs, except for the Yamaha which probably over spec'ed or mine has aged a bit
Can't wait to get my Teac and measure 0.2%. We'll see!
h3ll0
Active Member
Any updates on this?
Meanwhile I have dialed in my W&F measurement method a bit, so I can assess my Teac when it arrives. If the naysayers are right, I'll be the first to report. My table had a mixup in shipping/availability - now due to get a Cherry one next week instead of the light wood.
To measure W&F I use the aforementioned software and connect a turntable to a Behringer UFO 202 preamp (USB to the PC). I dial in the speed as best I can, pop on the Stereo Review test disk, a play the track. Visually monitor the reported max RMS value over a 10 second interval by the software.
Some numbers
Yamaha P-550, best average is 0.037%, spec'ed at 0.015% per owners manual
Technics SL-5200, best average is 0.028%, spec'ed at 0.025%
Pioneer PL-51A, best average is 0.064%, spec'ed at 0.06%
The numbers I am seeing are making some sense per the original vendor specs, except for the Yamaha which probably over spec'ed or mine has aged a bit
Can't wait to get my Teac and measure 0.2%. We'll see!
I've got the non quartz-locked automatic version of the SL-5200, the SL-3300 and using the strobe over a one minute period it shifts one and a bit lines that equal about .028% speed drift using this formula. It is spec'ed at .03% wrms.
DRIFT IN PERCENT = (#ICONS DRIFT PER MIN / 3600) X 100
h3ll0
Active Member
It must be nice having quartz lock not having to futz around with pitch control every couple of albums.
lico
Super Member
Update: Got the Teac.
Quick impressions:
Nice looking turntable, lighter than I expected, fit and finish is great, arm feels good enough to me when I use it. Easy deck to use. The rubber on the arm rest could be better - for smoother arm "slide out" to a track on a record.
Not crazy about the AT95 cartridge with this table. Swapped in my AT440 MLA, sounds much better now. The AT95 doesn't have the AT "signature" sound I like, and sounds worse than a AT92E to me. Not sure the AT95 is the best match for this arm, but will try it on other decks. Will probably get another headshell to try something else. The Teac headshell is same as Denon DP-300F.
Now about wow and flutter. This is a belt drive turntable with no absolute speed control or servo. So yes... play a 3000 Hz test record and you won't see exactly 3000 Hz. In my case - about 3030, or 1% fast. The RMS variation however is much better than the specs. I'm measuring about 0.06% RMS instead of 0.2% RMS like the specs say. I took a lot of my old tables and tried the same test. The Teac can't compete with a direct drive of course, but beat an old Technics belt drive BD-3 with better specs.
Paging Dr. Tinear...
Turntable/Spec/Measured
Technics SL-5200 0.025 0.028
Onkyo CP-1046F 0.025 0.037
Yamaha P-550 0.015 0.037
Technis SL-Q200 0.012 0.038
MCS 6700 0.04 0.041
Technics SL-5 0.025 0.061
Teac TN-300 0.2 0.063
Pioneer PL-51A 0.06 0.064
Technics BD-3 0.045 0.076
Quick impressions:
Nice looking turntable, lighter than I expected, fit and finish is great, arm feels good enough to me when I use it. Easy deck to use. The rubber on the arm rest could be better - for smoother arm "slide out" to a track on a record.
Not crazy about the AT95 cartridge with this table. Swapped in my AT440 MLA, sounds much better now. The AT95 doesn't have the AT "signature" sound I like, and sounds worse than a AT92E to me. Not sure the AT95 is the best match for this arm, but will try it on other decks. Will probably get another headshell to try something else. The Teac headshell is same as Denon DP-300F.
Now about wow and flutter. This is a belt drive turntable with no absolute speed control or servo. So yes... play a 3000 Hz test record and you won't see exactly 3000 Hz. In my case - about 3030, or 1% fast. The RMS variation however is much better than the specs. I'm measuring about 0.06% RMS instead of 0.2% RMS like the specs say. I took a lot of my old tables and tried the same test. The Teac can't compete with a direct drive of course, but beat an old Technics belt drive BD-3 with better specs.
Paging Dr. Tinear...
Turntable/Spec/Measured
Technics SL-5200 0.025 0.028
Onkyo CP-1046F 0.025 0.037
Yamaha P-550 0.015 0.037
Technis SL-Q200 0.012 0.038
MCS 6700 0.04 0.041
Technics SL-5 0.025 0.061
Teac TN-300 0.2 0.063
Pioneer PL-51A 0.06 0.064
Technics BD-3 0.045 0.076
Attachments
mjw21a
Super Member
:- Status