garrard 401 top plate - Missing Part Identification

[jenson]

Hey guys, I've attached three pictures for reference. The first two show the top plate—it's pretty clear there's an empty groove in one of them, just above the strobe light. The third picture includes the part that's missing. This has been nagging me for days, and I can't seem to figure out what it is, anyone?

p.s. i just noticed the thickness of this top plate in the on with groove seems thicker?




this white part goes in the empty, rectagular groove above the strobe in one picture,

 

[reubensm]

About a decade and a half ago when I was into Garrard 301 and 401 hunting in the UK, I came across this scenario while checking out some new old stock Garrards at a very knowledgeable audiophile's home. His explanation was as follows:

1) the early 401s had a flush strobe like this one, notice the difference on the underside with the mirror:





2) the later 401 chassis were designed for a raised strobe with a chrome frame, which was a lot simpler, design wise



Here is a closeup of the newer strobe light with a chrome frame:



The advice given to me was Garrard decided to drop the flush strobe light and use the newer raised strobe even as they still had the chassis types (top plate) cut for the older flush strobe, in stock. Hence they just went ahead and bolted the new raised strobe light on-to the old chassis, leaving the original mounting cut-out, open. Quite a few of these came out of the factory until the older chassis stock ran out and Garrard of course switched production to the chassis specifically designed for the newer raised strobe light. What you have is apparently this 'transition-chassis'

 

[analogadikt]

And the strobe on the very early flush strobe 401 would not be on all the time along with the motor. The pitch control knob had to be pressed down to switch on the strobe.

Regards,

 

[reubensm]

And the strobe on the very early flush strobe 401 would not be on all the time along with the motor. The pitch control knob had to be pressed down to switch on the strobe.

Regards,

This is a great point, many first-time users of the oldest version always come back saying the strobe light is not working. The oldest production series of the 401 came with twin spark suppressor capacitors (these also happen to be the most desirable) and a switchable strobe. The strobe light switch was actually integrated with the pitch control and would light up only when pitch control was pressed and held down. The production series that followed (and continued thereafter) featured a single spark suppressor capacitor and without the strobe light switch (the strobe light stayed on from power-up). There is also this raging debate on the aesthetics angle as not too many are familiar with the switchable strobe light concept on the older model- not too nice for someone to drop by your home to listen and ask whether the strobe light has fused

 

[jenson]

Thanks for sharing your wisdom! pretty interesting.

I don't have exact angles to confirm, however, older top plates seem thicker at places..

 

[reubensm]

Thanks for sharing your wisdom! pretty interesting.

I don't have exact angles to confirm, however, older top plates seem thicker at places..

I have come across and actually handled all versions of the 401 and can confirm that I did not find any differences between the quality (or thickness) of the older 401s and the newer 401s. Both the 301 and 401 were Garrard's flagship models and hence had a very high-quality production run. They were competing with the likes of Thorens and Lenco at the time and hence, performance was an important criteria.

However there are audiophiles who believe that the quality of the 401 was not up to the standards of the 301 as most of them were manufactured during the Plessey ownership era, while Garrard itself believed that the 401 was far superior when compared to the 301 as it addressed some of the 301's shortcomings.

There may be slight difference in chassis casting to accommodate changes, like the drop-in raised strobe for example. Buyers prefer the older 401s as they were closest to the production run of the 301 and there is this belief that Garrard cut costs and quality dropped as they got to the 1970s. Well, there are lot of opinions out there so there is an element of judgement to all of it.

 

[arj]

another opinion is Garrard apparently felt the motor of the 301 was overpowered and pulled it back a bit with the 401 but again its just another opinion. I got the 401 since it has a lesser premium to the 301 thats all...both are excellent.

 

[G401fan]

I have an early grease-bearing 301, and a very early 401 (serial no.487, dual capacitors, recessed strobe, press-down light). Both are excellent and I'd be hard pressed to certify one better than the other. Wouldn't exchange either for a Techdas.

 

[jenson]

I have an early grease-bearing 301, and a very early 401 (serial no.487, dual capacitors, recessed strobe, press-down light). Both are excellent and I'd be hard pressed to certify one better than the other. Wouldn't exchange either for a Techdas.

pics please!

