Garrard 401

[joel]

I've seen a few recently here in Japan for affordable money... I have to say I'm tempted. I've been buying quite a few mono records recently, so I have a fantasy of a Garrard with a Morch arm and a couple of wands
Anyway, assuming this itch eventually needs scratching, what should I be on the look for with used 401s, and what kind of plinth is best?
(I'm in Japan, so sending back to Loricraft for a service is not really practical).
Here's a gratuitous pic of one of these gorgeous beasties

[lilolee]

The best plinth is one which is solid and heavy. I used 7 layers of mdf and it weighed over 20kgs

Idler rumble is probably the main thing to check. Mind you how you do that is another matter as you'll need to get it mounted in the first place.

[joel]

OK. I see that Loricraft are now selling a skeletal plinth, but heavy is best. That's easy; someone is making granite plinths for 401s here. Would that do the trick (other than looking a bit funereal)?
Rumble. hmmm I guess that's where the risk lies... There do seem to be people capable of servicing and repairing these here, at a cost - so possibly not fatal.
The next question is where I'd put it and on what kind of alter, sorry, stand

[Mick Parry]

I live almost next door to Loricraft and know them all quite well. As it so happens, I am seeing Terry O Sullivan next week.

The skeletal plinth sounds almost identical to the standard Loricraft plinth. I suggest you choose according to your taste and budget.

I think the standard plinth looks better (subjective I agree) and it certainly gives the 401 a much better sound over other plinths. The Skeletal one seems a bit of a dust trap. But they both sound the same.

The beauty of a "plinthed" Garrard is that you can even mount it on the floor and it will still sound good. Loricraft have experimented with stands and whilst other TT's such as the LP12 need a good stand, preferably wall mounted, the 401 in a plinth is virtually unaffected by what it stands on. Therefore you have the advantage of being able to site it more or less where you want.

If you are serious about getting the best sound out of your 401, Terry's advice is

1. Get it overhauled. Normally this can be done for less than £100.00 excluding postage. The 401 will more or less run forever without adjustment etc.

2. Buy a Loricraft plinth....this eliminates rumble completely. Martin Bastin also makes a good one. The opinion is divided over Slate Audio's marble version, some like it and some hate it. I cannot comment because I have not heard it myself.

3. Buy a Loricraft PSU, this gives the sound a definate boost.

4. Buy a Naim Prefix if you run a Naim pre amp, if your amp is another make, buy the Loricraft version.

5. Buy a MC cartridge and mount it on either

a) Naim Aro

b) SME 1V

c) Shroeder (spelt incorrectly)

I have heard all 3 arms and prefer the Aro, but again that is subjective. I use an Aro with the new Dynavector 17D2 cartridge and it sounds great.

My 401 is cased in a standard plinth on top of a Hutter rack. I have only two upgrades planned. I intend to buy a Naim Supercap to fix between the Prefix and 52 amp and also I am toying with the idea of having having a special bespoke Townshend Seizmic air support made to place under the plinth.

A fully specified 401 is vastly superior to a LP12 and possibly even the Ninja variant. The Ninja slaughters a standard LP12 which sound broken in comparison and my 401 is certainly up with the Ninja. The advantage of the 401 is that once you have mounted it, it will run forever.

Good luck


Mick Parry

[Tony L]

1. Get it overhauled. Normally this can be done for less than £100.00 excluding postage. The 401 will more or less run forever without adjustment etc.

I suspect that if you wanted Lorricraft to service a 401 you could probably get away with simply sending them the main bearing and motor assembly, i.e. stripping the deck yourself. The 401 is a very simple beast and this approach would save considerably on postage. Get them to send the serviced bits back with a plinth and bolt it all back together yourself.

a) Naim Aro

b) SME 1V

c) Shroeder (spelt incorrectly)

The Morch Joel lusts after is I believe another good match.

The only thing I’d add is that when buying a 401 other than listening for rumble check the main bearing for play – I’ve seen a couple that you could slightly rock the platter and this can’t be good!

Tony.

PS For God’s sake man, the 301 is so much cooler!

[Mick Parry]

Tony

I am merely repeating Loricrafts recommendations.

They experiment all the time and they know what they are doing.

I have heard some fantastic sounds come out of their workshops, that why I have a Garrard.

As regards to whether it should be a 301 or 401, the 301 sounds best for mono but the 401 is way ahead on stereo reproduction.

I agree the 301 looks cooler but in a plinth the 401 is the better of the two.

There was a stainless steel / brass bespoke 501 model being made for a special customer and that was a real eye opener.

Regards

Mick

[Tony L]

As regards to whether it should be a 301 or 401, the 301 sounds best for mono but the 401 is way ahead on stereo reproduction.

Never heard the stereo / mono thing brought up before – I can see no logical reason whatsoever how a deck could perform better at one than the other. Whenever someone comes out with something like that my reaction is a firm “Why?”! Did Terry give any reasons to backup his statement?

The general consensus from what I can tell seems to be that the best of the lot is the early ‘grease bearing’ 301, followed by a ‘good’ 401, followed by the ‘oil bearing’ 301. This is certainly backed up by the second hand pricing, a grease bearing 301 (especially in the grey Hammerite finish) will cost massively more than any other 301/401 variant. I get the impression that manufacturing tolerances with 401s were a little more ‘variable’ than with 301s due to typical 70s UK industrial problems, so despite technically being the better design less than perfect build could shift the balance back to the stock 301 in terms of performance. I guess Lorricraft may restore the balance by servicing, though they certainly still charge a hell of a lot more for a 301!

