Hideous turntable day is a thing. 9th May.
Not quite coco-san quality but could be a lot of amp for the money?
Scammers will be scammers, and there are another five on offer at similar prices - all with zero feedback.
Yes, it was brand new then. I have to say, it improved tremendously after a good few hours playing. A definite favourite now, scary exposed cantilever though!
Paintwork looks nice
That’a what caught my eye. I like a bit of patina.
The costs of setting that unit mechanically straight (Let alone cosmetically) are well up there. The shots of the underside are horrorshow.
They look interesting. Anyboy get any idea what is a fair price for them? I could find no hints on Hi Fi Shark or eBay…
Seems like he’s trying to sell a serial number and hoping someone won’t notice the condition.
Would there be any reason someone would want a year one table?
The problem with very early hammertone 301’s is that the motor bearing is different to all subsequent 301’s - it runs on a domed sintered pad (similar to what is found in the spindle housing). This will be very well worn. You can see in the underside shot of the motor that the metal bearing plate (held in place by x4 rivets) is a slightly different shape (More pronounced dome) to the normal 301. The upshot of this and a slightly different motor casing is that these motors run with greater noise even in the case of NOS.
The rusted linkages would take some professional bench work and plating in any restoration attempt but the lifting paint and generalized rusting is indicative of damp, god knows what the spindle & motor coils would be like on close inspection. It is also likely the chassis would be very very rough casting once stripped and this would add further expense in preparation prior to re finishing
If we were sent this unit we would probably opt to replace so many parts to achieve a sound unit it would not be cost effective.
But, apart from that it’s ok?
Seems a shame but it certainly sounds expensive. So have you ever dealt with a better condition one with that bearing?
I’d have thought £2.5-3k is about right, but they are very rare and being mint with crates is a real bonus.
Be interesting to see if he gets any bids.
Yes including a New old stock. The best thing to do with these is detach the motor from the chassis, A la Bastin or Bob’s Cusworth. Garrard redesigned the motor to address the issue. It’s worth noting this was well prior to popularization of Stereo. Garrard played catch up with several 301 amendments to try and refine the design for STEREO prior to the launch of the 401.
Which is the most refined version Matt and is it defined between certain serial numbers?
The final revisions on the 301 would be the serial no’s 80,000+ (black face plate oil bearing with 401 type platter)
But this is only half the story:
The early motors designed to turn the grease bearing (greater drag) and deal with carts tracking at 4g+have more torque and can run down to 90v effectively (hello Japan man) . The BBC changed their 301’s from grease to oil bearings to cater to Stereo. Much of Garrards work on revising the unit was aimed at the motor and spindle bearings. -
In subsequent post production years it was discovered a great deal can be achieved from housing the 301 in the correct plinth.
In the ideal scenario: Late hammertone motor, oil bearing, detached motor to plinth, bearing supported.
Or oil bearing with very last version 401 motor (less torque but much quieter)
Purely from a sound perspective you would be looking at a mongrel.
Whilst much of the work is reversible, Grease bearing chassis need to be cut into (A la BBC) to allow for a Garrard 301 oil bearing to be fitted. The same is not true in reverse a grease bearing can be fitted to an oil bearing chassis. The debate between what sounds better grease or oil bearings is not clear cut, the motor windings are different and this is a key factor.
My life is tragic
Is the 401 superior to the 301?
So purely from a sound perspective would you say the last gen 401 is better with it’s quieter motor?