Thorens 125!

Discussion in 'rec.audio.pro' started by Max Metral, Jul 30, 2003.

  1. Techmeister

    Techmeister Guest

    WHERE do you come up with this ridiculous statement?

    Special Relativity is irrelevant to this discussion. Did you actually PASS Physics
    101 ??

    This is NEWTONIAN physics here, DUH! Special Relativity my BUTT!

    The mechanics are drastically different between the two systems, hence there are
    certain "inherent" differences. in theory, each COULD be overcome. It just happens
    no-one ever has.

    the AKG was a good example of a MM that sounds much like a MC but lacks some of the
    resonance flaws. i refer to the P8e and later models. Not sure if they even make
    them any more...

    db


    > An inherent difference between "coil stationary and magnet moving" and
    > "magnet stationary and coil moving" would violate Special Relativity.
    >
    > Are you really asserting that all m-m units are variable reluctance?
    >
    > James Boyk
    >


    --
    David 'db' Butler, Consultant
    Acoustics by db
    "...all the rest are just brokers"
    now on the web at http://www.db-engineering.com
    Boston, Mass
    Phone 617 969-0585 Fax 617 964-1590
  2. Techmeister

    Techmeister Guest

    Always found Denon ANYTHING kind of irritating and harsh on the top, FWIW

    > >An interesting topic, but I hesitate to extrapolate too far from
    > >personal experience. Probably best just to try one; they're
    > >common and cheap enough.

    >
    > I have not tried any of the current Denons at all. I probably should.
    > --scott


    --
    David 'db' Butler, Consultant
    Acoustics by db
    "...all the rest are just brokers"
    now on the web at http://www.db-engineering.com
    Boston, Mass
    Phone 617 969-0585 Fax 617 964-1590
  3. Techmeister

    Techmeister Guest

    No, I mean the high end P8-* series, VERY high-res, sound like moving coils but
    aren't and don't ring.

    How about Ortofon ??

    David

    > No, I've never listened to an AKG cart. I think I have an old one around
    > here, maybe a model 520, or that's the number that comes to mind.
    >
    > --
    > Stephen Sank, Owner & Ribbon Mic Restorer
    > Talking Dog Transducer Company
    > http://stephensank.com
    > 5517 Carmelita Drive N.E.
    > Albuquerque, New Mexico [87111]
    > 505-332-0336
    > Auth. Nakamichi & McIntosh servicer
    > Payments preferred through Paypal.com
    > "Techmeister" <dbNOSPAMtech@broadviewnet.net> wrote in message
    > news:dbNOSPAMtech-606E32.18155731072003@news.easynews.com...
    > > Well, we agree on the Stantons. I am surprised to see you have such a bad

    > impression
    > > of the Grado, given that you like the Shure.
    > >
    > > have you ever heard any of the AKG cartridges ?
    > >
    > > David
    > >
    > > In article <bgc2no$p5p$1@reader2.nmix.net>, "Stephen Sank"

    > <bk11@thuntek.net>
    > > wrote:
    > >
    > > > While the Stanton 681EEE is not nearly as brutal on a record as the

    > 680EL &
    > > > etc., it's still a dreadful sounding cartridge, to my ears, at least.

    > Top
    > > > end is not even remotely close to as smooth & detailed as the Shure, and
    > > > overall very unmusical. I'll take a well used V15-II over the Stanton.
    > > > And I have heard the best & worst Grados on very properly setup &

    > appropiate
    > > > arms, and I still think they suck.
    > > >
    > > > --
    > > > Stephen Sank, Owner & Ribbon Mic Restorer
    > > > Talking Dog Transducer Company
    > > > http://stephensank.com


    --
    David 'db' Butler, Consultant
    Acoustics by db
    "...all the rest are just brokers"
    now on the web at http://www.db-engineering.com
    Boston, Mass
    Phone 617 969-0585 Fax 617 964-1590
  4. Rob Adelman

    Rob Adelman Guest

    Techmeister wrote:

    > Always found Denon ANYTHING kind of irritating and harsh on the top, FWIW


    Well I disagree. I have a Denon cassette deck which sounds great for
    recording and playback. I have had good luck with Denon cassettes
    (though I don't know who actually made them). And I have used the Denon
    high output moving coil cartridges and was please with the tonal balance.

