@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.