I mentioned the Music Hall specifically because of its relationship to Pro-Ject. It uses a Pro-Ject tonearm and would have some similar sound characteristics. Upgrade parts like counterweights, the Speed Box, platters, etc. will generally match.
Whether it’s a clone would apparently depend on your definition of the word. I’d say a clone is the same. There is no Pro-Ject model like the Music Hall MMF-7.1. My reason for mentioning the MMF-7.1 in particular is that the motor is not physically attached to turntable. That does a terrific job of isolating vibration and the motor could be replaced without any tools.
Further on Pro-Ject and Music Hall – What many people don’t realize is that Pro-Ject isn’t building turntables. They have them built to their specifications at a factory that has been building turntables since long before Pro-Ject existed. Music Hall is Roy Hall doing the same...at the same factory...although the major parts like the tonearm, motor and subplatter were made for Pro-Ject.
If you’re considering a Technics, you really need to audition one. The sound difference between Technics and Pro-Ject is huge. I bought one after having been convinced by the forums. It was inexpensive on the used market and I knew I could sell it if I didn’t like it. And I really didn’t like it. If you subscribe to the belief that a Pro-Ject sounds musical, then to me the Technics was an un-musical turntable – a sound that to me seemed to match up in a bad way with its tank-like build. I’m not saying this to bash Technics. I know the fans of that turntable can argue about its superiority until long after I’ve gone to bed. But you said you like the Pro-Ject sound. I too like the Pro-Ject sound. Given that, the Technics is quite a departure - one that I wouldn't get into without a good long audition or a used turntable that I could re-sell without a big loss.
The thread on the motor problems is what originally convinced me that I would have problems but I have none.