Linn vs Thorens Smackdown. Who Will Win?
- Thread starter BennyES
- Start date
MCM_Fan
AK Subscriber
Looks like an AT11E, or one of the many variants Audio Technica sold over the years. It's a good, basic cartridge, but nothing special. The original stylus was a 0.4 x 0.7 bonded elliptical with a recommended VTF of 2 - 3g. Upgraded styli are available, but if you're spending Linn money, you will want a better cartridge.
KentTeffeteller
Gimpus Stereophilus!
Put the same level of setup attention on the Thorens suspension and on the Thorens as a system, and this would be a draw or even Thorens coming up a winner. I prefer the Thorens. But would rather have a SME 3009 II arm installed (pre Improved) as most of the cartridges I prefer are medium mass, as is most of today's cartridges.
KentTeffeteller
Gimpus Stereophilus!
No, not a good match. The Signet prefers a low mass tonearm. The LP 12 is medium side of high mass. And with LP-12 depends on what version of LP-12 you have. And what level it is.
Don't take this wrong way, but I'm worried that your set of questions suggests you should sit back for a moment and learn a bit more about turntables and the market before spending what seems to me a fairly substantial amount of money.
The items you mention are good pieces of equipment, but they are something of a hodgepodge, which confuses things. Basically you are asking about two turntables which appear rather similar, and are both descendants of the AR turntable. In standard form, the Thorens is a midlevel table, whereas the Linn, depending on its iteration and all the other stuff associated with it, should be higher level. But things are always more compicated than that. The SME Series III is an outstanding arm, but it really is suited to more high compliance cartridges than are being made today - you can buy (and often at very low prices) the cartridges it was ideal for, and then buy a new stylus assembly since Jico and other companies make excellent replacements for many of these cartridges. The Ittok is better suited for lower compliance cartridges, probably moving coils. But as noted, the bearing condition is a big variable - lower compliance cartridges put more energy into the arm and the bearings in the Linn are apparently damageable - the bearings in the SME are pretty impervious to normal issues.
Shipping tables is dangerous, shipping tables internationally is complicated and fraught with possible complications.
Not everyone likes suspended subchassis tables, and even the best turtable in the world isn't good if you don't like it.
If you wait a month or a year and get a better sense of what you are looking for, you'll probably make a better choice. Don't worry - there will still be turntables for sale.
In the meanwhile, if you don't have a table, get one from bartertown here, or even Craigslist. If you can pick up an AR Xa or XB, you will get a sense of what both Thorens and Linn were trying to improve on, and you can decide whether they actually did - an AR in good shape is a great table, and, if you are lucky, you can pick them up for beer money, though it has gotten harder to do so in the last decades. But there are plenty of decent cheap tables that will let you listen safely and rewardingly to vinyl until you know what you want.
The items you mention are good pieces of equipment, but they are something of a hodgepodge, which confuses things. Basically you are asking about two turntables which appear rather similar, and are both descendants of the AR turntable. In standard form, the Thorens is a midlevel table, whereas the Linn, depending on its iteration and all the other stuff associated with it, should be higher level. But things are always more compicated than that. The SME Series III is an outstanding arm, but it really is suited to more high compliance cartridges than are being made today - you can buy (and often at very low prices) the cartridges it was ideal for, and then buy a new stylus assembly since Jico and other companies make excellent replacements for many of these cartridges. The Ittok is better suited for lower compliance cartridges, probably moving coils. But as noted, the bearing condition is a big variable - lower compliance cartridges put more energy into the arm and the bearings in the Linn are apparently damageable - the bearings in the SME are pretty impervious to normal issues.
Shipping tables is dangerous, shipping tables internationally is complicated and fraught with possible complications.
Not everyone likes suspended subchassis tables, and even the best turtable in the world isn't good if you don't like it.
If you wait a month or a year and get a better sense of what you are looking for, you'll probably make a better choice. Don't worry - there will still be turntables for sale.
In the meanwhile, if you don't have a table, get one from bartertown here, or even Craigslist. If you can pick up an AR Xa or XB, you will get a sense of what both Thorens and Linn were trying to improve on, and you can decide whether they actually did - an AR in good shape is a great table, and, if you are lucky, you can pick them up for beer money, though it has gotten harder to do so in the last decades. But there are plenty of decent cheap tables that will let you listen safely and rewardingly to vinyl until you know what you want.
Makes sense. Don’t worry, I did not take your message the wrong way at all. I appreciate the advice. My uncle has an AR XA that I will try to borrow. How can listening to an AR give me a sense of what a Thorens or Linn will sound like? I agree with your recommendations, just wondering!
