• The move to the new server is done. There are some software and database maintenance updates in process. This has us passing the hat around to help out. We appreciate any donations. Seriously, even a dollar helps. The payment page may be found here - https://www.audiokarma.org/support.html

RESTORED GARRARD AT6 MK II

Were you pleasantly surprised by your Garrard AT6 MK II

  • Absolutely

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Impressed

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • It's pretty good

    Votes: 1 50.0%

  • Not that much

    Votes: 1 50.0%
  • Total voters
    2
  • Poll closed .
BSR OWNER

BSR OWNER

New Member
I just bought and restored a Garrard AT6 MK II. I had no idea what I had until I saw the platter freespin for nearly a whole minute (55 seconds). And, then there were the clear and steady horns and violins. I have a Dual. But, I have to say, I was very impressed with the build and sound of this Garrard. It's ugly as hell, but plays and sounds like an Angel. I love this thing! I forgot all about my other turntables. ijsthumbnail_20200411_233439.jpg thumbnail_IMG_20200411_233139.jpg
 
  • Like
Reactions: T68
Register to hide this ad
I forgot to mention that I have a Pickering V15 Cartridge in it right now. I can't wait to put my Shure M55E in this bad boy!
 
It's decent, but it's no Dual 1009, 1015, 1019, or no Elac Miracord performance wise. Big issue, 2.5 grams the lightest it tracks at reliably and that's in perfect condition. Shure M 55 E too compliant for an AT-6. A M 44-7 is better suited for this application.
 
KentTeffeteller said:
It's decent, but it's no Dual 1009, 1015, 1019, or no Elac Miracord performance wise. Big issue, 2.5 grams the lightest it tracks at reliably and that's in perfect condition. Shure M 55 E too compliant for an AT-6. A M 44-7 is better suited for this application.
Click to expand...
I ordered a M44E I don't know what a M44-7 is. And, you're right, It's not a Dual, but the platter is amazing and steady. I have a Dual 1019 so I have something to compare the AT6 with. But, I was looking for a simple little turntable with a ceramic cartridge to play my 45's and 78's. I was shocked to see what I ended up with. This is no Crosley!
 
I am not in anyway knocking the AT-6 in how it is built. Or how it performs. But remember, 2.5 grams was the lightest this changer was designed to track at and reliably trip the automatic mechanisms at. For an economy changer, of the middle of the road type, it's one of the best in it's era. I like them better than I do the late models with the Unimech mechanism by far. The Audio-Technica AT 3600L is the main modern magnetic cartridge you can buy today which works reliably in one. This is a well built, durable, reliable changer if you keep it serviced within it's limitations. The Shure M 44-E is asking a bit much of this tonearm.
 
Mine isn't a Mark II, but it is an AT6. I've also had an AT-60. Nice machine, quite decent for a compact form changer. Definite upgrade from the older Garrard that was in my console.
 
Agree with gadget73 about this changer. For a compact size changer, and for the price when new, I regarded this as the best solution available. And they're one of the easier Garrard changers to service and maintain.
 
KentTeffeteller said:
I am not in anyway knocking the AT-6 in how it is built. Or how it performs. But remember, 2.5 grams was the lightest this changer was designed to track at and reliably trip the automatic mechanisms at. For an economy changer, of the middle of the road type, it's one of the best in it's era. I like them better than I do the late models with the Unimech mechanism by far. The Audio-Technica AT 3600L is the main modern magnetic cartridge you can buy today which works reliably in one. This is a well built, durable, reliable changer if you keep it serviced within it's limitations. The Shure M 44-E is asking a bit much of this tonearm.
Click to expand...
I think I need it professionally lubricated because it takes far more than 2.5 grams to trip the automatic mechanism. The records skip at that point. The Shure Cartridges will play anything without skipping, and mine, at least, requires more tracking force than 2.6 grams. The Shure plays smoothly at 4 grams, and that would also solve the problem of getting the automatic mechanism to trip without skipping on records. Maybe you can explain to a layman why the Shure is not "Compliant" with the Garrard?
 
Then you didn't get ALL the old grease completely removed. Please note, ALL of it. The motor also needs to be disassembled, cleaned, and lubricated properly. You have to re-lubricate it in every area where it needs lubrication, properly, without taking any shortcuts. The changer must also be adjusted as necessary, to standards called for in the service manual. Don't be surprised too if you wind up needing a rebuild idler wheel also. This AT-6 uses a higher mass tonearm, the M 55 was happiest in a changer with a lower mass, higher compliance tonearm, with lower friction bearings, in changers in that era, this was a LAB 80, Dual 1009, Dual 1019, or ELAC/Miracord job, Also this is assuming you are using a Shure original stylus or a Jico equivalent. Many other generic manufacturers of lesser quality, will need more tracking force to track correctly. This is also assuming the arm is properly balanced, and tracking force is set correctly. There's a reason why I recommend conical styli in this changer, and medium to heavy tracking stylus options on the Shure mentioned. It's called 46 years of experience dealing with this class of Garrard record changers.
 
KentTeffeteller said:
Then you didn't get ALL the old grease completely removed. Please note, ALL of it. The motor also needs to be disassembled, cleaned, and lubricated properly. You have to re-lubricate it in every area where it needs lubrication, properly, without taking any shortcuts. The changer must also be adjusted as necessary, to standards called for in the service manual. Don't be surprised too if you wind up needing a rebuild idler wheel also. This AT-6 uses a higher mass tonearm, the M 55 was happiest in a changer with a lower mass, higher compliance tonearm, with lower friction bearings, in changers in that era, this was a LAB 80, Dual 1009, Dual 1019, or ELAC/Miracord job, Also this is assuming you are using a Shure original stylus or a Jico equivalent. Many other generic manufacturers of lesser quality, will need more tracking force to track correctly. This is also assuming the arm is properly balanced, and tracking force is set correctly. There's a reason why I recommend conical styli in this changer, and medium to heavy tracking stylus options on the Shure mentioned. It's called 46 years of experience dealing with this class of Garrard record changers.
Click to expand...
Thanks for that info!
 
gadget73 said:
pretty sure the service manual specifies no lube on the trip linkage. It has to be very free to move or it will cause you grief.
Click to expand...
OH! Well, since I just slap monkey grease on every moving part of my other turntables, I think I'll have this one professionally serviced.
 
BSR OWNER said:
I forgot to mention that I have a Pickering V15 Cartridge in it right now. I can't wait to put my Shure M55E in this bad boy!
Click to expand...

My autoslim has a XV15 cartridge in it, generic stylus, sounds a lot better than I thought it would at 3gm. I might try the Goldring G850 in my spares draw as thats what a lot of Garrards had fitted in the uk. I did try the Numark Groovetool at first, not a success, sounds like music fighting with itself.
 
I'm running a 680e.v3 DJ cartridge on mine. 2-5 gram elliptical. Think its an 0.4 x 0.7 mil. I got several of them cheap years ago when Stanton was getting out of the cartridge business. I think they were selling brand new from the usual places for about 20 bucks each. I have a Shure SC35c on my Type A. I should swap it to the AT6 just to see how that sounds. I also have a Stanton 380 that I should try. Might also be worth picking up an AT 3600 since they get good reviews and would fit the bill in terms of stylus shape and tracking force.
 
I just picked up a free AT6 mkII, and cleaned it up. It ia pretty minty. I had to make a spindle out of a wooden dowel, and slapped a Rega Bias on it, tracking at 2gm.

I see now it needs a higher TF. It was having tracking problems, near the middle an old scratchy record.

Speed and wow and flutter are good, but there is a lot of rumble (compared to my 1009). I suppose this is normal? Would a full cleaning and lube job get the rumble down by any significant amount?
 
likely yes. Gummy platter bearings won't help the noise floor. Giving the idler a light sanding to ensure its smooth and round should also help. Hard idlers transmit a lot of noise into the platter.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom