• The move to the new server is done. There are some software and database maintenance updates in process. This has us passing the hat around to help out. We appreciate any donations. Seriously, even a dollar helps. The payment page may be found here - https://www.audiokarma.org/support.html

Dual cs 415-2

guitarman50

guitarman50

Super Member
I've been looking for an automatic turntable for my wife to play her LP's. she is not concerned with Audiophile quality or such. Just wants to play her LP's. I was talking to the local stereo guy and he recomended a DUAL CS 415-2. It seems to be a nice table but I'd like to get the opinions of anyone who has one on this table? for 3 bills for a brand new table can I do better. Remember convenience will supercede sonics. Although to a point sound quality is a consideration as well.
 
Register to hide this ad
The Thorens TD-158 is very similar - they both probably come out of the same factory - but the Thorens looks a little less plasticy. Both even come with the same cartridge.

Neither one has much to do with what we old-timers remember of Dual or Thorens. My guess is that they're made in the same Czech factory that produces the Pro-Ject and Music Hall TTs. Not that there's anything wrong with that...
 
From what I can see it seems like this dual turntable is exactly what I need for its purpose. Seems like decent entry level performance, very good quality construction and the auto features for my wife who will judge based on convenience of use as well as sound.
 
The Dual and Thorens both were made in Germany by Fehrenbacher/Dual. Herr Fehrenbacher was the last factory director at the old Dual factory. He continued making this low end Dual model after Dual went under.
 
g50: Avoid! That's not a good Dual anyway - and apart from a lack of adjustment capabilities it's also got the disadvantage that its platter rotates around a fixed spindle. If you'd like a new full automatic table, I'd rather suggest to consider the Denon DP-300F instead, which is almost as good as a CS455-1.

Greetings from Munich!

Manfred / lini
 
You could try a Dual 1246, nice table, fully automatic, you see them on ebay fairly often.
 
I just had the Marantz TT-42 in my hands which is the same table rebranded. The platter is a pie tin. The counter weight is fixed so no changing carts.

Stay away.
 
guitarman50 said:
From what I can see it seems like this dual turntable is exactly what I need for its purpose.
Click to expand...

No reason to think it won't work just fine for you. I happen to own the Denon DP-300F and have no complaints, but it might not be as good a deal in your market. I was considering the Thorens-branded models (no USA distribution for Dual that I could find), but where I live they were more expensive than the Denon and not available locally (though even getting the Denon was a 280 mile roundtrip), plus the built-in phono stage in the Denon is a welcome convenience.

Don't know if you saw it, but below is a link to a brief review of the CS 415-2. The reviewer plugged the low-cost Dual into a system with Levinson amplification and Quad speakers, and it provided tuneful, rhythmic sound with good detail and satisfying bass performance. Sure sounds like it should do the job for you.
http://www.dualturntables.com.au/media/pdf/DUAL_CS_415-2_review.pdf
 
jrt: Sorry, but that review is just about as worthless as that one: http://www.goodsound.com/equipment/dual_cs4351.htm You'd better not trust these - like so many reviews these days it's only shallow, uncritical blahblah.

Really, trust me on that one: As much as I like the good Dual models, as much I can only recommend to stay away from the CS415-2, the CS420 and the CS435-1. That bloody fixed spindle design isn't the only weakness of these models - in fact these also hardly manage to stay within the DIN standard limits for wow & flutter even with records that don't have a rather tight hole that rubs against the fixed spindle, and those DIN limits are anything but very strict ones...

Another problem is the external dc power supply design, 'cause it's got zero proctection against reverse polarity, which Dual could have easily provided with a simple diode for probably less than 1 cent. So, if the power supply gets lost and people replace it with a universal one and happen to confuse the polarity on the first try, the motor electronics instantly becomes fried...

And then the high prices - which are completely silly, if one considers that the drive these models are based on was initially designed as a cheap commodity feature for integration in cheap tower systems of the late 80s. Just too high prices for a quality level that's just maginally better than what those cheap, plasic "toy class" like for example Audio Technica AT-PL50 or the Denon DP-29F offer for quite a bit less...

