lots of interesting perspectives really enjoyed folks' views. Can I hear some experts/devotees of Garrard 301/401 turntables. To be fair to the reviewers and buying public when Linn and many other 3 point suspension decks hit the market, I remember the big criticism of the idler design was rumble (I think). So, was this more about poor plinths - I remember my father's thin boxy ply affair, I can't recall the make, but it lacked mass and from my young engineering eye seemed sub-standard. I have seen some very solid-looking ply constructions and other very heavy granite etc designs today, is this the secret sauce that has allowed these decks to shine now? or is there other work needed to their mechanism, or was the criticism just not justified back in the day?
There was a very, very strong ‘idler bad/belt drive good’ at the time both in the press and at high st dealers. I came onboard at exactly this time and remember reading all manner of negativity towards the GL75 I’d just bought as part of my first system (Quad, JR149, all second hand). I really liked that Lenco. I remember damping the plinth with huge amounts of plasticine etc as HiFi Answers said to, and I think that helped. I was never conscious of bad rumble, though the arm was obviously pretty agricultural. The bottom line is no idler drive deck will ever be as quiet as a belt drive or direct drive, but there is way more to playing a record than a simple S/N ratio. Within a couple of years I’d moved the Lenco on, first for a Leak 3001, which was a fairly budget rebrand of a ‘70s Toshiba belt drive, and whilst it brought a better arm it just wasn’t good overall. That only stayed a few months. Next up was a Ariston RD80 first with a Linn LVV, which was just junk, and soon after with a wonderfully unfashionable AT1120 low mass arm. Thinking back there was still something missing, a connection that was there with the Lenco was still missing, though I did like the RD80 with the AT1200 and high compliance MMs like the Ortofon M20FL. I learned a lot about arms and cartridges at that time.
Next up was the infamous Xerxes, which was the point I felt vinyl replay really sounded ok. I bought it over a Linn purely because it played 45s without being a total PITA about it (assuming the PSU was working). I also only had enough cash for either a LVX or RB300, and the latter is just so much better that helped the choice too (the LVV being so piss poor really put me off any Linn arm below the Ittok, which I couldn’t afford, and at the time it was still illegal to put an RB300 on a Linn).
I didn’t have the knowledge, language or experience at that time to really understand that journey, but I think the Xerxes was the first deck that fixed the issues of the Lenco (mainly its arm) but didn’t screw what it did right up. Shame it was so badly made and the support so poor. It wasn’t until decades later that I’d go back to idlers, after some very enjoyable times with LP12s, a P9 and a Spacedeck. I suspect I’m where I’ll stay now. The TD-124 isn’t perfect, but it is a satisfying end-point to this particular journey. Almost a a circular trajectory back to where I started out.
In hindsight I certainly placed far too much trust in both the hi-fi press and the BADA dealer network, but I still very much view it as a fashion/group-think thing rather than any cynical conspiracy. Most folk in the industry were very decent and well-meaning, if maybe not quite as bright as they thought they were. Customers too, myself included, obviously. It takes both to create a scene/trend of that magnitude.
PS The Linn marketing had been so successful that anything without a suspended subchassis had a hard ride too. I remember talking to Tom Fletcher of Nottingham Analogue much later on and he explained the original Dais only had a subchassis due to market pressure and that he couldn’t get reviews, dealers etc without. His advice was to keep the transit screws locked down and ideally remove the springs entirely. He did not like “bouncy bouncy decks” at all.
