Garrard's (Finished at last)

[Lionheart]

It's taken a while (39 years of trying) but at last I've got a vinyl based system that I'm completely satisfied with in all departments (just).

http://i1199.photobucket.com/albums/aa466/lionheart-uk/Picture17236.jpg

http://i1199.photobucket.com/albums/aa466/lionheart-uk/Picture17042.jpg

http://i1199.photobucket.com/albums/aa466/lionheart-uk/Picture17233.jpg

http://i1199.photobucket.com/albums/aa466/lionheart-uk/Picture16237.jpg

[Spectral Morn]

Looking very interesting indeed :cool:

[southall-1998]

What speakers are you using with those Quad 303?

Cheers.

[Tarzan]

Very nice!:stalks:

[dantheman91]

What speakers are you using with those Quad 303?

Cheers.

Hi

Thinking there celestion 25's :eyebrows:

[Beobloke]

Is it me or is the SME 3009 simply one of the most gorgeous things ever made?

It just looks so right, especially on a 301 or 401! Beautiful decks, John.

[Lionheart]

Thanks for the compliments Chaps. The speakers I'm using are a pair of Celestion 25's, I've tried numerous speakers over the years but the 25's have the sound I've been searching for, importantly for me they are not so fussy on placement (they are sited at the narrow end of a long through lounge) about 6 ft apart, 9" off the rear wall and 4" from the side walls, the downside is I can only use one 303 unless I have the speakers modified so I can Bi-amp. I have another couple of amps in use which I swap around every 6 months (Rogers Cadet II and an original Sugden A21), the modded Lenco in the last photo is paired with a Temple Audio amp and a pair of original Heybrook HB1's.

[Marco]

Like others have said, John, lovely turntables and system :)

How would you say that the 301 compares with the 401, sonically?

Marco.

[spendorman]

You could use a 303 for each channel by using a suitably connected lead. One can even parallel the channels of a 303, there is info from Quad on this.

I have used a separate 303 for each channel, was years ago, worked well.

[WOStantonCS100]

http://i1199.photobucket.com/albums/aa466/lionheart-uk/Picture17236.jpg

Classic elegance. How do you choose which to use? By cartridge?

[Mika K]

Nice system especially when looking at the TTs but finished? I think there might still be something to work on. There always is :)

[Lionheart]

Like others have said, John, lovely turntables and system :)

How would you say that the 301 compares with the 401, sonically?

Marco.

Hello Marco...........Sorry for the 'very' late reply, In my opinion the 301 is the better deck sonically, it's quite hard to find any negatives really, don't get me wrong the 401 is excellent too but at the end of the day the 301 does it for me, it's silent in operation, gets up to speed instantly (and stays there), doesn't suffer platter ring like the 401 and just has a more realistic sound in general. I use the Rega/Shure combo with the 301 and stick to playing pre microgroove pressed 1950's & 60's Lp's, 12" and 45pms, the 401 has the SME/AT 120e pairing and is used for playing better condition later pressings. The Lenco is the surprise performer and if I didn't have the Garrards I could quite easily live with it as my main deck, it's a lighter more bouncy type of sound to my ear of which I'm sure some might prefer to the darker sounding 301/401.

[Lionheart]

Nice system especially when looking at the TTs but finished? I think there might still be something to work on. There always is :)

Your not wrong there Mike, I've switched my attention to amps over the last few months but I'm sure I'll be back to turntable fiddling fairly soon

[DSJR]

I just have this "thing" for the 401 and I'd love to get some better cartridges and headshells into that SME :) The platter belts are easily fitted and a more modern mat ON TOP OF the original Garrard one may be worth thinking about. I may be totally wrong in this, but there is no reason why a 401 should sound worse than a 301 is there?

[Mika K]

I have discussed with some professionals (even one person that worked at the factory at the time when 301s and 401s were made) and heard interesting story about the tolerances among other things and their meaning to decks performance and sound.

The story goes that after the period of 301 units the factory was bit blind to new technology and designed the 401s with considerably smaller tolerances with some new ideas for the improved mechanics. The new deck was excellent but later it was found out that the sound was not there. Even if the mechanical worries of the prototypes were solved, still there was something there. So the later patches of 401s are changed a bit going back to the good old days of 301. It was considered that sonically the best solution would be somewhere between 301 and 401 and some workers have build themselves these kind of frankenunits.