    -Rob

    >
    >>>An interesting topic, but I hesitate to extrapolate too far from
    >>>personal experience. Probably best just to try one; they're
    >>>common and cheap enough.

    >>
    >>I have not tried any of the current Denons at all. I probably should.
    >>--scott

    >
    >
  5. Scott Dorsey

    Scott Dorsey Guest

    Techmeister <dbNOSPAMtech@broadviewnet.net> wrote:
    >what lathe and cutter?


    I'm running an ancient Scully with a Westrex head. RCA amps, with the
    7027 output tubes replaced with Sovtek 5881WXGTs for a bit more headroom.

    >You never told me you were a vinyl junky ?


    So, send the ten bucks and get the RAP LP, which was cut in my back
    bedroom.

    >A 681, shades of 1975, dude!


    Sadly, a lot of the DJs out there are using things far worse than the 681,
    and if you're cutting for that market (and most vinyl IS being cut for
    that market), you need to make sure they can play the stuff.

    The RAP LP has one cut that cannot be played on a 681 without breakup.
    --scott

    --
    "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."
  6. Fill X

    Fill X Guest

    >Line contact styli are a huge win for me for transcription work, because
    >they track worn records much better than styli with more contact area.
    >So measured distortion on a square wave test may be higher, but the actual
    >distortion on a typical pressing is lower because of the reduced tracking
    >error.


    this is why I like the lyra cartridges.
    >
    >I have not tried any of the current Denons at all. I probably should.
    >--scott


    They are pretty nice and the 103 is a bargain.


    P h i l i p

    ______________________________

    "I'm too fucking busy and vice-versa"

    - Dorothy Parker
  7. James Boyk

    James Boyk Guest

    Chris Hornbeck wrote:

    >>An inherent difference between "coil stationary and magnet moving" and "magnet stationary and coil moving" would violate Special Relativity.


    > I'm guessing you really mean Maxwell here, but I get your point.


    No, I mean what I said. Special Relativity says that there's no fixed
    frame of reference, which is what would be required for m-c to differ
    from m-m.


    > I just don't agree that it's applicable. Do you remember the
    > Lirpa cartridge that was a little car riding around on a fixed
    > record? Works the same, but not the best engineering choice.


    Right. That's what I'm saying. It's a matter of engineering details, not
    of fundamental principle. In terms of fundamentals, there can be no
    difference between the two types.


    >>Are you really asserting that all m-m units are variable reluctance?


    > Yes. And will be until magnets can be made lighter than coils.


    I'd love to see a citation on this.

    James Boyk
  8. James Boyk

    James Boyk Guest

    Techmeister wrote:
    > Special Relativity is irrelevant to this discussion. Did you actually PASS Physics 101 ??


    Special Relativity says, among other things, that there's no absolute
    frame of reference, and therefore in this very specific case, there's no
    inherent difference between m-c and m-m. In both case, the coil and
    magnetic field move relative to each other. In neither case is either of
    them Absolutely Stationary.

    By the way, for what it's worth, when I first realized this simple
    truth, I did check it with a Caltech colleague who's a physics professor
    in the field of theoretical particle physics, and he confirmed my view
    of the matter. Admittedly, it's a little unusual to invoke Special
    Relativity in what appears to be an everyday situation; but in fact it's
    necessary.

    James Boyk
  9. James Boyk

    James Boyk Guest

    Kalman Rubinson wrote:
    > Except that there is no 'stock' Thorens arm on this one. It's a
    > relatively massy Sony.



    The stock arm on my Thorens 126 was a fairly poor unit with, among other
    things, a metal finger lift that was a separate piece screwed to the
    headshell and which vibrated and grunged up the sound. Replacing this
    arm with an SME III (current when I bought the Thorens) made an immense
    improvement. The turntable itself is very good, though undoubtedly not
    in the highest category. I'd love to have the gonzo extravaganza Thorens
    or SME tables in my lab. Once a year I startle my students by playing
    them an Lp on our quite modest setup and they fall over at the
    superiority of the sound to what they're used to.

    James Boyk
  10. Stephen Sank

    Stephen Sank Guest

    Can't say I have ever heard an Ortofon that I didn't think was over-bright &
    less than smooth. And I used to sell them, so I know the line pretty well.
    I'll have to dig out the AKG cart/carts that I have & see what models I've
    got. Not sure I don't have a P8 series.

