Some Stuff For Sale

[Mike Lindsey]

"So this appears to be a very high compliance cartridge (30) and would require a low mass tonearm to mate up with it."

I reread this and am confused. If the tonearm is high mass, as the 125's is, then wouldn't that require a high compliance cartridge? I'm thinking of compliance as the 'springyness' of the cantilever suspension. In auto terms a heavier car would need stiffer springs, a lighter car with still springs would be a horribly bumpy ride (not good for LP's), and a heavy car with light springs wouldn't handle very well either and might bottom out.

High mass tonearms require low-compliance cartridges. There is a webpage on this somewhere and I will find it and link it later.

I really liked my Stanton line of cartridges but perhaps times, tastes, and my hearing have changed. I used them mostly because the very short cantilever was good for back-cueing, something I did when recording LP to cassette. I'm thinking the longer, more delicate looking cantilevers might have better stereo separation and high frequency output.... Am I getting this stuff right? It's a brave new world for me, as Silversport pointed out.

This I can't answer but I bet Max or Scott could.

An alternate solution to selling the B&O and replacing it (probably an additional $100), would be to keep the B&O and spend more dollars on the SME 3009 tonearm, which would really bring the unit up to snuff.

I would play what you have for right now just to have a benchmark. Maybe after a few months start thinking about mating a cartridge that matches your arm first. I can tell you a Denon DL-103 (for only $150) would sound fantastic. I know this because I have this cartridge myself. Then, when funds are available, go ahead and get a SME 3009 to mate up with the DL-103. That is another great combination, and I feel a better arm than the Thorens.

But if it will operate and I won't be harming my LP's any, I'll follow my own advice on not modifying for a bit and just enjoy it as is. There's nothing like tearing a new toy apart on the first day, right?

Couldn't have said it any better. []

BTW, just getting ready for a big BBQ so won't be able to get the boxes, but I will get them on my way home from work tomorrow.

TTYL this evening.

Mike

PS. Bill, I couldn't agree more. I have had so much help on this board that I try and give back whenever possible.

[colterphoto1]

Mike,

Thanks for the note but now I'm more confused.

Lets start at the beginning.

Thorens arm HM and B&O HC are bad match

so keep arm HM and get a LC cartridge like the Denon (you want them different, right?)

then if I move to a SME arm, isn't that a LM arm? How would that mate to the LC cartridge?

It sounds like initially I would want to change the mass/compliance of

either the arm OR the cartridge, but not both.

So my auto suspension analogy is entirely incorrect? I don't get it....

M

[scott0527]

Mike,

Thanks for the note but now I'm more confused.

Lets start at the beginning.

Thorens arm HM and B&O HC are bad match

so keep arm HM and get a LC cartridge like the Denon (you want them different, right?)

then if I move to a SME arm, isn't that a LM arm? How would that mate to the LC cartridge?

It sounds like initially I would want to change the mass/compliance of

either the arm OR the cartridge, but not both.

So my auto suspension analogy is entirely incorrect? I don't get it....

M

I'm thinking keeping it simple would be good. That Thorens arm was used on thousands of turntables and sounds great with many different cartridges. In fact I am sure it was far more commonly used on Moving Magnet cartridges such as your Stantons than it was for any low compliance Moving Coils.

I'll say again, that I have used that arm with some very standard Moving Magnet cartridges including a Stanton 681EEE and they sound fabulous.

When you start talking about SME 3009, you need to dig deeper into which version 3009 arm as to whether it's a high mass arm or low mass. Don't get caught up in that yet.

It seems like the Denon 103 might match up well given the weight of this Thorens arm BUT the Denon 103 is that it is a Low Output moving coil cartridge. You will need a special preamp phono input to use it (in the Blueberry, it is the $500 Cream option for instance). Not sure what preamp you'll be using but chances are it has only phono inputs for higher output moving magnet cartridges.