Don't know if the story s true, but from what I have played with 301s and 401s I guess it could be :D

[Lionheart]

I just have this "thing" for the 401 and I'd love to get some better cartridges and headshells into that SME :) The platter belts are easily fitted and a more modern mat ON TOP OF the original Garrard one may be worth thinking about. I may be totally wrong in this, but there is no reason why a 401 should sound worse than a 301 is there?

I must admit I was surprised as well, I aways assumed the 401 with it's better spec would be superior than the 301 but in this case the 301 is IMO a shade better, I suspected that the idler wheel was to blame but I changed them around and the 301 still come out on top sound wise, I've used numeruos mats to try to address the 401's shortfalls, the thick heavy 'Waterloo' mat is just about the best I've tried so far (I use a thin 'Bellow' type mat on the 301)

[Lionheart]

I have discussed with some professionals (even one person that worked at the factory at the time when 301s and 401s were made) and heard interesting story about the tolerances among other things and their meaning to decks performance and sound.

The story goes that after the period of 301 units the factory was bit blind to new technology and designed the 401s with considerably smaller tolerances with some new ideas for the improved mechanics. The new deck was excellent but later it was found out that the sound was not there. Even if the mechanical worries of the prototypes were solved, still there was something there. So the later patches of 401s are changed a bit going back to the good old days of 301. It was considered that sonically the best solution would be somewhere between 301 and 401 and some workers have build themselves these kind of frankenunits.

Don't know if the story s true, but from what I have played with 301s and 401s I guess it could be :D

That's very interesting and certainly believable. The 401 I have is fairly early but it isn't the 1st model with the depressible strobe light, the engineering on my 401 is superb though and certainly on par with the 301 In Every Department.

[DSJR]

Isn't the 301 mat from an old Sony direct drive? used to make nice sucking/squelching noises when a record was removed - Marco should have one :eyebrows:

[Lionheart]

Your right Dave it's off an old Sony DD, keep it under your hat though......I watched one go on E##y for £28 not so long ago. I prefer it to the original Garrard, Metromat or cork mats, to my ears it allows the Garrard to sound very detailed, the thicker mats are okay but they tend to overdampen the sound and make it sound a bit dull in comparison .

[Mika K]

Do you have the platter dampening rings in use? I think in 401 those had bigger effect than in 301 and have settled to use them. There is audible difference there and imho bigger than between decent mats. One of my friends thou likes the sound of his 301 better without any dampening.

[Lionheart]

Mika..........Thank you I'll take your advice and give the platter rings a shot.

[wiicrackpot]

Isn't the 301 mat from an old Sony direct drive? used to make nice sucking/squelching noises when a record was removed - Marco should have one :eyebrows:
Dave,

I think you knowledge is amazing, :respect: i'll be looking for one now as the one that came with my 301 is really shot,
and my 401 one has a dint on the silver centre disc. :)

[jason]

My word that's a stunning looking system, very nice..

Jason

[DSJR]

Dave,

I think you knowledge is amazing, :respect: i'll be looking for one now as the one that came with my 301 is really shot,
and my 401 one has a dint on the silver centre disc. :)

Nah, I just started collecting HiFi Sound magazine in the late 60's and started as a Saturday boy at a radio shop in 1973, moving on to a proper HiFi one a year later. The Aspergers kicked in and I mopped up as much info as my little brain could take. My whole career in audio was like being a kid in a toy shop, coupled with being like a bull in a china shop (oooh, the stories of my misfortunes with gear I could tell :eek: )

[Mika K]

The big audience demands own blog for those tales! :cool:

[DiveDeepDog]

I've got an early '65 401 that fits the criteria of the 'crossover ' deck. It has a flat 301 bearing :)

I've just bought a 70's 401, so am looking forward to comparisons with alleged quality control issues.

The 3/401 comparison is always interesting, I was talking to Loricraft at Whittleburry, and he has a 401 at home .
I'm hoping to have a 301 at home before chrimbo , I always attributed the higher price of 301's to the preference in Asian markets.

Mark

[DSJR]

The first separate turntable I EVER saw was a 401 on its own in a shop window in 1965/66 when I was eight/nine (can't remember the exact year, but my aunt, uncle and cousins had moved to Hemel Hempstead in 1965 and the 401 was in the window of the largish shop "Tee Vee Sound" in the Marlows shopping area of the town) and the deck (I was used to autochangers up until this point) has stayed burned in my psyche ever since, since I was really confused as to why a deck and arm were separate.....

[gummy]

Very nicely presented group! May I ask what the plinth on the 301 is made of?

[pure sound]

Love the HIGH FIDELITY badge. What did that come off?