 

[jenson]

didn't know that 401 came with a suspended plinth too, SME plinth apparently, instead of the squash balls, springs on all four corners....It's obviously not favoured. We can now see how the squash balls were considered as an option.. @reubensm any insights...

Interesting to see how suspended plinths were a thing back then

 

[jenson]

Pics!

 

[analogadikt]

Interesting to see how suspended plinths were a thing back then

Garrard sold both the 301and 401 with mounting hardware that had springs. The 301 came with stainless steel bolts that are visible from the top and fix it to the mounting board. The 401 has studs that go up from bellow. Both sets had four springs and threaded posts to be fixed at the corners of the mounting board which would then drop into the plinth or console.
In 2008/9 my 301/3012 came in a huge 6' long custom radiogram of 1964 vintage where the 301 was mounted in such a fashion under a flip up top.

Regards,

 

[jenson]

Garrard sold both the 301and 401 with mounting hardware that had springs. The 301 came with stainless steel bolts that are visible from the top and fix it to the mounting board. The 401 has studs that go up from bellow. Both sets had four springs and threaded posts to be fixed at the corners of the mounting board which would then drop into the plinth or console.
In 2008/9 my 301/3012 came in a huge 6' long custom radiogram of 1964 vintage where the 301 was mounted in such a fashion under a flip up top.

Regards,

Thanks for insights! Looking back, loricraft simply replaced the spring with squash balls, innovative, and in some way still true to the original design....

 

[arj]

didn't know that 401 came with a suspended plinth too, SME plinth apparently, instead of the squash balls, springs on all four corners....It's obviously not favoured. We can now see how the squash balls were considered as an option.. @reubensm any insights...

Interesting to see how suspended plinths were a thing back then

BOTH 301/401 original SME were suspended plinth. fundamentally they are the same but for a different powered motor and shape of top plate.

I dont think springs are great (dont have direct experience) but sorbothane, squash balls etc all work very well .They do not as sound good with a heavy plinth which works excellently for a lenco.

 

[reubensm]

didn't know that 401 came with a suspended plinth too, SME plinth apparently, instead of the squash balls, springs on all four corners....It's obviously not favoured. We can now see how the squash balls were considered as an option.. @reubensm any insights...

Interesting to see how suspended plinths were a thing back then

The SME 2000 plinth was essentially a universal plinth and not really a Garrard-specific one. Vintage literature of those times suggest that the SME 2000 plinth was actually designed by SME for their flagship 3009 and 3012 tonearms. The user could just get the mounting board cut to the template of the turntable deck and the SME tonearm that he/she owned and bolt them on. The dealers who sold them either assisted with cutting the mounting hole or just had prefabricated mounting boards for various type of decks and SME tonearms. One would notice a lot of Garrard 401s paired with them as they were sold at a time when the 401 was in production.

Here is an example of how the original brand new one looked:



There are a lot of examples of the SME 2000 in use with other decks, especially the Thorens TD125. I have never owned a SME 2000 but came across a few of them, and actually heard one with a Garrard 301 and SME 3012, at an esteemed FM's home. It sounded great but I remember looking at it and thinking that a Garrard deck on it would need special attention to keep it running in pristine condition, to avoid rumble.

The underside of the original mounting board with the spring suspension:



The optics associated with this plinth, on an enthusiast's rack, is an awesome sight to behold.



The debate between a layered heavy plinth vs a box plinth is a long and subjective one. From my experience with various Garrard turntables, they tend to sound punchier in box plinths but one always has to contend with the rumble factor. The layered heavy plinths are more forgiving as they offer superb dampening but many (including me) feel that the fidelity is slightly compromised, with them.

 

[jenson]

Another master class Thanks for sharing this background. It's still lurking around in the UK..

Off topic, plinths by Vinylista looks gorgeous on the garrards..and doable from diy perspective..Looks like a slight upgrade from loricraft, atleast the earlier versions of vinylista...recent ones looks advanced with some resonator type approach added

 

[jenson]

Plinths by vinylista