This is just a matter of opinion. My opinion is that acrylic is not intrinsically any better than alu. The early Teres turntables used all acrylic platters, and the recommendation was for no platter mat. Then they went to acrylic with pockets of lead shot imbedded in the acrylic. Then they went to wood platters on their top of the line turntables. I am sure, if queried, Teres would say that each "upgrade" was for the better. When I see an OEM turntable with an acrylic platter, my first thought is that the platter material was chosen for looks, ease of machining, and low cost, not necessarily for max performance. My question would be why would you feel confident that acrylic is better than alu? I would suggest using a mat on the alu platter, rather than exchanging the whole platter. Boston Audio Mat1 or 2 is very good. But that's just my opinion. |
Sorry, but the very fact that you are entertaining this expensive change in platters made me think you were entering into it with the bias that acrylic would be superior to alu. Anyway, you asked for opinions, and you got opinions. I would sooner experiment with platter mats, if for no other reason than the cost factor.
One bit of caution: you probably want to be sure that any new platter is not too far different in mass and circumference from the original, for three reasons: (1) the motor was probably chosen and tuned to move the mass of the OEM platter, (2) if the tt is belt-drive or rim drive, then the motor pulley circumference was chosen to give the correct speed when coupled with the OEM platter circumference, and (3) an excessively heavy new platter might cause premature bearing wear. |
Dave, FWIW, the Kenwood L07D came with a stainless steel mat, 30 years ago. When I listen to mine, I feel no urge to experiment with something else, but there are those who diss the L07D because of that mat. There is no unanimity of opinion in this hobby.
Hey, are you going to the CAF? I am going to drive over there after brunch. I will look for Clarity. |
Dave, I am familiar with it at a distance. I don't own one. And the reason I don't own one is that there is unanimous agreement among those that do or did own one that it is inferior to the stock stainless steel platter sheet, in terms of sonics.
I spent 4 hours at the show yesterday. The best thing that happened is that I bought 20 great LPs from one of the vendors for a total of $100. The VPI direct-drive cum 3D printed tonearm was there, but I did not even bother to see them, because I know I cannot judge how they would sound in a totally strange environment. I did however see the new Saskia II, and I had a nice chat with Win Tinnon, who is a great guy and good friend. He is showing it with headphones, using a Schroeder tonearm and a vintage Panasonic strain gauge cartridge which is driven by a Dave Slagle tube-based preamplifier. As Win himself admitted, the problem is that the headphones he was given to use by another company are not that great. I could only marvel at the beauty of the Saskia and the obvious state of the art approach taken by Win. His new controller is quite impressive.
Best vinyl room, or one of the best, was the Robiyatt Audio one with Miyajima cartridges on demo. Their latest mono was in a Gray tonearm on a restored Gray turntable, very very cool. They were using restored Quad 63s, by Electrostatic Solutions. The amps and preamp were new Miyajima products. The Miya phono stage has THREE phono inputs. Seems that manufacturers are getting the message. |
Two addenda:
(1) The ceramic platter to which I am referring in my first paragraph is the one Dave asked about, the optional ceramic platter for the L07D.
(2) I made a technical error in stating that the Slagle preamp drives the strain gauge cartridge. It's obviously the other way around; the cartridge drives the preamp. |
Dear Nandric, I don't quite understand. You wrote, "I was stunned by the fact that this, say, 40 euro mat sounds better as the 'metal one'." What mat are you referring to? It seemed you were really saying that the acrylic Lurne' naked platter surface was preferable to the SAEC. So I am puzzled what 40 Euro mat you refer to.
But then you also made reference to the SP10 Mk2. I do stand by my long ago statement to you, that the SAEC metal mat is superior to the rubber mat that is OEM on the Technics. That's all I said back then. I personally do not care for the "sound" of acrylic despite the structural similarity of acrylic to vinyl, but that is a separate issue. In fact, the use of an acrylic platter is a reason not to buy a turntable, for me. I do like the graphite mats from Boston Audio in preference to the SAEC, these days. |
I think acrylic in combination with other materials might work fine. It is only those solid blocks of pure acrylic platters to which I object. I hold the Kuzma Reference in high esteem. I did not know that it uses a composite acrylic platter. In photos, the surface seems to be something solid and black in color, i.e., not acrylic.
Richard, Did you take the circular magnet structure off of your stock Mk3 platter and remount it on your home-made one? You are indeed fearless and adventuresome, if so. |
Dear Nandric, I have no feel for the politics of Eastern Europe, now that the war is over (thankfully), and all the countries involved have new names and different borders. I don't really know who hates whom these days.
The Lenco L75 platters were also dynamically balanced, and each one will have small drilled impressions on its inner aspect, indicating where mass had to be reduced to bring that particular platter into balance.
I don't know if the Mk3 is "the best". It is surely terrific, but I would like to have a shoot-out among three or four of the top contenders, done under well-controlled conditions. (Same tonearm and cartridge, same system, same listeners, but more than one.) Someone might reference the shoot-out that was published in a Japanese magazine in the 80s, but that one was not well controlled and did not include the Mk3 at all. |
Nandric, I may be wrong, but I think Richard is saying that different operators produce different quality results, even though the machine itself is computer-controlled, and presumably even though the program being used to control the computer may be the same for each operator. I share Richard's puzzlement, in that case. There are still some hands-on aspects of the work, including fixing the blank piece of metal into the cutting machine, and perhaps therein lies the source of the variable outcome. |
I agree.
That's why we have Stradivarii. |