    --
    Stephen Sank, Owner & Ribbon Mic Restorer
    Talking Dog Transducer Company
    http://stephensank.com
    5517 Carmelita Drive N.E.
    Albuquerque, New Mexico [87111]
    505-332-0336
    Auth. Nakamichi & McIntosh servicer
    Payments preferred through Paypal.com
    "Techmeister" <dbNOSPAMtech@broadviewnet.net> wrote in message
    news:dbNOSPAMtech-50CCB8.18322901082003@news.usenetserver.com...
    > No, I mean the high end P8-* series, VERY high-res, sound like moving

    coils but
    > aren't and don't ring.
    >
    > How about Ortofon ??
    >
    > David
    >
    > > No, I've never listened to an AKG cart. I think I have an old one

    around
    > > here, maybe a model 520, or that's the number that comes to mind.
    > >
    > > --
    > > Stephen Sank, Owner & Ribbon Mic Restorer
    > > Talking Dog Transducer Company
    > > http://stephensank.com
    > > 5517 Carmelita Drive N.E.
    > > Albuquerque, New Mexico [87111]
    > > 505-332-0336
    > > Auth. Nakamichi & McIntosh servicer
    > > Payments preferred through Paypal.com
    > > "Techmeister" <dbNOSPAMtech@broadviewnet.net> wrote in message
    > > news:dbNOSPAMtech-606E32.18155731072003@news.easynews.com...
    > > > Well, we agree on the Stantons. I am surprised to see you have such a

    bad
    > > impression
    > > > of the Grado, given that you like the Shure.
    > > >
    > > > have you ever heard any of the AKG cartridges ?
    > > >
    > > > David
    > > >
    > > > In article <bgc2no$p5p$1@reader2.nmix.net>, "Stephen Sank"

    > > <bk11@thuntek.net>
    > > > wrote:
    > > >
    > > > > While the Stanton 681EEE is not nearly as brutal on a record as the

    > > 680EL &
    > > > > etc., it's still a dreadful sounding cartridge, to my ears, at

    least.
    > > Top
    > > > > end is not even remotely close to as smooth & detailed as the Shure,

    and
    > > > > overall very unmusical. I'll take a well used V15-II over the

    Stanton.
    > > > > And I have heard the best & worst Grados on very properly setup &

    > > appropiate
    > > > > arms, and I still think they suck.
    > > > >
    > > > > --
    > > > > Stephen Sank, Owner & Ribbon Mic Restorer
    > > > > Talking Dog Transducer Company
    > > > > http://stephensank.com

    >
    > --
    > David 'db' Butler, Consultant
    > Acoustics by db
    > "...all the rest are just brokers"
    > now on the web at http://www.db-engineering.com
    > Boston, Mass
    > Phone 617 969-0585 Fax 617 964-1590
    >
  11. James Boyk

    James Boyk Guest

    Stephen Sank wrote: Can't say I have ever heard an Ortofon that I didn't
    think was over-bright & less than smooth.

    I didn't know the regular line, but I did know their top m-c cartridge
    as of about 1980 very well and it was ultra-smooth and not overbright.
    Very neutral tonally; very delicate. But very low-output; and we were
    told that that was not an inherent requirement but was a bow to certain
    consumers who wanted the output lower! Was it the MC-20? It was a very
    expensive unit that came in a sort of attache case and I think came with
    a subscription to a periodical put out by Ortofon also. It was really a
    superb unit.

    James Boyk
  12. Harvey Gerst

    Harvey Gerst Guest

    James Boyk <boyk@caltech.edu> wrote:

    >Stephen Sank wrote: Can't say I have ever heard an Ortofon that I didn't
    >think was over-bright & less than smooth.
    >
    >I didn't know the regular line, but I did know their top m-c cartridge
    >as of about 1980 very well and it was ultra-smooth and not overbright.
    >Very neutral tonally; very delicate. But very low-output; and we were
    >told that that was not an inherent requirement but was a bow to certain
    >consumers who wanted the output lower! Was it the MC-20? It was a very
    >expensive unit that came in a sort of attache case and I think came with
    >a subscription to a periodical put out by Ortofon also. It was really a
    >superb unit.
    >
    >James Boyk


    Didn't Paul Weathers make a stereo cartridge that never caught on?

