Why Should The Legendary Td124 Be Better Than My Td320 Mkii

[gillsev]

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=220557012047&ssPageName=STRK:MESOX:IT

She sold yesterday for $699. Now I have money to get my TD124.
Woohoo!!!

[qanh]

As we now know, future offerings from Thorens, or anyone else, would not be of this level of build quality.

To me these turntables are priceless. Even at today's inflated second hand prices, you couldn't reproduce one of these for that amount.

-Steve

This is very true of today's Thorens ... if it is still worth the "Thorens" name on it.

I thought you might be interested to read this guy's comments on Audiogon about today's Thorens, i.e. the Thorens TD295 Mk4 turntable ...

http://forum.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/fr.pl?ranlg&1120421948&read&keyw&zzthorens

Hi all,

could anyone give me more information about this one- TD 295 mk4 ?

Is this true of that this is Project - Thorens product ? so I cannot find data of tonearm TP41 instead of TP40 in older version 295, eg mk2, mk3.

Thank you and regards,

QA.

[raphaelmabo]

could anyone give me more information about this one- TD 295 mk4 ?
Is this true of that this is Project - Thorens product ? so I cannot find data of tonearm TP41 instead of TP40 in older version 295, eg mk2, mk3.

The TD 295 replaced the Thorens TD 290, which was the first Thorens with a Pro-Ject tonearm and on a solid plinth instead of a suspension chassi. The suspended chassi was simply too expensive to produce, and Thorens in Germany was filed for bankruptcy in 2000 but the Thorens Export company based in Switzerland (owner of the patents and designs) survived and found a new investor.

The tone-arm in the TD 295 is a version of the the Pro-Ject 9 with a "fishy thingie" anti-skating. This tone-arm is also used on higher end Pro-Jects as well as several Music Hall turntables (like the Music Hall MMF 5.1, which sells for a similar price as the Thorens). You can find information about this tone arm at the http://www.project-audio.com/main.php?list=tonearms&cat=tonearms&lang=en Note this is not the 9cc Evolution but the standard version. To my knowledge the only difference between the Mk III tonearm and the Mk IV is the material, the Mk III having a metal tube and the MK IV uses the carbon fibre tube.

The plattern and the dust cover is also sourced from Pro-Ject. What makes the Thorens stand out is that it has built in electronic speed control with a switch on the top. The competition from Music Hall and Pro-Ject are all manual, where you change speeds by moving the belt on the drive pulley after you have lifted the plattern. The Thorens also features an opto-electronic auto-shutoff mechanism, so it is semi-automatic. The Music Hall 5.1 and the Pro-Ject Xpression are fully manual.

This convenience unfortunately raises the price for the product.
The Music Hall 5.1 with it's double plinth is actually more advanced and sounds better if fitted with the same cartridge, but then it is much more fiddly to use. Thorens is by no means bad sounding, it has a pleasant and solid sound and well worth the money it sells for in Europe - especially if you want some convenience. It is clearly better than the all-automatic turntables at lower price points or even some semi automatics one. Comparing with a Dual 505 this is an upgrade.

Even if some parts are sourced from Pro-Ject, does this make this Thorens a Pro-Ject? It is common for many turntable makers of today to source components from other makers - Pro-Ject tonearms is commonly found on many turntables, and so are Rega tonearms without the turntables are called Pro-Ject or Rega turntables. SME can also be found on turntables without being a SME turntable.

Thorens also fits Rega tone arms on some of their products.
The TD 295 is a Thorens design with some Pro-Ject sourced components. It is not identical to a Pro-Ject model, and has less in common with Pro-Ject than, for example, Music Hall which uses more components from Pro-Ject and is also made by Pro-Ject. (only the plinth design differs between Music Hall and Pro-Jects own models). Thorens also uses their own plinth design, and the motor has Thorens designed/specified bearings. The actual motor is purchased from Pro-Ject. The TD 295 takes Thorens standard belt, also used on many other Thorens turntables.

Thorens do have one specially developed tone arm themselves and it's used on the new TD 309 turntable, EISA awards winner two years in a row. The TD 309 is a genuine Thorens and is everything Thorens, everything is specially designed for Thorens.

However, Thorens no longer owns a factory. They don't make their own turntables. Not since 2000, those operations was filed for bankruptcy. So Thorens relies on the manufacturing talent of others. Their turntables are made in Germany, the lower end models are made in the same factory that still makes the Dual turntables. The higher end models has various manufacturers, I am unsure who exactly makes them.

I am also unsure if the TD 295 is made by Pro-Ject in the Czeh republic, or if it's made in Germany.

[raphaelmabo]

Anoter difference is that the TD 295 uses a DC motor - the Pro-Ject and Music Hall uses a less expensive synchronous motor, which is a simpler design. The Thorens needs the DC motor because it has speed control, but it is not needed on the Pro-Ject / Music Hall.

[rkay5]

Anoter difference is that the TD 295 uses a DC motor - the Pro-Ject and Music Hall uses a less expensive synchronous motor, which is a simpler design. The Thorens needs the DC motor because it has speed control, but it is not needed on the Pro-Ject / Music Hal

The TD295 doesn't use a DC motor it use low voltage synchronous AC motor.And it's made by Pro-ject.

[ilkka313]

The plinth construction on 300 series is bad, it's too springy. I had one of these, bass response was poor no matter what cartridge I tried. Older Thorens models are much better designed and made.

[raphaelmabo]

The TD295 doesn't use a DC motor it use low voltage synchronous AC motor.And it's made by Pro-ject.

You are right, my mistake. It uses a 10 pole synchronous motor. It is the 309 that uses the advanced DC motor. I mixed them up. Sorry for that.

[raphaelmabo]

The plinth construction on 300 series is bad, it's too springy. I had one of these, bass response was poor no matter what cartridge I tried. Older Thorens models are much better designed and made.

The 300 series does not have the same plinth, for example the 320 and 321 has a split plinth connected with springs. You can see the split if you look at it from above, it is the line in the middle of the deck that goes from the left to right all. This decouples these two parts from each other. The lower 3xx-models has a simpler construction with a sub-chassi on springs which is based upon the TD 160 idea but enhanced.

You may have come across one that was in need of service. The leaf springs can be adjusted. If they are "too springy" then something is simply not correct. Normally I say that a 3xx-table requires lower maintenance and is more fuss free than the older 70's tables, but of course anything can happen even to a 3xx if one is unfortunate.

I wouldn't call the bass response poor (not with a correctly adjusted plinth) and that older Thorens models was better designed and made, not if you compare with the 70's bodies. The 60's bodies was different but then they were much more expensive to produce and used a different mechanism, which this thread also states. But then, there are always those who feels "the older the better". New constructions, new materials, new ideas, changes the look and feel.

Here is a review of the TD320 from Hi-Fi Choice.
http://www.theanalogdept.com/images/spp ... eFeb89.jpg