Hi Lewm,
Recently, I had the good fortune of listening to a Technics SP10 MkII table, a Technics SP10 MkIII table and a Garrard 301table in my system. All three of these tables were modified by Steve Dobbins of Xact Audio. The plinth for each table was made by Steve and each plinth used a different combination of materials to compensate for the different resonant characteristics of each tables motor. The two Technics tables are direct-drive tables and the Garrard table is a rim-drive table.
After listening to the Garrard 301 at my friends place, Steve Kaufman, I was very impressed with the sound. I have listened to Garrard 301s before. I thought that they had excellent drive but I thought they sounded dry, not much in the way of tonal quality.
The Garrard 301 built by Steve Dobbins did not sound dry at all. Rather, it sounded lush with beautiful detail while maintaining the drive characteristic of most 301s. I talked with Steve Dobbins about why his 301 sounded so good. He said it was a combination of many things but he said in addition to working on the plinth, motor and bearing, he designed a completely new platter. The new platter used three different materials none of which was aluminum. After talking more with Steve Dobbins about the 301, he recommended that I listen to his modified Technics SP10 MkII.
Steve kindly suggested that we listen to the MkII and the 301 in my system. Steve Dobbins lives in Boise Idaho and I live in Fort Collins Colorado. At Steve Dobbins expense, he shipped the MkII to my place and Steve Kaufman kindly brought over his 301 for comparison (Steve K. lives in Fort Collins). Steve Dobbins flew from Boise to Fort Collins to compare the tables. On a Sunday, Steve Dobbins, Steve Kaufman, Grant Gassman (a friend of mine and an audio nut) and I got together to listen to these tables.
To make this table comparison as fair as we possibly could, we used two Schroder reference arms with the same type of wood (jacaranda), both 12 inches in length and cryoed Nordost wiring. Steve D. moved my Soundsmith strain-gauge cartridge from arm to arm to keep the comparison as fair as possible. Steve D. carefully aligned the Soundsmith strain-gauge cartridge each time he moved the cartridge from one arm to another arm. The rest of the audio system was the same.
For reference, my audio system includes an Intact custom-designed strain-gauge phono preamp using a 437A WE triode tube, an Intact custom-designed auto-former volume control, an all DHT amp and a tri-amped speaker system. The DHT amp includes a Telefunken RS241 DHT tube and an Eimac 75TL DHT tube. Most of the iron in the DHT amp was designed and made at Intact audio. The DHT amp drives a field-coil driver designed at Emia by Dave Slagle. The field-coil driver is connected to a Lowther cone and basket. The basket is mounted to a 36 Azura fiber-glass horn designed and built by Martin Seddon. The DHT amp also drives a Fane horn-loaded tweeter. I use two Nuforce amps to drive Klipschorn bass horn units. The bass units are crossed over using a Marchand electronic crossover. Finally, I have a Hsu Research amp with its own crossover driving a Bruce Edgar refrigerator horn sub.
Ok, finally the comparison. We listened to the MkII first and I have to say I was disappointed. It had the usual great drive and rhythm but the tonal quality was dry. It didnt have the nuance that I like. Next we listened to the 301. I thought it was much better than the MKII, great drive and pitch stability along with the lush sound I heard at Steve Kaufmans place. Steve D. said he though I might not be happy with the MkII so he also shipped a MkIII to my place as well. So he set up the MKIII. Remember Steve D. shipped two tables to me and did all the hard work of setting up the cartridge on the arms. After getting the MkIII set up, we listened. It wasnt even close. The MkIII was in another league as Steve Kaufman said (Steve K bought the MkIII we listened to on the spot even though he had just had received the 301, hes using the 301 for his mono setup now). The rest of us though the same thing. The MkIII was substantially better than the 301 and previous to listening to the MkIII, I thought the 301 would be hard to beat. The MkIII and the MkII were worlds apart. The MkIII made the MkII sound ragged by comparison. The MkIII had it all, wonderful nuance and space while retaining the great drive that direct-drive turntables are known for. All four of us have the same opinion. I believe anyone interested in good sound would have heard the same things we did.
Last week, I sent a check to Steve D. for the MkIII he recently build and delivered to me.
John P.