    Harvey Gerst
    Indian Trail Recording Studio
    http://www.ITRstudio.com/
  13. On Fri, 01 Aug 2003 23:58:43 -0500, Harvey Gerst
    <harvey@ITRstudio.com> wrote:

    >Didn't Paul Weathers make a stereo cartridge that never caught on?


    He made 2. A condenser PU that I could not afford and a ceramic (with
    adapter to simulate a MM PU) which I could. It was not very good.

    Kal
  14. On Fri, 01 Aug 2003 16:17:34 -0700, James Boyk <boyk@caltech.edu>
    wrote:

    >Kalman Rubinson wrote:
    >> Except that there is no 'stock' Thorens arm on this one. It's a
    >> relatively massy Sony.

    >
    >
    >The stock arm on my Thorens 126 was a fairly poor unit with, among other
    >things, a metal finger lift that was a separate piece screwed to the
    >headshell and which vibrated and grunged up the sound. Replacing this
    >arm with an SME III (current when I bought the Thorens) made an immense
    >improvement.


    The SMEIII quickly lost favor among audiophiles as the trend quickly
    swung to more massive MCs which did not suit it unless modified. I
    still use one with its perfect matches: the Ortofon SME30H and Shure
    MV30HE integrated armwand/PUs.

    Kal
  15. Mike Rivers

    Mike Rivers Guest

    In article <f5hmiv4mttqd8grcm8vphgu58i6c3abvfo@4ax.com> hargerst@airmail.net writes:

    > Didn't Paul Weathers make a stereo cartridge that never caught on?


    The Stereoramic. I had one. It sounded pretty good, but then what did
    I know at the time? I was still using home built amplifiers and
    speaker cabinets, and I had a Weathers turntable, FM (mono) cartridge
    and arm, so the Stereoramic fit without modification.

    It was a ceramic element, and it came with in-line equalizers
    (integrators - probalby just an R-C filter) to convert the linear
    displacement-to-voltage response of a piezoelectric element to
    velocity-to-voltage response that a phono input expected from a
    magnetic cartridge.



    --
    I'm really Mike Rivers - (mrivers@d-and-d.com)
  16. Eric Toline

    Eric Toline Guest

    Re: Thorens 125!

    Group: rec.audio.pro Date: Fri, Aug 1, 2003, 11:58pm (EDT-1) From:
    harvey@ITRstudio.com (Harvey=A0Gerst)

    Didn't Paul Weathers make a stereo cartridge that never caught on?
    Harvey Gerst
    =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
    =3D=3D=3D=3D
    Why does that name remind me of a Weathers FM cartridge?

    Eric
  17. On Sat, 2 Aug 2003 11:22:40 -0400 (EDT), Audioetc@webtv.net (Eric
    Toline) wrote:


    >Why does that name remind me of a Weathers FM cartridge?


    Yes but in mono.

    Kal
  18. James Boyk

    James Boyk Guest

    For a really serious discussion, we could talk about the Thorens 224,
    which played both sides of a stack of Lps. I saw one at the old Audio
    Lab store in Cambridge.

    James Boyk
  19. On Sat, 02 Aug 2003 16:40:19 -0700, James Boyk <boyk@caltech.edu>
    wrote:

    >For a really serious discussion, we could talk about the Thorens 224,
    >which played both sides of a stack of Lps. I saw one at the old Audio
    >Lab store in Cambridge.


    I pulled maintainance on one once. Twenty five years and I can
    still taste the metallic fear....

    Chris Hornbeck,
    guyville{at}aristotle{dot}net

    "But you only need to hate these things once, then you figure it out
    and things are all right."

    Mike Rivers
  20. James Boyk

    James Boyk Guest

    Chris Hornbeck wrote:
    > I pulled maintainance on one once. Twenty five years and I can
    > still taste the metallic fear....


    Yes, it looked formidable.

    Then there's the story about the Sony model which played one side of an
    Lp and then flipped it and played the other side. The "flippers" were
    two grippers operated by DC motors. I heard that at the demo, one of the
    motors had been wired backwards and so the flippers acted in opposite
    directions and broke the Lp. It's hard to believe that the record would
    break, though; more likely it would just fight the flippers to a
    standstill. A shame not to be able to believe a great story.

    James Boyk

Share This Page