Here's a nice writeup specific to your arm.

http://www.theanalogdept.com/cartridge___arm_matching.htm

Oh yes, the B&O that is coming with your tt, has an output of 3mV which would should play just fine through any regular phono input. The low output mving coils are usually in the range of like .25mV more or less.

[Mike Lindsey]

Mike,

Thanks for the note but now I'm more confused.

Lets start at the beginning.

Thorens arm HM and B&O HC are bad match

so keep arm HM and get a LC cartridge like the Denon (you want them different, right?)

then if I move to a SME arm, isn't that a LM arm? How would that mate to the LC cartridge?

It sounds like initially I would want to change the mass/compliance of

either the arm OR the cartridge, but not both.

So my auto suspension analogy is entirely incorrect? I don't get it....

M

Here's a brief description of the tonearm/cartridge synergy:

http://www.gcaudio.com/resources/howtos/tonearmcartridge.html

Scott sums it up nicely and you should just see how this sounds at first. I'm only going by what is on the cartridge/tonearm database on your Thorens arm and cannot vouch for the specs being quoted. If that cartridge has a compliance of 30 I can tell you that is pretty high, and really should be mated with a low-mass arm for optimal results. That's not to say it won't sound good. I would setup what you have and just go from there.

Do you have the necessary items to dial it in? The Shure VTF gauge, Hi Fi News test record, protractor or other alignment tool? If not, I would get these while the table is in transit. These items can all be had at Garage Records, Needle Doctor or Elusive Disc.

Mike

[whell]

"I'll say again, that I have used that arm with some very standard

Moving Magnet cartridges including a Stanton 681EEE and they sound

fabulous."

Very true. I've got a Thorens TD-145 which has the same TP-16 tonearm, and use an Ortofon OM 10 Super. The combo really sounds nice. I may upgrade to an OM 30 or 40 stylus when I get my bonus next month. One day, I might also give that Stanton a try if I can find one at a reasonable price, maybe used.

[Mike Lindsey]

Are you sure that's the TP-16 on the TD-125? I quoted earlier from the database page and it mentiond TD-125 (1972):

Thorens
TD 125 Mk II (1972)

Eff Length
230 mm

Eff Mass
16.5g

Overhang
14.4 mm

Offset
22 degrees

Mount Dist
215.6 mm

Cart Mass

VTA Adjust

Mount

Headshell
Removable

Null Points
54.4/117.9 mm

Price

Thorens
TD 126 Mk III (TP16 Mk III)

Eff Length
232 mm

Eff Mass
7.5g

Overhang
16.4 mm

Offset
23 degrees

Mount Dist
215.6 mm

Cart Mass

VTA Adjust

Mount

Headshell
Removable

Null Points
61.0/120.3 mm

Price

If it is the TP-16, then the cartridge should be a much better fit (7.5g mass). Again, I am getting these specs off the tonearm database and I'm not real sure hopw accurate this stuff is.

Mike

[SilverSport]

nice work Mr. Lindsey!...[] []...CP1...do you feel the excitement building???

Bill

[LarryC]

Do you have the necessary items to dial it in? The Shure VTF gauge, Hi Fi News test record, protractor or other alignment tool? If not, I would get these while the table is in transit.

Michael, you need the Shure gauge for sure, and you'll need an alignment tool with a mirrored surface to do two things: (1) to make sure the stylus cantilever is as parallel as possible to the lines on the protractor, i.e., parallel to the record groove at the point of touchdown; and (2) to make sure the cart is straight up and down as seen from the front, not tipped in or out ("azimuth"). Hopefully you can adjust the azimuth on that arm (you can't on some).

The test record is expensive, and the only thing I found useful was the grooveless anti-skating band. Mike, are there other thngs?

This Beginner's Guide to Cartridge Setup has a lot of good info if you don't mind taking the time to read it through.

Larry

[6foot8]

Hello there fellers,

That sure is a TP-16 arm on that table I sold Michael. I don't have the original maual for it but attached is an electronic copy I have. That tone arm and B&O cartridge should be a nice sounding and very acceptable match...at least until Michael gets bitten with the upgrade bug. Even in stock trim she is a very nice sounding table.

