Teac TN-300 just say no?

[Dr Tinear]

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

What are you using for a flutter meter? I sincerely hope you're not quoting numbers from some cell phone app. If your numbers are accurate, the only two surprises on the list are the worse-than-spec performance of the Technics BD-3, which could be due to a bad belt, and the considerably better-than-spec performance of the Teac TN-300. The Teac's 1% speed error is a bit unsettling, but not out of line with the numbers that have been reported for several Rega models. After reading your post, I'd probably audition the TN-300 if I were in the market for a new turntable at that price point.

 

[h3ll0]

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.

Did you see the other thread by tharbamar about the Teac? You can adjust the speed via speed pots underneath.

 

[MacNoob]

Turntable/Spec/Measured

Technics SL-5200 0.025 0.028

I like to see that the good 'ole DD Technics still comes ever so close to meeting spec even after 35 years.

Re the pitch control on non-quartz lock decks - I haven't touched pitch on my garage sale SL-3200 since I deoxited the controls. No significant drift visible on the strobe.

Good on ya for doing this comparison for us.

 

[Aerobat]

Now if you could record some solo piano and oboe music we could give it the ultimate test!

 

[Tharbamar]

I can help you do that even though I don't listen to a lot of piano heavy music, most of my collections are rock, r&b, soul and heavy metal.

But I do have some Diana Krall, Anne Bison, Shelby Lynne, Patricia Barber and Miles Davis.
Let me know if you guys want any particular track to play and recorded from what I have, so I can uploaded HD video to YouTube for your reference.

Best regards.

 

[RamblinE]

Wow. Great thread to read through so far. Say, any conformation on whether or not this is indeed a Hanpin? I always get a kick out of how McCarthy people get over that very topic. Is it or isn't it? In luie of proof that it is we're just going to ASSume.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Bill Ashton]

I was very pleased with my Rega RP1 until I played "That Boy" off Meet The Beatles...unlistenable due to the wow/flutter...at the risk of hijacking this thread, perhaps that might be a track to audition?

Yeah, I know it isn't piano or oboe music...

 

[lico]

Did you see the other thread by tharbamar about the Teac? You can adjust the speed via speed pots underneath.

Hadn't gotten that far yet - but did tonight. Was able to adjust the 3000 Hz test record tone down to around 3005 Hz. The adjustment pot on the Teac is certainly not a consumer friendly feature, located on the bottom and requiring several iterations of lift turtable, adjust, play record, etc.

 

[lico]

What are you using for a flutter meter? I sincerely hope you're not quoting numbers from some cell phone app.

I used some free download referenced higher in this thread, and run the audio into by PC using a USB phono preamp.

Attached is what it showed for Teac tonight after adjusting pitch speed closer. Note I am not too concerned about total accuracy here - just wanted something easy to use and to characterize a range of tables looking for out of family results that would show a new turntable is worse than a vintage table. The Teac isn't. In fact I think it's pretty darn good for a belt drive table, don't you?

 

[Decibel_116]

Thanks to the OP for making a very good and well-intentioned comparison of a new turntable with questionable specs to some established vintage turntables. Back in the heyday of turntables, the performance of a turntable could be in large part determined by a quick look at the specifications. You could rely on those specification numbers because standards were established by the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and manufacturers were held to those standards. During those days there were so many choices for turntables that today's offerings pale in comparison. A review of specifications would allow a buyer to down-select to a manageable number of turntables to actually go and audition. Well, the market sure has changed, but this old guy has not changed all that much. I still rely on specifications - or better yet actual measurements - to help determine which turntables are within the performance range I am interested in. I also know that specifications do not tell the whole story or determine everything about performance - especially sound quality. That's why you audition before you buy, which is almost impossible these days. There is no question from this engineer's perspective that these numbers, when measured against a known standard, are extremely useful for evaluating the performance of a turntable. So, for guys or gals like me, its important to see good numbers for wow&flutter, speed drift/accuracy, and rumble. I really like the way this TEAC turntable looks. It looks like a real winner, but looks can be deceiving. Frankly, the published specifications are a concern. So much of a concern that I would not even consider purchasing one. When I see a thread like this one; where an AK member is doing their level best to make an honest comparison, it give me hope that maybe some of these new "entry level" (for lack of a better term) turntables actually have decent performance. The FTC doesn't enforce ratings of stereo equipment anymore. That leaves today's "specifications" in the category of marketing hype for me. Heck, quite a few turntable manufacturers do not even provide specifications. We are left to read subjective reviews that have no measurement data and are mostly all positive and amount to more marketing hype.

Once again, thanks to the OP for the comparison effort. I salute your efforts. It will be interesting to see if the wow and flutter is actually audible.

 

[lico]

Well, I did it mainly because I wouldn't want to own a turntable with 0.2% W&F either. There are lot of experts around here who know a lot about turntables - and when they start expressing opinions you have to listen. I'm not a newbie either, though and have doubts on some things.

OTOH... the AK turntable forum should be a great place to get information on new products, not just old thrift finds, CL finds, and Technics SL-1200s. Newbies walk into this place all the time and get warned that anything new is bad, and old is always good. That's BS.

I'd love to see some data on a Onkyo CP-1050 for instance (it's direct drive and my old Onkyo was one of the best performers I tried). Or the highly regarded U Turn Orbit. Not sure how the Orbit became highly regarded actually. I might order one and give it some spins

 

[jkilla]

Agreed, major respect for the OP to take the time to measure and do comparisons using these tools. Flawed as they may or may not be, the hope is that if the same methods are applied across the board, we can at least establish some kind of relative comparison.

Now, additionally we can apply the ear test which will tell us if things like WOW/flutter are audible.

Appreciate this in contrast with others who refuse to do any sort of measurement and make claims.

 

[ranch 22b]

Great thread. Thanks lico!

 

[majick47]

Lico do order and evaluate a U-Turn Orbit, in short order it got highly regarded for being an affordable ($200) quality built in the USA no frills entry level belt drive table that can hold its own up against other entry level tables (Teak TN-300 $400).

 

[91r100gs]

Lico, Thanks for the info

BTW, how are the headphones?

 

[hotdogst]

Great thread! Thanks lico

 

[iLUVanalog]

Lico do order and evaluate a U-Turn Orbit, in short order it got highly regarded for being an affordable ($200) quality built in the USA no frills entry level belt drive table that can hold its own up against other entry level tables (Teak TN-300 $400).

Do you spell it incorrectly on purpose?...or do you not know it's spelled Teac?

 

[Garven]

Lico do order and evaluate a U-Turn Orbit, in short order it got highly regarded for being an affordable ($200) quality built in the USA no frills entry level belt drive table that can hold its own up against other entry level tables (Teak TN-300 $400).

I'm surprised the Wow & Flutter Gang aren't out in full force dumping on the Orbit as its specs are nearly as bad as the Teac (0.175%W&F versus 0.2W&F, which as we know from this thread is much higher than measured reality, in one case anyway).

And those Hanpins some love so much to hate come in at even less than the Orbit!

 

[lico]

Lico, Thanks for the info

BTW, how are the headphones?

Haven't given them a good extended listening yet, but they sound decent so far. Speaking of headphones, I think the Marshall Majors (daughter has those) are very nice, so I want to compare/contrast.

 

[lico]

Lico do order and evaluate a U-Turn Orbit, in short order it got highly regarded for being an affordable ($200) quality built in the USA no frills entry level belt drive table that can hold its own up against other entry level tables (Teak TN-300 $400).

Hmmm.... but for $200 I can get a nice cartridge and headshell for my Teac. We'll see.