Thorens 125 Vs. Linn Sondek = 0 ?

[don...@vaxb.mdx.ac.uk]

To settle an argument/debate, was the Thorens 125x copied by Iver X of
Linn to produce the first examples of Sondek's ? Just curious....
Don

[GMGraves]

I dunno, they are similar, aren't they? I suspect however, that the
impetus and inspiration for the Sondeck was probably the Edgar Vilchur's
AR table. They are even more alike. If memory serves, the Thorens TD125
had an AC servo motor in it powered by an on-board oscillator. The
Sondecks used Hysterisis-Synchronous motors powered by line frequency, ala
the AR.

George Graves

[JJMcF]

The Linn is similar to the Thorens TD160 and its predecessors. The TD125
is a much more expensive design with a large heavy subchassis (not the
stamped tin thing on the Linn) and a motor powered not by the power line
(as in the original Linn, the AR, and the TD160) but by a Wien-bridge
controlled ac oscillator. The TD125II replaced this with a servo design,
which purists like less.

[Jonathan Ives, Oracle UK]

I would think the LP12 is closer to the TD150 Thorens deck the TD124 had a
strange clutch arrangement where the platter was dropped onto the spinning
idler.

The TD150 was a good deck usually let down by a poor arm. My father had one
for most of the 70's before upgrading to the TD160/SME. The TD150 is still in
regular service with the person who bought it from him.

As to whether Ivor 'borrowed' from Thorens I don't want to get into that
debate - I remember what happened to Salmon Rushdie !

Cheers
jives
_______________________________________________________________________
Jonathan Ives, Oracle UK ji...@uk.oracle.com

[Mark]

What made the Linn unique was the level of attention paid to the
mechanical engineering and production of the components, i.e.
tolerance of parts.

--
Mark

[Bruce H. McIntosh]

In article <3tguvt$n...@tolstoy.lerc.nasa.gov>, jj...@aol.com says...

The only problem I have with my 125 (other than the dust cover getting
cracked when I had the 'table shipped) is that it's really touchy.
It's sitting on a heavy stand (cabinet with walls of doubled 3/4 birch
plywood). The least little accidental contact sets the platter and
tonearm to jiggling, and (generally) the needle to skipping. With a
toddler in the vicinity, it makes for very nervous listening :-).

Still and all, I'm quite happy with my ancient 125. Which brings up a
question: where might I obtain the little antiskate weight for a first
series SME tonearm? It disappeared some years ago, before I obtained
the table.

[Heikki Pesonen]

I just bought a slightly damaged Thorens Concrete phonograph
from a shop. It has the SME 3009 Ser III arm.
"Concretete" means that it has a about 10 kg:s block of
some kind of concrete!

Does anybody have the same machine?
(I KNOW it=B4s not High-End but it costed moore
than the other things I have for Hi-Fi.)

[Jean C. Crozel]

> I just bought a slightly damaged Thorens Concrete phonograph
> from a shop. It has the SME 3009 Ser III arm.
> "Concretete" means that it has a about 10 kg:s block of
> some kind of concrete!
>
> Does anybody have the same machine?

+++++
many people thought that an heavy cabinet could avoild vibrations. So they
builded concrete bodies, like i did in my first TD design, i was 15 years
old.
TD 125 subframe, bearring and motor are not bad items at all, but the
assembly in concrete is surely not a good idea. Concerning the SME 3, it
is for me onely a plastic arm that could have been given free with hifi
magazines for exemple. It's a terribly bad tone arm, and in addition you
have to be an ingeneer to set it up : forget it for ever if you expect
some musical results. good luke.

[JJMcF]

Re: badmouthing the SME 3 tonearm. This arm was designed specifically to
optimize the results with high-compliance cartridges and shouldn't be
judged on any other basis. Try it with a Shure V or Audio-Technica
ATL-170; heavy, stiff moving coil cartridges are totally inappropriate.