turntable reviews?

[Frank Dernie]

View attachment 122739

Anyone know what this thing is for?



JSmith

Seperating the technically illiterate from their money?

 

[Frank Dernie]

A friend of mine is dying to ask whether during your time with Garrard any discoveries were made on the hugely important issue of which plinth design/material most effectively mitigated rumble in 301/401s. It’s not me you understand, definitely a friend

The 301/401 was originally intended for broadcast and supplied with little rubber grommets which separated the chassis from the plinth it rested on.
The 401 was in production then and wasn't being developed, if Garrard had continued its replacement would certainly have been direct drive.
The 401 has better support of the main bearing than the 301 but was mainly a styling excercise because the 301 looked too old fashioned to sell any more at that time, which makes me laugh now.
iirc the biggest cause of rumble was deterioration of the idler wheel surface, but that would still only be the case 50 years later if the bearings are pristine, which they may not be, depending on how well maintained a particular unit has been.

 

[Frank Dernie]

Take @DSJR 's advice, he probably has massively more experience of the reality than anybody else on here!

 

[DSJR]

Frank, My first 401 suffered motor drone through to the stylus but I can't remember if the idler was responsible (it isn't on Duals and Lencos with similar noise as it's there with idler removed and stylus on a stationary record but motor running). For yet more sins, I have a thought lost 401 in mint condition set in a substantial veneered plinth and hinged cover coming my way once able to travel to collect it. It was 'given' to me in the late 80's (they weren't worth a huge amount back then) and was stored behind a load of stuff in a dry spare bedroom of an old pal of mine who sadly passed away last year. His widow was clearing out a considerable amount of HiFi gear he'd collected (a lot of which I'd sold him too) and voila! it re-appeared. I love the style of the 401 (I'm an early 60's kid) and would love to see if I can get this thing running quietly enough. It has a uni-pivot arm based on a HiFi News article from the early 70's and if this is serviceable, I'll fit me Decca Microscanner (a HUGE masochist cartridge but soooo good when running right) and a Notts Analogue Spacemat on top of the Garrard one ( ) and see how we go.

In the meantime, my precious and beloved Dual 701 will stay with me regardless, even if the other Garrards, Lenco's, Duals, Thorens and Beogram 3000 have to go - The 701's automatic too (what's the world coming to!)


Best vinyl player I ever owned was a Notts Analogue Mentor with mentor stabilised Unipivot arm and my Decca Garrott Microscanner - The mentor looks like a Rega on steroids with a 72lb platter running on a very substantial bearing and graphite top platter which totally kills boom or noise if a playing record is thumped while playing (try doing that on a springy belt drive ). I had some master tape copies which I played on my high speed Revox B77mk2 (you take reel to reel completely for granted once you own one but lust after one if you don't) and the few tracks I could compare, the mentor wasn't found wanting (latest model is the 'Dias'). the Decca failed as they all do eventually and I had a Citroen 'money pit,' so the Mentor and Revox were sold, along with my rather nice Nakamichi CR7 cassette deck - I kept the Decca and eventually had it repaired - it still 'sounds' lovely but I don't have a deck able to take it properly.



To all those raising their eyes at the above - see what happens when vinyl gets a look in, when a bloody Topping D10s or E30 will out-perform it given a suitable source streamer? You can sink tens of thousands into this format and still want more! I was interested in the Kronos turntables my old stomping ground (KJ) sold for a while, with contra rotating platters, but they don't seem to carry it any more. Total madness really but they sure are prettier than proper cutting lathes which possibly out-perform them...

 

[Frank Dernie]

Decca Microscanner (a HUGE masochist cartridge but soooo good when running right)

Deccas are my favourite cartridge.
My wife and I were visiting Charlie Chan who you may know.
Charlie is a dyed in the wool analogueophile and he played an LP on his Verdier TT which had 2 arms, one had a rebuilt Decca SC4E iirc and the other a super expensive Allaerts.
Afterwards Sheenagh asked in all innocence "why do you use that other one?" referring to the Allaerts

 

[Frank Dernie]

In the meantime, my precious and beloved Dual 701

Best measuring TT I have ever seen data for.
I looked around for one for a while but came to mys senses, I rarely use the ones I already have!

 

[DSJR]

Best measuring TT I have ever seen data for.
I looked around for one for a while but came to mys senses, I rarely use the ones I already have!

The arm shouldn't take fancy cartridges, but it didn't 'arf' sound great with my Koetsu Black, now sadly a channel down as the bottom trim came off and I carelessly trapped a coil wire when re-attaching it, breaking said wire when I tried to use it again (OUCH!!!). Nice compromise cartridge though and I really should have it repaired (Expert Styli I wonder?). It'll cost hundreds though to do, but the diamond is mint with barely a hundred hours on it and the Blacks were never as coloured or 'squishy' sounding as the early Reds and Onyx were (I compared all three at the time).

 

[JSmith]

So the RPM of a turntable is 33/45/78 RPM and a CD is between 200 and 500 RPM... so CD must be better, right?