Unfortunately Technics has discontinued the SL-BD20, which was better than these Duals, albeit only semi-automatic, and usually offered for some US$ 140 to 180. The Denon DP-300F isn't really much better than the Technics, but more universal (due to its halfinch-mount headshell) and in addition fully automatic - for around US$ 300 of course also not cheap compared to one what could get on the used market for that sum, but still not really unfairly priced for a new table in that quality class. So I think the DP-300F is pretty much the best thing one could currently recommend to g50, if he insists on buying new.

Greetings from Munich!

Manfred / lini
 
Whilst I agree about the over-rated reviews and the high asking prices to some degree I have to say that the CS-455 I played with did have adjustable tracking weights and worked rather well with an Ortofon M20FL fitted.
Not the highest-fi granted, but it went about it's job in a workmanlike manner and was good enough in most cases and certainly for uncritical listening.
I doubt I'd buy one new, but at 2nd hand prices and in good nick it sounds just what the OP asked for!
 
I've never heard the Dual models for myself, but it sounds as if the OP is in a position to do so. The review I linked to may be shallow, but it indicates that at least one person, who was able to listen to it extensively in a familiar system, found the CS 415-2's sound to be reasonably good. Neither I nor anyone else in this thread, at least from what I can gather in the responses, has had a chance to actually audition the 'table.

As to specs, despite the Dual's non-rotating spindle, it has half the rated wow and flutter of my DP-300F (0.05% WRMS vs. 0.1 % WRMS). I don't know the pricing elsewhere, but the OP indicated he could buy a new CS 415-2 for $300 Canadian; the source I saw for the DP-300F is that it's $429 Canadian, so the Dual might actually the lower-priced unit for him.

The OP indicated that sound quality, while not unimportant, was less an issue than automated features (which both have) and a price of "3 bills" (which the Dual provides). The lack of an adjustable counterweight may limit cartridge choice, but it also simplifies setup and means there's one less thing that can go out of adjustment. It's not that I want to discount your input or that of others, but the Dual CS 415-2 seems to have availability, the right price, and at least one positive review going for it.

I'm hoping the OP buys it or at least gives it an audition at the shop and reports back on what he hears; there's very little information out there on this machine. What little I've seen on other forums is from people who bought it used, with missing power supplies, worn belts, and other issues.
 
jrt: Seems like you gathered a not quite correct impression, 'cause I actually do know the 415-2 and 435-1 in real life, too - I just never bought one of these myself, 'cause why would I waste good money on turntable models that I deem overpriced and rather low quality? I do own a 505-4 and a CS455-1M, though. The latter is still based on the small drive, but it's got a heavier platter and a better arm - and the "M" indicates the version with the heavier, nicer looking plinth. And it still was fairly competitively priced, when I bought it around 7 years ago (iirc, I paid a tad less than 240 Euro (shipping included)) - whereas I surely wouldn't have bought it for what they charge for it now...

Well, and as for the w&f specs: In an actual comparative review measurement the CS415-2 managed only 0.148 % DIN, the CS435-1 (reviewed in the Thorens version TD170) even only 0.156 % DIN, while the SL-BD20 delivered 0.069 % DIN and the DP-300F 0.067 % DIN. In case you're not overly familiar with DIN specs: ~ 0.07 % can be considered as already pretty good for a belt-drive (for comparison: the Thorens TD280(II) delivered 0.06 %), while ~ 0.15 % would be rather bad.

So, no worries, I'm not pulling vague suspicions out of thin air, I'm speaking of experience and can present measurement data from more trustworthy reviews to back up my opinion on these models...

Oh, and a reason for the lower priced offer to g50 might be that the CS415-2 will probably soon run out in favour of the new CS440. And there'll be a new CS460, too.


Gary: Yup, the CS455, its semi-automatic sister CS450 and its successor CS455-1 (and the luxury plinth version CS455-1M) already are pretty decent entry level hifi models. These were the only ones of the Dual-Schneider era CS4xx family models I used to recommend, until the prices went up rather steeply around late 2005 (iirc).

Over in the US the prices unfortunately are even higher nowadays (i.e. borderline silly, I'd say), so I can only suggest to not buy these new anymore. Unfortunately this also goes for the CS505-4 for, which one could regard as the last model with roots back to the classic Dual-Steidinger era - and which is still the best of the models Fehrenbacher continues to produce, even though some versions of the CS455-1M nowadays are priced higher...


