Loricraft Garrard 301 to Dobbins Sp10 Mk3 - What can I expect ?

No, I am not buying the Beat. I am buying a mk3 in Dobbins plinth. Dobbins takes away the mk3 top plate and installs the entire motor in the plinth. For Beat I think he does more to the power supply and such. 

Hi, I still use the Loricraft Garrard 301. It uses a stacked birch ply plinth. There are few modifications to it too

1.Kokomo Mk2 bearing
2. Woodsong Audio magnetic brake disc
3. AudioSilente idler wheels
4. Funkfirm Achromat

Kodo The Beat is still in production. In fact Steve told me that now he has the Beat SE version which he has demoed at RMAF this year. The SE version is quite a bit more expensive though

@ljgm, I preferred the 301.

Before talking about 301, I will talk about the 3 technics I had the fortunate opportunity to try. 1200G, Sp10 Mk2, Sp10Mk3.

All of them sound surprisingly similar! All of them had similar flow of music, similar tonality, similar feel/PRAT, similar quietness. 

1200G - Very detailed and clean sound. Sounded very complete with its own plinth. I had the special analog PSU from Time-Step. 

Sp10 Mk2 - Never build a complete plinth for it because I didnt know if I would keep it. I used it as a naked player with some good isolation footers. It sounded grander and a bit warmer than 1200G. 

Sp10 Mk3 - I had the Steve Dobbins version, with his amazingly inert heavy plinth. It was supplied with Stillpoint footers. PSU had all the old caps replaced with new Panasonic ones. Overall a mint piece.
It had everything that the smaller brothers had but it also had the explosive dynamics that approached the Garrard. It was more colorful than the other 2 technics tables. I tried with and without stillpoints. While with stillpoints sounded quieter and tighter, I preferred the slightly noisy but more natural sound with a regular steel cone.

Finally the Garrard 301: None of the Technics had the flow and emotion of 301. They all exhibited a certain electronically controlled, tight sound. Everything was just forced to put in place with the Technics. The flamboyance and natural presence, the aura was not just there. Technics was academic while Garrard was a flowing stream of music. It is not quiet but it makes you sing along. All the arguments around how much cleaner and more transparent a window Technics presents goes out of the window when you find yourself simply nodding and bobbing your head with the garrard. Its because, 301 was telling you more about the mood of the song, the tension of the band. 

It was a very educating experience. I am not a DD guy. 

One important difference I missed out is, from 1200G to Sp10 Mk2 there was a marked increase in slam factor. 

Hi lewm, I like the 301, Lenco L75, EMT 930, Rega, Nottingham Analogue, Dr.Feickert, Bergmann (latest model), Avid, Well setup LP12 and many more record players. All of them sound different but none of them exhibit the kind of electronically controlled flow I hear from Technics or even the EMT DDs. Whether Kenwood would cure it, I dont know. I will wait for a time when I get to hear it.

Having said that, I would agree that Garrard is not tonally studio neutral. My 301 is highly updated with some good tweaks. Yet it is not dead neutral. Lenco is better in that aspect. 

I tried the 1200G with lower torque, default torque and also higher torque. The sound did change a bit. The thing is when you want to “fine tune” these things matter. When you are looking for a more fundamental change in sound these things don’t help or doesn’t matter. I am not saying someone liking the Technics is less critical. I think it is all about how the ears have gotten trained over the period. After listening to the flow and uncompressed dynamics of idler the DD sounded too controlled. I can imagine exactly the opposite if I was a long term DD user and listening to idlers. I would probably complain about the noise, control and less organized presentation of idler.