Attachments
The little table that could, the AR XA was my main deck for decades, it's that good. With a Grado Platinum Reference damn near unbeatable. Had the AR for a time and purchased a Thorens TD166MKII thinking it would better the AR, but it didn't so was relegated to the bedroom system.
And as already mentioned, the AR was the grandfather to the tables you're looking at so the tactile feel and presentation will be familiar. A very simplistic deck that just makes music, with room for improvements that put in competition with real heavyweights.
It was yrs before a really top flight DD deck was able to knock it off it's perch. That deck and subsequent DD tables have now seen the top spot again ceded to another belt drive deck.
stratokaster
Mental toss flycoon
The Ittok is a medium-mass tonearm (13.5g). I would say it should work well enough with most high compliance cartridges.
SME Series III can be made to work well with medium-compliance cartridges if it comes with the damper kit (SME FD200). Personally i would prefer the SME over the Ittok.
The LP12 itself depending on year of production and upgrades can be worse than the Thorens, at the same level or significantly better.
If you really want a sprung turntable, I personally would opt for a Thorens TD125 which is better engineered than a pre-Keel/Kore LP12. I have never been a fan of Linn's flimsy armboard mounting...
SME Series III can be made to work well with medium-compliance cartridges if it comes with the damper kit (SME FD200). Personally i would prefer the SME over the Ittok.
The LP12 itself depending on year of production and upgrades can be worse than the Thorens, at the same level or significantly better.
If you really want a sprung turntable, I personally would opt for a Thorens TD125 which is better engineered than a pre-Keel/Kore LP12. I have never been a fan of Linn's flimsy armboard mounting...
Last edited:
They're all part of the same design family--they isolate the structure that holds the platter bearing and the tonearm mount by hanging it from springs. The motor is on the base assembly and drives the platter via a belt. Compare that to another classic belt drive design like a Rega, where the platter bearing and tonearm are mounted to the same structure that holds the motor.
twiiii
Lunatic Member
I'm not fond of the early 3009 tone arms and there fore will give the nod to the Linn in this case. But my TD 125 is almost 50 years old and never given me any real issues. Oh you have to clean controls and lube thing s a bit, but you will have to td that with the Linn too. Its which ever one has the best arm and in this case I think its the Linn.
The AR XA in proper working order
Actually, the subchassis sits on top of the springs but the point is made. The AR XA was the first competitive commercial turntable to use that design and it was a big hit. A restored XA, even with the simple tonearm is a marvel of utilitarian design and can bring the music in a way that defies its simplicity. It is a great value and there isn’t much to go wrong.
Actually, the subchassis sits on top of the springs but the point is made. The AR XA was the first competitive commercial turntable to use that design and it was a big hit. A restored XA, even with the simple tonearm is a marvel of utilitarian design and can bring the music in a way that defies its simplicity. It is a great value and there isn’t much to go wrong.
That's right; it's Sota that hangs it.
Ilikevinyl
Cool Breeze
Signet TK7E & the Denon DL-110 would be a good match for the Ittok arm. The Denon DL-103 needs much more arm mass than the Ittok.
I would take the Ittok arm over the Pro-Ject. Ittok, build quality is better.
dogscanskate
Super Member
There were others before but how many were made? The AR XA sold in great numbers for well over a decade and good, functioning examples are widely available and affordable.
And I believe the Scott may have been the first, but good luck with that.
Compare the Ariston and Linn:
https://www.vinylengine.com/turntab...id=48b012d046f61e0075115d970aea5427&mode=view
And I believe the Scott may have been the first, but good luck with that.
Compare the Ariston and Linn:
https://www.vinylengine.com/turntab...id=48b012d046f61e0075115d970aea5427&mode=view
Yeah, but the AR is the design that Thorens and Linn copied. The subchasis below the top plate was the AR innovation, as, I think was the belt drive with the motor on the top plate, so the platter and arm were only coupled to it by the belt. That is the configuration most belt drives have followed.
Who was 'first' has been argued back and forth, with various claimants to the title, but it depends exactly what you mean by suspended subchasis. Putting a turntable on springs is very old. How many springs, how they are implemented, and where the various parts are, affect who gets to claim first place.
Who was 'first' has been argued back and forth, with various claimants to the title, but it depends exactly what you mean by suspended subchasis. Putting a turntable on springs is very old. How many springs, how they are implemented, and where the various parts are, affect who gets to claim first place.