Greetings from Munich!

Manfred / lini
 
lini said:
jrt: Seems like you gathered a not quite correct impression, 'cause I actually do know the 415-2 and 435-1 in real life, too - I just never bought one of these myself, 'cause why would I waste good money on turntable models that I deem overpriced and rather low quality?
Click to expand...

Sorry. I guess I thought no one had heard one because I didn't see anyone commenting on how they sound, just features, build quality, and specifications. The reviews you and I linked to both commented favorably on the respective models' strengths with respect to rhythm/timing, and taut, tuneful bass. When a 'table gets these aspects right, I find I can be engaged with the music. How did the 415-2 and 435-1 sound in this respect to you?

Thanks for the interesting test information on wow and flutter. My only familiarity with DIN specs is that they tend to be tighter than WRMS (i.e., equipment listing both show the WRMS number considerably lower than the DIN number) and that 0.2% wow and flutter by DIN standards was considered the limit to still be considered a "high fidelity" product.

You also mentioned that the Dual CS 435 was essentially the same as a Thorens TD 170. The Thorens interests me because it can be ordered with a built-in phono stage and includes the 78 rpm speed. If the positive sonic attributes attributed to the CS 435-1 in that review you provided a link to is also applicable to the TD 170-1, then it's a model I'll need to investigate further. I purchased the Denon DP-300F because I could actually see one at a shop, and it was considerably cheaper than the Thorens models. I compromised on the lack of 78 rpm, a compromise I've since regretted. Like the OP, features outweigh, to some extent, sound quality, and in my case, even price/performance value.

Here's a brief review of the TD 170-EV. Like its Dual counterpart, the reviewer commented favorably on its rhythmic qualities. Even if I can't audition it first, these positive comments across the line about a performance attribute so important to me makes it seem a decent risk. http://www.cepro.com/article/hands_on_thorens_td170_ev_turntable/
 
jrt: You know, problem is that even those plastic toy class tables I mentioned above aren't that bad (and before you ask: No, I haven't got one of those myself, either - but my parents have one Sony version of these and a friend of mine has got another Sony version...), that one couldn't enjoy good records with these thingies or not find the one or other positive attribute to say about these. Pretty much the same goes for the 415-2 and 435-1, just that these Duals have a less plasticky appearance, but unfortunately also a much higher price. And just btw: Most of these plastic tables use an AT3600 family cart just like the Duals do (the DMS251S also is just a rebadged AT3600 family model). So I was hardly surprised to find these actually sounding pretty simiar.

Well, and as for that TD170 review: Oh my, another one of "these" reviews - from a reviewer that needs a couple of hours to set up a table with an already pre-installed cartridge. And of course he also won't mention the model designation of his "old, capable" Kenwood table, so that his comparison reference remains unknown...

Whereas I can't really comment on using that Thorens for 78 rpm use, 'cause I've got no personal experience with 78 rpm records. However, I thought the fans of these would rather prefer a table with pitch control for the purpose and possibly also a phono stage with slightly different equalisation curves to choose from. It that's the case, then I wouldn't expect the Thorens to be really ideal.

Well, and as for DIN w&f: Well, one could say the DIN measurement results are closer to the practice than the WRMS results, 'cause the DIN method is test record based, while WRMS results were often produced without record and derived from motor control signals. That's why WRMS results can be extremely low in comparison. And yes, I also have 0.2 % in mind for the DIN w&f limits for hifi - but one has to consider that many of the DIN standard limits are rather old and have never been updated, and that also goes for that w&f limit. Shall mean: At least from about the mid-70s on, 0.2 % DIN for w&f would have actually been considered to be rather bad, 'cause 0.2 to 0.3 % are in fact already considered as the limit of audibility of w&f for an average listener. I.e., many of the DIN standard limits for hifi rather represent what an average consumer would deem pretty good quality than what a hifi fan or audiophile would deem actual hifi quality.


Greetings from Munich!

Manfred / lini
 
lini said:
jrt: You know, problem is that even those plastic toy class tables I mentioned above aren't that bad . . . that one couldn't enjoy good records with these thingies or not find the one or other positive attribute to say about these. Pretty much the same goes for the 415-2 and 435-1, just that these Duals have a less plasticky appearance . . .
Click to expand...

