advertisement


Compact Garrard 401 plinths

I must say this is a timely post, I just got myself one of these beasties, and was wondering just the same thing. Mine came with an SME plinth, I'm gonna use the lid upside down as a bed for my dawg.
 
Can it be done? They always look massive. I only have 40cm depth to play with.

I doubt you can get that small and still maintain sufficient structural rigidity. The cutout hole for a Garrard is very large as there is a lot that hangs down under the deck. I’d download the plinth cutout template (widely available with a bit of Googling) and work from there. IIRC my slate plinth for the 301 was 450x450mm.
 
I can take a tape measure to my Loricraft skeletal tonight, if that helps. It fits - just - on a standard rack.
 
I have a similar question about a lot of classic decks generally. SP10, thorens TD124 ... why do all the plinths have to be so massive?

Is it for mass and stability? If that’s the case wouldn’t something like a concrete built plinth of a smaller size do the same job?
 
I have a similar question about a lot of classic decks generally. SP10, thorens TD124 ... why do all the plinths have to be so massive?

23939205481_8efe944c6a_b.jpg


With a 9” arm in a traditional Ortofon-style ‘50s plinth the TD-124 is tiny, no larger footprint than say a Planer 3. It fairly tall due to the huge main bearing, motor etc hanging beneath the top plate, but very small footprint and easily fits on say a standard Target wall-shelf. The Garrards and SP-10 (and EMTs) are large because they are professional broadcast decks rather than home audio, they are designed for maximum serviceability, and folk tend to want to use 12” arms, maybe even two arms which obviously makes them bigger again.
 
I doubt you can get that small and still maintain sufficient structural rigidity. The cutout hole for a Garrard is very large as there is a lot that hangs down under the deck. I’d download the plinth cutout template (widely available with a bit of Googling) and work from there. IIRC my slate plinth for the 301 was 450x450mm.
Bah, thought as much. Although I might actually be able to get away with 450 if the feet were far enough back from the front.
I can take a tape measure to my Loricraft skeletal tonight, if that helps. It fits - just - on a standard rack.
Thanks, I'd appreciate it.
The plinth on my 401 is very compact, pics of it can be found here. I'll measure it tonight and get you sizes.
Cheers, that does look compact.
 
as an side Tony, what made you switch from a 301 to the Thorens?

I had far more personal time, effort and expense invested in the 124, a larger supply of spares (about two thirds of another TD124!), and I do like the small footprint which means much later in life it can end up on a wallshelf in a retirement flat or whatever. I do rather miss the Garrard though, it was a stunningly good deck.
 
My wonky tape measure skillz make my Loricraft skeletal, cut for a single 9” arm, a smidge under 40cm deep and a smidge over 45cm wide.

I vaguely recall asking Terry to make the plinth as small as possible, so they might not be the standard production dimensions.
 
Sean

Some while ago on an ancient vaguely similar thread these got drawn up - might help you plan what you need, where the compromise will be. The arcs show where the centre of the armbase can go for a few popular arm radii... so actually at least half the packaging problem is - what arm are you using / where can it's own base cut-out go to best effect? See if you can make one work for your situation:

http://www.acoustica.org.uk/other/garrard.html

(happy to re-work this a bit if you have a particular thing in mind, drop me a pm)
 
23939205481_8efe944c6a_b.jpg


With a 9” arm in a traditional Ortofon-style ‘50s plinth the TD-124 is tiny, no larger footprint than say a Planer 3. It fairly tall due to the huge main bearing, motor etc hanging beneath the top plate, but very small footprint and easily fits on say a standard Target wall-shelf. The Garrards and SP-10 (and EMTs) are large because they are professional broadcast decks rather than home audio, they are designed for maximum serviceability, and folk tend to want to use 12” arms, maybe even two arms which obviously makes them bigger again.

Not much bigger than the 135 by the looks of it. Interesting.
 
My wonky tape measure skillz make my Loricraft skeletal, cut for a single 9” arm, a smidge under 40cm deep and a smidge over 45cm wide.

I vaguely recall asking Terry to make the plinth as small as possible, so they might not be the standard production dimensions.
Thanks very much MB, that's good news: looks like it's do-able.
Sean

Some while ago on an ancient vaguely similar thread these got drawn up - might help you plan what you need, where the compromise will be. The arcs show where the centre of the armbase can go for a few popular arm radii... so actually at least half the packaging problem is - what arm are you using / where can it's own base cut-out go to best effect? See if you can make one work for your situation:

http://www.acoustica.org.uk/other/garrard.html

(happy to re-work this a bit if you have a particular thing in mind, drop me a pm)
Brilliant Martin, thanks. All very speculative at the moment but when the time comes I may hit you up for some advice.
Mine is 435 wide, 420 deep and 150 high. Not sure you can make the depth much less than this.

401.jpg


401-2.jpg
Thanks Killie, that looks great, and very compact. I remember you had a 125 with the same arm - how does it compare?
 
Similar physical size, but a very different plinth cut-out, i.e. you can’t drop one into the other’s plinth.

Ah, OK, thanks, didn’t know - just assumed they were the same...and have been looking for a cheap 135 as I have a spare 124 plinth :)
 


advertisement


Back
Top