Philips 212 or Thorens TD165
- Thread starter Xenomorph
- Start date
Register to hide this ad
Blue Shadow
Waiting for Vintage Gear from this century
Well the Thorens was 20 bucks (MSRP) cheaper than the Philips in the 74-76 era when they were new.
The Philips has a decent low (and adjustable) mass tonearm which suits some cartridges better.
Even though the 212 is considered the Poor Man's Thorens the 165 is the beginning of the line back then and would have similar performance. Platter on the 165 is nicer and with a Herbies Way Excellent mat should sound nice.
The Philips has a decent low (and adjustable) mass tonearm which suits some cartridges better.
Even though the 212 is considered the Poor Man's Thorens the 165 is the beginning of the line back then and would have similar performance. Platter on the 165 is nicer and with a Herbies Way Excellent mat should sound nice.
twiiii
Lunatic Member
A Phillips was a nice unit at the time. But the Throrens is quieter and will not feed back like the Phillips at loud levels. That said I would not touch the Thorens if it has the Thorens arm. SME arm all the way. Unless you want a linear arm, which is what I prefered from that time period.
melofelo
Addicted Member
Hang on to the Philips 212 if it's in good working order. It makes a nice platform for affordable High-ish compliance cartridges despite its toy-like ( but actually decent sounding) tonearm. It's a very musical sounding turntable when paired with a cartridge that suits its arm mass and the pitch controls are nice to have on a belt drive. It's speed stability is also pretty solid considering it's circa 1972 origins.
The suspended isolation system is pretty good too although the further you can place it from your speakers the better, and preferably on light but sturdy shelf. I think its also a pretty nice looking turntable in its own right.
The suspended isolation system is pretty good too although the further you can place it from your speakers the better, and preferably on light but sturdy shelf. I think its also a pretty nice looking turntable in its own right.
Xenomorph
Active Member
I like it quite a bit, so much so that I bought a none working one for spares. I saw the Thorens and thought it was a good price, so I thought I'd ask about it's performance vs the 212. I think I'll stick with the 212 for the foreseeable future, it sounds good to my ears and I like it's quirkiness.
melofelo
Addicted Member
It's sometimes hard to compare turntables on specs alone but a Thorens at a good price with a tonearm that has good bearings ( no play ) is always worth a look. Depending on what arm is fitted ( especially its effective mass) it might actually allow you to use cartridges with a medium or low compliance suspension which don't mate well mechanically with turntables like the Philips ( or some Dual turntables with the ULM arm) that uses a low mass design. Maybe someone who has that model can offer some tips. I've heard later Thorens Td160s IV with a Rega RB250 arm and they do sound nice , but better ? is subjective...it all depends on how you set them up, what cartidge you pair them with , where you site them what surface they sit on...alignment geometry etc..and even then..you can still end up liking BOTH for what they do individually. Short answer... it took me 5 turntable to work out if I preferred, 3 point suspended ( Ariston RD60/ Ar-EB-101) , minimalist belt drive ( Rega Planar 3) , Semi Auto convenience ( Akai AP-206c) ..MId Century Cool factor that happens to sound good also( Philips GA-212 )... and I still can't part with any of them so kept all 5.
Xenomorph
Active Member
The turntable I've had that I really liked was a Realistic Lab 400, I stupidly sold it when I had a brain fart and thought "I won't bother with records now I stream music". So I sold it and my records, I regret that like you wouldn't believe.