Thanks again Michael and Mike!

Eric

Thorens 125 MkII.pdf

[Mike Lindsey]

Eric - that's good to know! He should be fine then with that arm having 7.5g of effective mass. Glad you chimed in! BTW, sorry to have hi-jacked your thread.

Larry - I use it for the 3 anti-skating tracks, the resonance frequency track and the track where you put your preamp in mono mode and the noise from both channels is supposed to cancel one another out and be dead silent. I believe this tests the azimuth but I will have to check when I get home. If played in stereo what you listen for is one channel being louder than the other.

Mike

[6foot8]

Mike...no apologies necessary please. I'm glad the discussion came up so I remembered to get the manual to him.

[scott0527]

Hello there fellers,

That sure is a TP-16 arm on that table I sold Michael. I don't have the original maual for it but attached is an electronic copy I have. That tone arm and B&O cartridge should be a nice sounding and very acceptable match...at least until Michael gets bitten with the upgrade bug. Even in stock trim she is a very nice sounding table.

Thanks again Michael and Mike!

Eric

Eric

I'll second that. I'm sure you've had enough experience to know if something sounded really wrong.

Have you been able to sell your other items? This thread kind of got hi-jacked into, "Michael's new Thorens".

[colterphoto1]

I was kinda wondering why Eric's pro dealer would put together a mismatched setup.

I'm still confused about the HM/LC LM/HC tradeoffs. Maybe some more reading???

So you mean I don't need any of these?

[LarryC]

the track where you put your preamp in mono mode and the noise from both channels is supposed to cancel one another out and be dead silent. I believe this tests the azimuth but I will have to check when I get home.

I'm pretty sure you're right, tho' I'd still want to check visually. I should do that band, too, perhaps when you're here.

Larry

[colterphoto1]

Oh yeah, sorry about the thread jacking but it is about my favorite topic - ME. LOL

Just remember this one for future turntable newbies...

[6foot8]

Scott,

The other stuff is still for sale.

[LarryC]

I'm still confused about the HM/LC LM/HC tradeoffs. Maybe some more reading???

Mike, the mass and cantilever compliance form a resonant system and frequency. I think it's kinda' like the turn-signal blinking rate determined by a coil (the light filament?) and a capacitor. My understanding is that if that resonant frequency is too low, like, say, a few ambient Hz from footfalls, it won't take much for the arm/cart to bounce around the groove. Supposedly if it's too high, it will start to react to music, record and groove interactions. (I'm being vague because I actually don't know what I'm talking about. [:^)]) So, you want a resonant freq between those two evils.

[6foot8]

Michael,

The Thorens manual is attached for you to my previous post regarding the tone arm model.

[Mike Lindsey]

the track where you put your preamp in mono mode and the noise from both channels is supposed to cancel one another out and be dead silent. I believe this tests the azimuth but I will have to check when I get home.

I'm pretty sure you're right, tho' I'd still want to check visually. I should do that band, too, perhaps when you're here.

Larry

Yeah, I checked it visually to the best of my ability.

I do have a litlle bit of noise when played in mono, but nowhere near as much as my Dual made. Come to think of it though, my L/R balance on the preamp was slightly different as I always have a little more gain on the right channel (left speaker is in a corner). I should try it again with both channels having the same gain and see if it makes a difference. It was very subtle, regardless.

Mike

[scott0527]

I was kinda wondering why Eric's pro dealer would put together a mismatched setup.

I'm still confused about the HM/LC LM/HC tradeoffs. Maybe some more reading???

So you mean I don't need any of these?

Read the link I posted a page or so again from the analogdept.com. I thought it explained the compliance issue pretty well but you need to put your thinking cap on and read it a couple of times to understand. It's only a page or so. He was even using your particular arm in his examples. He also mentions that even though "on paper" the arm shouldn't match well with his Shure (which would be similar to your stantons) he has been using the Shure for years with good results.