I agree, and think it's one more reason why the CS 415-2 could be a good choice. The OP has stressed that simplicity/convenience is more important than sound quality. For a hi-fi enthusiast, not being able to tweak tonearm settings and being pretty much stuck with the stock cartridge might be anathema, but for someone who just wants to press the start lever and hear a record play, such refinements might be more a hindrance than a help.

Most of these plastic tables use an AT3600 family cart just like the Duals do (the DMS251S also is just a rebadged AT3600 family model). So I was hardly surprised to find these actually sounding pretty simiar.
Click to expand...

One of the things that attracted me to the Denon DP-300F was the removable headshell and easy interchange of cartridges, but after buying an extra headshell and trying some other budget cartridges with the Denon (M97xE, Grado Green1, and AT95E), I found that I preferred the stock cartridge, which is also an AT3600 variant. For that matter, I loved the sound I got from an AT CN5625AL (another 3600 variant) on my LP12/Ittok rig, so maybe I just really like that cartridge family.

I can't really comment on using that Thorens for 78 rpm use, 'cause I've got no personal experience with 78 rpm records. However, I thought the fans of these would rather prefer a table with pitch control for the purpose and possibly also a phono stage with slightly different equalisation curves to choose from. It that's the case, then I wouldn't expect the Thorens to be really ideal.
Click to expand...

I'm old enough to remember when most people still had 78 rpm capable record players, and even bought 78's when I was a kid. I don't recall anyone having or worrying about pitch control or different equalization curves; we just turned the knob or lever to the 78 speed position, flipped over to the 78 stylus, and played the record. Unless you're hiring yourself out as a professional for archival or transcription services, I don't think the lack of such features will seriously impact one's enjoyment of the records. I no longer collect 78's, and gave away most of that collection and associated equipment years ago, but I still have a small collection of the ones that I bought as a kid or that were owned by parents and grandparents. Nothing special about them, but I'd like to be able to listen to them once in a while.

. . . many of the DIN standard limits for hifi rather represent what an average consumer would deem pretty good quality than what a hifi fan or audiophile would deem actual hifi quality.
Click to expand...

No argument there. And while it's understandable that participants in a forum such as this aspire to loftier standards, and warn off people who seem headed in the wrong direction, there's nothing wrong with people enjoying what seems to them "pretty good quality." The AT-LP60 is one of those sub-$100 plastic turntables, and people love them (Amazon lists 168 reviews with a 4.4 stars out of 5 average rating). The Dual CS 415-2 offers a significantly better wow and flutter specification along with a more pleasing, "less plasticky" look. Maybe that's enough to make it a good value for someone wanting a brand new, fully automatic turntable to play records on, one for whom audiophile considerations are unimportant ("she is not concerned with Audiophile quality or such. Just wants to play her LP's").

I'm probably biased because a couple of decades ago I worked part-time at a small audio shop, but I can't help but stand by the recommendation of "the local stereo guy" the OP mentioned at the top of this thread, a guy who likely knows the OP's needs in greater detail than any of us. Plus, I haven't been able to come up with a better alternative that meets the criteria of being new, fully automatic, and selling for $300 or less in the Canadian market.
 
Thorens TD 170-1

I had a few records that I just had to play again -- and maybe rip. Needed a turntable to restart analog playback after 15 years and loosing my original 1987 vintage turntable in a divorce. I remembered that I am very sensitive to wow and rumble (use a subwoofer) so getting something halfway decent was important.

So I ended getting a $300 Thorens TD 170-1 from the Needle Doctor and had a very quick and easy setup after it arrived today. Trying to use a 2.2 gram tracking force per a review that I read. This setting was hard for me to be sure of with the coarse markings for tracking force and anti-skate. Need to verify - hope I can find my old gauge. But it seemed to perform flawlessly with my Diahann Carroll/Mercer Ellington "A Tribute to Ethel Waters" limited edition. I then played four more LPs.

Very pleased with the OMB 10 cartridge and the low wow and rumble from the turntable. The speed seems to be right on but I will get around to checking it with a strobe disc. From the bottom it looks like the motor has access holes to adjust the speed settings ( H and L labeled) The center spindle is fixed. :sigh:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom