PTP Audio vs Garrard 301

SPH also produces a Bearing Spindle that is Composite.

It has the Steel within the Housing and a Material of choice to be in contact with the Platter.

I have been demonstrated one with a Ebony Wood, as the choice made for the Material in contact with the Platter. 

There are also options, on all offered bearing types for the Lenco, to have a Part produced to be compatible with a Stacked Patter configuration.  

An aside, SPH makes an aftermarket bearing for both Lenco and Garrard. I have two and they sound great.

The second review says the idler drive “frees” one from the “problems of direct drive”. That’s a new idea to me for sure. I wonder what those problems are, in comparison to idlers. In neither review do we get a same tonearm, same cartridge comparison of the two idlers. However I think you can’t go terribly wrong with either the Garrard or the PTP, but I’d choose the PTP with motor controller and big bearing.

http://www.ptpaudio.com/magazine-reviews.html

I was a Garrard 401 owner for many years, it was mounted in a 9 Stone in weight Granite Plinth.

The Garrard had undergone a Platter Bearing upgrade, so was not entirely original spec'.

I moved onto a PTP Solid Nine with the PTP Bearing and a Speed Controller.

I have not compared these Two TT's side by side, but feel sure the PTP is a very good version of a Idler Drive TT.

Additionally, not too many months ago, I have been demonstrated a newly owned 401 which is mounted in a compressed Bamboo Plinth.

The demonstration was carried out in a system, that I had used the PTP in, with a short period of time between the two sessions.

I do not recall any differences that would suggest one is noticeably differing from the other.

I am not aware of any location a review can be found, comparing the PTP / 301, where TT's have been identically mounted, with the same Tonearm>Cart' and system in use.