the 126 is more "solid" and was more advanced TT......
25 responses Add your response
Grab the TD160 if its a Mk1. The TD 126 is quite complex and therefore more prone to drama. (tweaking, possible electronic failure & mechanical fussy operation, ect.) Besides, if the Td160 is a MK1 it will have a better bearing and platter than the TD126 which was made with alot of bells and whistles but not with high quality like the Td125's were before it.
Thanks to all-
I am not sure which TD 160-will check next time I get a chance...
It does seem like the complexity of the 126 could end up being expensive..(I really just wanted this as a back up to my Funk t/table ...)
Wonder if any of you know if there is a good knowledgable Thorens repair guy in Los Angeles who could give it the once over?
Nothing complex about the TD160 mk1, all you need to do is a little digging on the net about how to check things over. Try here for starters -
The TD126 though is a mechanical and electrical rats nest of parts. More trouble than its worth really. imo
The 160mk1 can be modded to go head to head with new entry level hi end tables (rega, Music Hall, Project ect.) but needs some work first (better plinth and bottom, dampening, ect). Not too mention a new arm..
If you need to repair the Thorens than you have the wrong
one. The TD 160 mkI may be cheaper than repair cost. I agree with Jeremy reg. his qualification 'entry level hi end' for 160 mkI. But by the TD 160 Super one can live the word 'entry' out. Assuming ,say, Rega 300 included. No idea about US prices but in Europe one can get both together for 400-500 Euro.
Viridian, You should add 'according to my opinion'. I use
Rega 300 on my Thorens 160 Super as do many others. This is about price-quality relationship. I have the Triplanar on my Kuzma Stabi Reference (my main system) but never thought about swiching them. BTW the qualification 'completely inappropriate arm both sonicaly and mechanicaly' despite this long description contains not a single argument against Rega. Ie only your opinion. There may be some other opinions, you know.
Nothing wrong with using a Rega RB300 with the TD160 especially since you can get solid aluminum adapter plates for them from England or from Artisan Fidelity.
Better yet, use a modded RB251 with better internal wire and upgraded end snub/counterweight.
Some of those vintage arms mentioned are low mass anyway and less compatible with many modern cartridges.
Jeremy 72, I agree with your first statement. I also bought
this solid aluminum adapter on ebay. uk. The other two statements are questionable. Because of the Rega construction it is easy to rewire the arm by yourself.
This should be cheaper then the modded RB 251.
Your latst statement is unclear because 'some' is not a name . Think of: some(one) has stolen my car. The problem seems to be obvious.
Guys-is the stock arm on the TD 160 dreadful? It looks pretty gnarly, but how does it perform?
My main t/table has a modded RB300, but I really would be getting this as a back up-I imagine the cartridge is either shot -or possibly missing...
What would be a good budget (sub $100) one to fit on the stock arm?
Ortofon? Denon perhaps??
The TP16 MkI w/ Magnesium headshell is somewhat underrated for a vintage arm imo but would need total rewiring to really sound its best at this point. It used good quality horizontal bearings and at med. 16.5g eff mass is compatible with alot of carts. Only thing is the headshell is a bottom mount only which can be a pain in the neck.
As for total arm mass, compared to say a RB300, I don't think its much lighter but could be wrong? The suspension springs on the TD160 are also adjustable, so a little weight variance in arm should be of no consequence.
My experience is the opposite of the poster above in that the RB300 at 11.5 grams eff mass being a med mass arm is compatible with a broad range of cartridges, cart mounting is also a breeze. I like the sound also but prefer a modded/upgraded RB251 over a RB300 anytime.
Hi Viridian, You can repeat your 'IMHO' as many times as
you like but it is obvious that you have very strong opinion about Rega. The question is: who cares? The Rega has already established status as the best arm for the money.
Regarding the compatibility question there are many unsolved issues. In the other threads one can read about the havy weight FR-66 s used with MM carts with fantastic
resuls ( see: Halcro in MM thread). So your 'theoretical' assumptions are refuted by experimental results. Because of the price tag (one need to save somewhere) the only thing one need to improve is the wiring. To be more specific from the collar on. This part is worthless and the ground wire is connected to one of the RCA connectors. One can change this part by installing 5 din connector in the collar tube and then use the regular phonocable of his choice. Or, if one is brave, replace the whole with a new
wiring form tags till the phono-pre.
Viridian, I have read those statements you made twice. Your
categorical statement ''The Raga 300 is a completely inappropriate arm'',etc, make no sense with your 'IMHO'.
I have never seen any negative comment about this tonearm
ever. It was btw an groundbreking design when introduced.
It was/is the most succesful tonearm ever. The designer
was able to build a factory thanks to this tonearm. And then comes Viridian who in all his 'IMHO' knows better.
I use this tonearm in my second system with Thorens 160
Super. I deed the rewire myself. One can find on the iternet all the needed info with pictures, etc,. If you can solder then you can do this job yourself.
Viridian, Anyone is entitled to like or dislike whatever
component provided he adds 'in my opinion'. But your what
I called 'categorical statement' is of different kind. Such statement pretend objective technical knowledge which is not meant to be subjective. Ie one need to address,say,
the geometry of the tonearm, the bearings, the construction,etc. and proof that there are shortcomings in the tonearm. This technical part is not supposed to be subjective. Say 'the geometry of this arm is IMHO wrong'. This last statement make no sense.