JSmith

 

[sergeauckland]

So the RPM of a turntable is 33/45/78 RPM and a CD is between 200 and 500 RPM... so CD must be better, right?




JSmith

It's also got 16 bits, whereas my LPs don't have any bits, at least nothing falls out of the sleeve with the record.

S.

 

[Loathecliff]

I think the biggest differentiator between well setup turntables is the phono preamp

That's certainly been my experience.
Late 80s, the prototype of a new phono stage was kindly given to me and all changed.
Kingsway Hall recordings swapped in preference.
The aural seams in much praised Decca efforts were exposed.
Many EMIs at last showed much more of what was on the tape....depth; string tone; perspectives.
TTs at the time were 401, Thorens 150 & 166, & late father's now modded (hack sawed) Lenco 75.
The Lenco with 3009 grommet-free mounting onto the Lenco steel base was supreme.
I'd never heard depth and delicacy like it on any vinyl set up.
The oddest part was the now apparent lack of cartridge fussiness.
Any half decent MM sounded .. musical?
Of the many amps I had, the budget Rogers Cadet (both mks 2&3) stood out.
(the mk3 had imho the worst of all the lousy phono stages inflicted on us). Now the Cadets showed as fast (most un-valve like) and revealing with a transparent mid range. The Leak 20 ran them close. Quads? They became display pieces.
The phono stage's maker appeared many months later. Asked if I'd changed the couple of components he thought needed upgrading. I hadn't touched it. Didn't dare.
I put on my favourite LP, Beethoven pc 4. Gilels/Philharmonia.
"Don't change anything", he said.
Speakers had shifted from the esl57 (one frame rattling, and the diodes needing replacing, again) to a pair of unfashionable traded in Ditton 25 floor standers. A strange device, seemingly without a mid-range speaker. Three point mounted onto Whitworth sockets, and tilting-back slightly..... Time to stop. Sorry, one crumbly, waffling and losing the point.
Any mod who wants to delete this nonsense, please go ahead.

 

[Frank Dernie]

I was interested in the Kronos turntables my old stomping ground (KJ) sold for a while, with contra rotating platters, but they don't seem to carry it any more. Total madness really but they sure are prettier than proper cutting lathes which possibly out-perform them...

One of the members of the WAM brought his to one of the Scalford bake offs it certainly is a lovely bit of machining but technically makes no sense IMO. I forget what amps he used but I am fairly sure he was using speakers with a plasma tweeter, maybe Lansche I forget. His system sounded great anyway I thought.

 

[Frank Dernie]

3009 grommet-free mounting onto the Lenco steel base

That guarantees plinth vibration is directly coupled to the headshell and since the cartridge is supposed to be the "stator" in the transducer system the spurious vibration will be "seen", wrongly, as signal.
OTOH it seems a bit of spurious resonance seems to be the source of the PRaT "improvement" with some mods.

Those grommets are there to avoid this, and the arm is more accurate with them fitted as specified in the manual (yes, I have measured it).

 

[Frank Dernie]

current project is an SL75B bought glued up for fifteen quid inc P&P Christmastime). I'm fond of my Garrard 86SB despite the flimsy arm.

Those Garrard arms measure pretty well - they were designed on an engineering basis to have minimal pickup of plinth vibration or headshell resonance.
Some of the minimising of the plinth resonance pickup was simply punching strategically placed holes in the steel top plate pressing such that the arm mount was at a node in a potentially damaging resonance. Edit: production cost a penny effect measurable, unlike most of the fashion and marketing conscious efforts of today!
The little slide and clip in plastic cartridge carriers actually gave less spurious vibration (at least when undamaged) on the cartridge output than the, much used even today, SME removable headshell collar and clamp of the time (yes I have measured this too ?)

 

[Loathecliff]

That guarantees plinth vibration is directly coupled to the headshell and since the cartridge is supposed to be the "stator" in the transducer system the spurious vibration will be "seen", wrongly, as signal.
OTOH it seems a bit of spurious resonance seems to be the source of the PRaT "improvement" with some mods.

Those grommets are there to avoid this, and the arm is more accurate with them fitted as specified in the manual (yes, I have measured it).

Hi Frank, I know what the grommets are for, and I didn't expect to get away with it.
The purpose was a rigid path.
You are assuming the Lenco chassis is as a bad as a 401s?

 

[DSJR]

The UK Linn mindset of the 80's has a hell of a lot to answer for. I inherited an SME fixed head 'Improved' arm which awaits my reluctantly fetching down an 'Almost Super' souped Up Thorens 160BCmk2 so I can fit it now I have period cables and so on ready to go. First thing I did was to get a set of the rubber mounting bushings for my own experiments, but now I don't need to as Frank has done it for me Arm has a good stylus V15 III ready fitted into the black gunked headshell (really made a subjective difference to the resonant arm structure, this stuff in the shell), but as I find the V15 III a little hard toned (the HE stylus wasn't but you can't get them now), not sure which of my vintage cartridge stash to transfer over - maybe a nice B&O MMC20-CL, which has a 'quiet' kind of tonal quality to it which may suit the lively SME and rather 'stark' Thorens sonics (I prefer the 150 to the 160, but they do wear out eventually.

