The Hub: Thorens TD-125: the table that couldn't get no respect


Back in the early '70's when I began to haunt "stereo joints" (as I called them), there weren't a lot of options when it came to turntables. The basics were Dual and Garrard, with the occasional Miracord (the US brand of the German Elac); later on, the flood of turntables from Pioneer and other Japanese brands hit. In those days, the table that was THE most serious turntable, sold with the best systems, was the Thorens TD-125. The absolute top table was the TD-125 with an SME 3009 arm (as listed for sale here).

I don't know this for a fact, but I suspect the TD-125 came into existence for two reasons:
1. While its predecessor, the TD-124, was the product of a Swiss music-box maker, it seemed more like the creation of a Swiss watchmaker. Its belt-drive plus idler-drive mechanism was hideously complex, and was undoubtedly expensive to manufacture;
2. The TD-124's organic styling and cream-enamel finish was very much a child of the '50's and'60's; the first time I saw one, I was reminded of mom's Sunbeam Mixmaster. As the new decade approached, the 124 looked old-fashioned, and its motorboard assembly seemed better suited to installation in a console, than standing proudly on its own.

The TD-125 replaced the 124 in 1968, crisply-bedecked in Scandinavian-style cabinetry. Its first iteration was made through 1971 (as seen here on the Thorens site, auf Deutsch) and the TD-125 mkII continued in production from 1972-1975.

At least by Teutonic standards, both tables are pretty simple devices, belt-driven tables with suspended sub-chassis for some measure of isolation against shock and feedback. An electronic speed control and strobe round out the design. It was available with Thorens' TP-16 arm, with the SME, or armless; a number of variants were made, including long-base models designed for mounting a 12" arm, and chassis designed for console-mounting.

If the description of the 125's design makes you think of the A.R. turntable, well, there are great similarities. Given its higher price (originally $280 vs. the A.R.'s $68), the Thorens should be better built, and in my experience, it is, and is quieter and more dynamic, as well. While the A.R. has often been tweaked and hot-rodded (thanks to parts made by my friend George Merrill, and others), the most-tweaked Thorens was the TD-160, and the 125 has been largely left alone. Haden Boardman wrote in Hi-Fi World of the deck's potential (seen here), but most 125's have remained stock.

Chris Thornton is a former Chicagoland Hi-Fi salesman entering his second decade as a sufferer of Audiophilia Nervosa. He picked up a Thorens TD-160 mkI at an estate sale, and following examples cited on Audiogon and the Analog Department (seen here), Chris cleaned, lubed and tweaked the 160, and was astounded at the improvement in its performance. "These old 'tables, you can't compare an old stock one with one that's been restored. Fixed up right, they just SING, and the build-quality is unbelievable"

Taking advantage of a steel-industry layoff, Chris now specializes in restoring and tweaking Thorens turntables, and today's subject is an example of his work. Chris usually installs a new Origin Live arm on the tables he rebuilds, but the vintage SME 3009 on today's 125 just FIT, both aesthetically and historically.

Chris' work not only offers excellent bang for the buck, but serves as proof that there are still plenty of opportunities out there for enterprising audiophiles with a commercial bent and some ability. It also shows that there's still a lot of great old gear out there waiting to find a good home and someone to put it into good working order.

So: keep hunting!
audiogon_bill
I have had several, the last about 20 years ago. If you really want to hear them sing take the platter off and give it a tap. They really benefit from a good mat.

A lot of tables have the same issue, and frankly, I'm not sure if it's a cause for real concern. Exciting a bell-mode resonance by balancing the platter on a finger and pinging it doesn't represent a condition that's going to be encountered while playing a record.

I sometimes think the whole dead-plastic-platter school of design has gone too far the other way; to me, those tables generally SOUND dead, as well.

That's a sweeping generality, and doesn't represent all cases. I'm just sayin'....
I have a TD-125, pretty much stock, and yeah, if you don't want the platter to ring, don't hit it with a hammer.

One thing I don't understand about Mr. Thornton's GORGEOUS rebuilds, is why he builds such a massive plinth. In a suspended deck, the table is decoupled from the plinth, so does it really matter how heavy the plinth is? I've never seen anyone re-plinth a Linn, which has the same basic suspension system.

An excellent question; I'll see if I can get Chris to respond to that.

My thought is that a more massive base is less likely to excite even a suspended sub-chassis. I could be wrong; it's been a long time since I had to work through equations in Dynamics class. ;->

Thanks for the comments, and thanks for reading.
he problem with a resonate platter is that it reflects the vibrations generated by the stylus tracing the groves. No one though this important when the 125 was designed but a better understanding of the micro dynamics of LP playback showed that it affected sound quality. This understanding led to both the non-resonate platter and the mats weights and clamps that have appeared over the last 30 or so years. The whole question remains open however as the current variety of attempts to deal with it attests. The Linn is designed as a total system where defects balance each other , it is either brilliant or high level Rube Goldberg depending on your point of view. It often sounds best placed on a flimsy table.The Thorens WILL benefit from a better plinth, as will most tables.