Thorens specific group please ?

[Hartge7]

Agreed, Thorens are generally easy to set up. Why a separate group? Most questions can be answered quickly. I reckon nearly everybody on AOS has had a TD something or other at some time.

And I would be surprised if most have not had an SME arm either on that TD or some other table.

There is a Thorens love thread on another site and I'm amazed how many are sporting the SME 3009 S2 Imp and other SME arms. My SME was on a 125 years ago, now I have a 160 Super with the Magnenpan arm. No way to compare some lowlife needed my 125 more than I did.

[Dingdong]

I had an ADC, an SME 3009 S2 and a Hadcock on mine. The SME and ADC were pretty similar, although the SME did benefit from new wire. The Hadcock was so much better. It had improved clarity and soundstage compared with the others.
Cartridge used on them all was my Shure VST V.

Getting the springs right on the TD160 is a pain in the arse. There are various threads about on the internet. It is possible to get it bouncing freely, but it goes out of tune quite easily.

[DSJR]

I would disagree with DSJR n the mat. But from most of his recommendations he must have quite different ears from me.

Cable dressing is just fixing the arm cable so that it has little effect on the suspension.

Not sure if much will help with the warps tbh. The clamp will help if it is warped in a bell shape perhaps.

Invest in summat to clean yer vinyl as well.

Stick with the M75 for now.

Try Brasso for polishing the arm.

Maybe I shoulod justify my comkments a little...

In the company of its peers, a TD160 isn't really that good. It's a bit messy and smeared sonically and the structure of the thing isn't very substantial, especially if you push it with more demanding tonearms. Back in the day, I make no apologies for saying that every R200 equipped Rega 2 or 3 we traded in absolutely trounced a Td160, irrespective of the arm it was fitted with. Sorry, but these memories are strong as I did countless dems.

The TD160 Super was an improvement though, the more solid baseboard and MDF arm mount helping here, but even then, a TD160 Super with R200 was easily beaten in clarity terms by a Systemdek III, Logic and LP12 with similar arm and cartridge on, the TD160 just sounding weak and wishy-washy in comparison.

Heavier mats as fitted to the "Super" model, the Avon mat and the notorious squidgy Le Mat/Dumpa mat sort of focused things up a little bit and gave a bit more punch in the case of the heavy rubber ones, the stock rubberised thingy fitted to the 160 and 125mk2 being terrible sonically and much worse than the 124 and 150/125 mk1 ribbed one.

As for cable dressing, ever tried setting one of these things up with a later Mission 774 with thicker and more rigid exit cables, let alone a typical SME cable? Sure, a Linn, R200 and RB tonearm cable is a doddle in comparison, but it's amazing how some people still get it wrong. If you're a wizz at getting the suspension right then good for you. The ladies on the production line used to need around five minutes on each I read somewhere..

In my experience over the years, for best sonics off your records, I'd much rather have a Systemdek IIX, CJ55, TT2, Legend, Mantra, as these springy belt drives do seem to get more for the emotions to chew on off a record. My own donated TD160 still lies sulking up in the loft, awaiting a plug for my SME but even then, I don't hold too much hope for it. Sorry, I feel that spending over£50 on a fancy mat is just throwing money away on one of these since with the total expense, I think you could have got summat better from the next tier up the vinyl ladder......