advertisement


Garrard 301 vs 401

jimb0

jimb0

Jelly Roll Soul
I am very interested in getting hold of a 301 or 401 and doing the custom plinth thing. I am currently getting back into vinyl after a break - the old house move, kids, vinyl in storage story. Although I have been looking at modern turntables with interest (gyrodek se, NAS spacedeck etc) my grandfather worked for Garrard for 40+ years which makes me keen to follow the vintage route. I have read enough to convince me that these beasts can more than stand up to modern competition but want to know if there are appreciable sonic differences between the two models when housed in a modern plinth.

I am planning to pair it with an Origin Live modded RB250 (maybe 300?) and denon DL110 or 103 (would need to change phono stage for low output MC). I think I am leaning towards a skeletal type plinth either from Lorricraft or get one made up locally.

I am not rushing into this and am vaguely keeping an eye on prices while getting quality time in with my current modest Pro-ject 1.2 to see if I remain smitten with the vinyl experience. What do people think are reasonable prices at the moment?

I guess the next move is to locate some tame Garrard owners to have a listen and probably do the same with the modern competition.

Jim
 
My advice for what it is worth......Buy a 401 now, even if you dont do anything with it for a while. Prices are going only one way, and it 'aint down. You will not lose money on it.
I have never heard a 301 but I dont for one second think they are worth 3 times the price of a 401 on sound quality grounds. As for looks? Ahh, thats a differant matter and I will freely admit that I would love a 301, it has a certain retro coolness that its younger brother cant get close to.

Paul.
 
Jim

The 401 is your best bet because stereo sounds better than on a 301.

The RB300 sounds good but Loricraft recommend the incognito mod rather than OL.

The skeletal plinth sounds almost the same as the standard Loricraft plinth, so it more of what you favour visually as well as sonically.

I have a 401 with all the extras and live just off junction 15 of the M4. You are welcome to have a listen anytime.

Regards

Mick
 
Garrard 401/RB300 and DL110 is a combination that works really nicely: I set one up for a friend to use in his MF A1FE/Tannoy DC2000 system.
Please be aware that the lack of height adjustment on the standard Rega arm means you will need to fabricate a platform to lift the arm up, so that it's base/mounting plate are on the same level as the motor unit top plate, or possibly fractionally higher...
As the other gents here know intimately and both still run 401s, I'm not about to disagree with what they've said.
BTW, the 401 I set up had been mine: I ran it with SME IV and various moving coil carts for a year or two. But that's another story...
 
Hi,

I have a 401 with Incognito'd and Mitchel counterweighted RB300 in a DIY copy of a skelatal Loricraft plinth.

I would really recommend getting one - but as Paul said - buy now to avoid disappointment!! With ebay etc the prices are escalating fast.

Mick's 401 would be a good one to listen to - however his Aro (still got that Mick?) is likely to sound better than and quite different to a Rega arm. I'm planning on going the unipivot route at some point and would consider an Aro or similar.

Can't go wrong with a 401 - 301 is overpriced (IMHO) and with modern stereo records can actually sound worse.

Thanks,

Rich
 
I used one of these adjusters from originlive when i put my rega arm with the 401. its just the right height and is supposed to sound better than the screwed type. The only draw back is the £48 price tag. Just seen the latest mod for the arm on the site,a stripped and polished arm tube with groves machined in lookes similar to all the discussions on PFM re the arm stripping.
Clive Smith
 
Sounds like 401 is the way to go.

Rich: Do you have pictures of your plinth?

Is the tonearm mount normally de-coupled from the top in these designs? There is an interesting plinth in this review . Although the aesthetics aren't exactly to my taste the design is interesting.

Jim

PS: Thanks for the offer Mick. Will certainly take you up if I am ever down that way.
 
Jim.

Good link, a Garrard article that I seem to have missed! Scary prices for those Shindo bit's!
As for decoupled armboards they seem to be the exception rather than the rule, but I have had good results on my plinth, some info here . Not sure wether it would work with a unipivot, you would have to try that yourself.
I am well on the way to finishing my second plinth. The only thing holding me back now is lack of money, the deck deserves a better arm and cartridge than it has at the moment. A local gunsmith (!) has machined some parts for the decoupled armboard and I am hoping the results are going to be worth it. When finished I am going to put the plans on the web but would also be prepared to build one for anyone without the confidence to have a go themselves, dont hold your breath though!

Paul.
 
Chaps

Just to take Richards point a step further. I used a RB300 (unmodified) and switched to an Aro.

The RB300 is a good arm and will produce an excellent sound, especially if set up with a MC cartridge.

The Aro just takes everything up several notches and brings the vinyl to life.

The loricraft standard plinth works on the principle of a heavy base supporting a light top plate (which houses the TT) on 4 squash balls.

Jim

If you are ever sailing down the M4, just let me know and you can have a good listen. That applies to any one else who is interested in the Garrards.

Regards

Mick
 
A variation on the Lorricraft skeletal is the way I want to go. I am pretty sure that I will start off with an RB300 either stock or modded and then look at uni-pivots later.

How about a similar aproach to the 6moons plinth but using squash ball decoupling and a tonearm "tower" mounted from the base?

table.jpg


Jim
 
Originally posted by jimb0


How about a similar aproach to the 6moons plinth but using squash ball decoupling and a tonearm "tower" mounted from the base?



Jim
Click to expand...


The problem with this route is keeping the spindle to tonearm distance and VTA constant. I have found that the squash balls took a long time to settle. Any movement of the main sub chassis will affect cartridge alignment to a certain extent. Although my plinth is incredibly immune to external knocks it is always a possibility that it can move slightly.
This is why I experimented by replacing the squash balls with cones. Trouble is I personaly prefered the sound of the squash balls. The cones (I used carbon issolators) sounded better in hifi terms, quite noticably so, but they slowed the pace of the music. With experimentation it may be possible to find something that offers a good blend of atributes, only thing is it can be expensive trying out all the alternatives!
As an interesting aside, Loricraft are the UK distibutors for the RCD isolation cones. This composite material looks to have some very promicing properties. Again its all down to cost and i'm a cheapskate!


Paul.
 
Paul

Loricraft conducted some experiments on isolation and at the end of the day, squash balls gave a better result than RDC.

Regards

Mick
 
Hi Mick,

In mentioning RDC I was talking more about the material than the cones as such. The Clearlight website has a little bit of info. It would be interesting to try out the material, perhaps to make a plinth or subchassis.......
........thats the problem though realy, wether it be a manufacturer or a bod like me, R&D is a time consuming and expensive job. Its all to easy to try and re-invent the wheel and try and be differant just for the sake of it. At least if your a manufacturer there is the possibility of recouping your money at the end.
The Stands Unique Carbon Issolators that I tried did alot of things well. The soundstage was very impressive, being both deeper and wider than the squash balls and the bass was a lot tighter too, stoping and starting alot quicker. It was just the pace of the music seemed to slow right down. I hate saying it but the cones did round earth things well but the squash balls let the music flow in a more natural way.
Somewhere out there is a gizmo that gives the best of both worlds. All we need to do is find it!! (But I for one wont be staying up at night looking for it!)


Paul.
 
Paul

I agree with your point about the fruitless task of reinventing the wheel.

Loricraft experimented and experimented like hell to arrive at their present design of using a heavy wooden plinth and squash balls to support a thin MDF top board to house the TT.

Loricrafts plinth is of a superb standard but expensive.

I suggest if you are going to DIY, then use their self same philosophy.

Regards

Mick
 
You must log in or register to reply here.


advertisement


Back
Top