Oh eff - I'm going all subjective on this site as well. Aren't you 'digital' people glad you never got into vinyl or lifted yourselves out of it?

 

[Frank Dernie]

Hi Frank, I know what the grommets are for, and I didn't expect to get away with it.
The purpose was a rigid path.
You are assuming the Lenco chassis is as a bad as a 401s?

Being "rigid" is an idea based on static thinking applied to a dynamic system. Nothing is rigid over the full audible range and the grommets are actually "rigid" enough for correct function where they are placed.
The Lenco chassis is no better than the 401, I am familiar with both.
I do know that both have been in fashion for a while though, which never ceases to surprise me.

 

[JeffS7444]

The UK Linn mindset of the 80's has a hell of a lot to answer for.

Oh yes, Linn: Besides having owned a trio of LP12s, I recall the USA distributer briefly convincing us that not only did having other unused speakers in the sound room degrade the sound, so did the piezo speaker in my wristwatch!

I liked the LP12 + Valhalla power supply and Ittok arm well enough once the arm cable, suspension springs and grommets had been fretted over per Linn mythos, but eventually got lured away by a secondhand Technics SL1200 Mk II which seemed to have superior pitch stability, and at a price which was far less than one of Linn's various upgrades. I probably should have kept that Technics.

 

[DSJR]

The use of single pairs of speakers in a dem room is actually a good one. More than two pairs in the room and everything starts to sound the same and even bringing forward the pair playing isn't really enough. I discovered this when my little dem room for one pair at a time had to be given over to ten pairs all in a line or on shelves above and everything then sounded the same - mediocre!

What I was kind of referring to is that what works for Linn Isobariks at the time (spikes to the floor and so on) didn't always work for 'BBC Inspired' thin wall models. Removing the rubber grommets from older SME arms may have 'cured' one thing, but as Frank D has suggested, just moved a potential issue from one part to another and actually making things worse. See, dealers like me weren't trained in any particular mechanical aspect (although the best of us could play one or more musical instruments), so we followed the mantra to the letter without questioning it. I still 'do the tune dem' in my head when hearing new gear and also live music, but that's just me.

It was the utter tribal blind adherence to things which ended up peeing me off. *Everything* had to be done their way and it didn't always work. The 'split' between Linn and Naim as a marketing collaboration polarised many dealers, but it helped to free my mind frankly and subsequent events from 1985 to 1990 and onwards helped me spread my auditory wings, although the tribal disciple in me still gets hurt when ATC speakers are annihilated by people who don't really know what they're about and why they do what they do. Having said that, I'm not so closed to other brands being 'better' and for less money, but discovering this with vinyl, put me off the LP12 'fruitbox' for decades and it's only in recent times I've been able to return occasionally to setting up and 'upgrading' some when asked and I have to say the Thorens 150 based styling is timeless.

I'm not sure the now replaced Technics 1200mk2 was the dogs doo-dahs either really. The incredible platter torque did apparently come at a price, apparently the supply regulators injected noise or similar into the servo's (may be bullsh*t but that's what peeps were saying over here) and the mains transformer, underneath the deck plate in my 1500 but under the platter in the 1200mk2, could inject hum if an MC cartridge was used. The tonearm, rigid and massy in the mid 70's ancestor decks, was much lighter (good) but maybe more 'resonant' at audio frequencies (not so good). Bringing it up to date, the very well priced and stripped out SL1500C looks to have addressed much of this and the new motor arrangement looks very like the Pabst based one that my pushing-fifty year old Dual 701 has... All the attention is on the new 1200 models at audiophool prices, but little's been said about the better value? 1500C...

What all this sh*t has to do with ASR possibly considering turntable reviews I have no idea. Hope sone or two of you find it vaguely interesting. I can't talk about dacs or modern amps you see, let alone most of the speakers reviewed here with any real insight at all

 

[Phorize]

The 401 was in production then and wasn't being developed, if Garrard had continued its replacement would certainly have been direct drive..

Now that is interesting-were you aware of any prototypes or early designs? I think that the assumption with the next garrard enthusiast crowd is that a successive transcription deck would have been an improved idler .ie a 501 rather than a completely new design. It’s a shame they never got there IMO.

 

[Frank Dernie]

Now that is interesting-were you aware of any prototypes or early designs? I think that the assumption with the next garrard enthusiast crowd is that a successive transcription deck would have been an improved idler .ie a 501 rather than a completely new design. It’s a shame they never got there IMO.

The engineering was looking at direct drives but actually the main thrust was improving the performance of less expensive units using clever engineering, Garrard had a laser based vibration measuring system in 1975.
The 401 was trickling out of the place, the magazines and hence the vast bulk of the fans had gone for the Linn marketing and our own R&D showed DD to be superior but very expensive to engineer for our production volume.
The 501 was a Loricraft project. Loricraft is/was a small company that bought all the parts and was run by somewhat eccentric (IMO) but fun enthusiasts.
I think Garrard had accepted that the pro market had been taken over by Technics, Sony, Telefunken, EMT, and others all DD iirc.