Tony.

[joel]

Excellent suggestions and tips. Thank you Mick, Tony and Lee.
This looks like something I could do in stages, especially if I follow Tony's suggestions and send the main bearing and motor assembly off to Loricraft to be seen to. I shall check for platter wobble!
Anyway, A large and very heavy plinth it shall be. Freight costs and poor exchange rates mean that I'll probably have this done here in Japan. One of the things I really like about the LP12 is the grooved plinth...
I use an Accuphase preamp, so a Naim phono stage is out of the question. However, the Loricraft Missing Link comes *very* highly recommended; in fact I'm lining up to buy one (BTW have you heard one of these Mick?) - I'd like to find one s/h if I can. I also use the Dynavector DV17II and agree that it is an excellent cart, and can see no reason to change other than to add a mono cart.
As far as arms go, the Morch is really interesting because the arm tube is interchangable so I can have an arm for the stereo cart and one for the mono; this seems an eminently practical solution. It is also said to be an excellent arm and I think the "look" fits very well with the Garrard.
That said I shall keep an eye out for the others on the list (I've seen, but not heard, a Schroeder - and it is a stunning piece of work). If I do this in stages, I can bide my time looking for the right arm at the right price.
My alter shall be low in true Lonorgan style. This will enable me to pray simultaneously to both Garrard and Rudy Van Gelder.
This all sounds like a plan. Crikey.

PS one really good reason for not buying a 301 is that it is more than three times the price of a 401 and is beyond my means at the moment.

[Mick Parry]

Tony

Terry did explain to me why the 301 is better suited to mono, it was something to do with the main bearing. I am seeing him some day next week, so I will raise it with him and come back with a more definitive answer.

Garrard tended to make everything inside and this is why they became expensive. I used to work with several ex employees who to a man have stated that both the 301 and 401
were ludicrously over engineered. The platters were spun and balanced for 6 working days and if you look inside the rim you will see small holes drilled out by hand to achieve perfection. Their Engineers just did not know where to draw the line.


Joel

I have not heard a Loricraft Missing Link, but Loricraft always over engineer, so I suspect it is good.

The only other one they would recommend is Naim but as you have a non Naim system, your best best is to play safe and go for the Loricraft one.

Regards

Mick

[Mick Parry]

If I was in your shoes, I would employ a carpenter to make up a plinth locally.

It is not rocket science and evidently the best wood is American Ash. It is almost white when new but quickly turns golden with age. Oiling it speeds up the process considerably.

Regards

Mick

[joel]

I shall look for an appropriate carpenter.
My understanding is that the Loricraft Missing Link is very well engineered and seriously under-priced for what you get!
These guys look like they might have something in stock...
http://www2.odn.ne.jp/sound-k/audio-3.html

[sideshowbob]

I've heard nothing but good things about the Missing Link from people who generally seem to have good taste.

A 401 in a nice plinth with a Morch sounds like a cunning plan to me, I've been thinking about putting together something similar (probably not a Morch though), but decent condition cheap 401s are a bit thin on the ground at the mo. One day.

-- Ian

[Tony L]

I shall look for an appropriate carpenter.

I get the impression that the way to approach Garrard plinth design is to consider the plinth in two parts: the ‘top plate’ and the plinth itself. The Lorricraft designs have a inch thick top plate decoupled from the outer plinth on ‘air filled decouplers’ (which I suspect means squash balls). The vast majority of decks that I consider successful have a similar method of decoupling the unit from the world at large, logically the Garrard plinth design is pretty similar to say a Xerxes – the top-plate sits inside, but mechanically decoupled from the outer plinth.

As with most things in life I have a crack-pot theory on this subject. In turntable design I think mass is good from a isolation perspective, i.e. the deck should be a good solid affair, it will worry less about its environment, but if the whole thing behaves as a rock solid entity it will probably sound leaden and slow. This is where things like the Lorricraft plinth, Xerxes etc work – they are heavy things, but the actual gubbins mechanically connected to the platter is pretty light, and light things don’t store much energy so tend to sound more agile. They are a sensible compromise between high and low mass design bringing the benefits of both.

The Nottingham decks (such as mine) take this to what I see as it’s logical extreme – an incredibly heavy rotating mass in the platter giving exceptional speed stability sitting on a light skeletal chassis (logically a smaller, lighter version of the Garrard / Roksan top-plate), this being decoupled from the outside world by compliant rubber feet and this sitting on a further massy bottom plinth for additional isolation, i.e. mass is where it should be, and not where it shouldn't. I have never heard a Slate Audio solid plinth for a Garrard, but my gut feeling is that it won’t work nearly as well as the Lorricraft as it is a solid lump, not a split design.

Tony.

[Mick Parry]

Tony

I have heard rumours that you can buy a wooden plinth which supports a heavy slate top plate which in turn is suspended on four squash balls.

I have been told that the slate sounds good......whether it does or not is another question.

Regards

Mick

[lilolee]

You may be interested in this plinth design, found here http://www.eng.abdn.ac.uk/~eng289/401/401plnth.htm

Also Shindo do a nice plinth for the 301 - http://www.shindo-laboratory.co.jp/player/player.html