2. analog
  3. 126170-7436

Best platter mat, especially for DD turntables

There has been quite a bit of posts about platter mats and I wanted to add my experiences. I have posted this on the vintage DD thread but have been requested to move this into a new discussion, so here it is.

For my Technics SP10mk3 (Krebs 2 mod), I have tried Boston Mat 1, Micro Seiki CU180 and the TTM Mat with Matching Oil filled clamp (http://www.usaudiomart.com/details/649203862-ttm-mat-2-and-oil-damped-stabilizerweight-combo/). Among these 3 mats, the TTM was the best and after I introduced it to Albert Porter, he too thinks it's the best for the Sp10mk3. However, I have found an even better platter mat that I would like to share with the group. It's Acoustical Systems SDP (http://www.arche-headshell.de/accessoires/sdp-the-sonically-most-effective-upgrade-for-every-turntable/). SDP stands for Special Decoupled Platter. This is not just a mat but an additional platter that decouples and isolates the bearing and spindle from the stylus. While most mats offer some isolation and decoupling of the platter, this is the only mat I know that also decouples the spindle. It stands head and shoulders above all the other mats. In fact, for me, the improvement it brought to my SP10Mk3 was greater than the Kreb mods. It's expensive and requires the arm-boards to be raised but it's worth the trouble IMHO. Especially for DD turntables where you have  the motor directly connected to the spindle (in most designs though there a few that are decoupled), it makes sense to decouple not only the platter but the spindle from the LP. Hence, SDP probably makes more improvements for DD turntables than Belt drive turntables. 
Here is how the SDP is different from other mats. What is not obvious form the pictures is that the SDP mat is thicker than the original spindle height. Hence it sits over the original spindle completely and has its own precision spindle to guide the LP and clamp/s onto the SDP. In other words, the original spindle is buried inside the SDP. Underneath the SDP are soft vibration absorbing gel packs which interfaces between original platter and SDP. This allows the SDP to absorb vibrations from the original platter. The mass of the SDP also acts as a damper for any vibrations from the original spindle. 

The net effect is that the noise floor drops further and I can hear more detail, resolution, separation and space. Very startling improvements.  FWIW. 
ddriveman

Showing 9 responses by ddriveman

ddriveman OP
171 posts
 
Inna,

No, the fact that the SDP works well does not mean that the turntable itself is bad. No more than putting different mats, headshells, damping feet etc means that the design is bad. SDP works well also for belt drive turntables like Micro SX5000, Brinkmann and other high end belt drives. SDP completely isolates the spindle from the LP. This is something that other mats or TT designs do not do.
ddriveman OP
171 posts
 
Halcro,

 Note that Acoustical Systems makes tonearm risers to match the height of the SDP. So you do not need new tonearm pods.
Interesting point about the pigskin mat. I must try it too on my upcoming TT-801. I managed to snag a couple of Victor pigskins mats. Do you use the suede side up? 


ddriveman OP
171 posts
 
Hi Sampsa,

Thank you for sharing the link to the wonderful Japan trip with Jean Hiraga. There is so much to learn from Japanese audiophiles. And I really like WE horns and recently heard a replica WE system. Sounds very good. And of course the Japanese food. Yum! The wooden platter on the Garrard 401 seems to go after the same principle as the SDP i.e. isolate the platter and spindle from the LP. Just a different use of materials. I also like the vintage Gray Research tonearm. It looks odd but sounds great.
ddriveman OP
171 posts
 
Hi lewm,

Thank you for your clarification on the DD motor to spindle connection. You are correct that the rotor is just the magnet and is part of the motor only and by itself is inert.

In fact for the SP10MK3 (and only the MK3, the MK2 is different), the magnet rotor is huge and around the outside of the coil stator and connects to the platter directly. So, in the case of the SP10MK3, there is no part of the motor that attaches to the spindle and in this respect, resembles a belt drive.

However, for most other DDs (including the SP10mk2), the magnet rotor connects to the spindle directly. And while the rotor itself is inert, force is applied to the rotor and hence spindle in order to create motion. This is unlike belt drives and the SP10, whereby force is applied to the platter in order to create motion. And the argument here (commonly made by belt drive aficionados) is that the platter has a higher mass than the spindle and provides more damping properties. But we're splitting hairs.

Nevertheless, the whole point of the SDP and the Japanese wooden platters (from sampsa55's link) is to completely isolate both the platter and spindle bearing from the vinyl. And while the Japanese designs rely on mass and the damping properties of wood; SDP relies on its material, POM (which closely matches vinyl characteristics), mass and gel absorption packs between platter and SDP. But I'm now thinking that Acoustical Systems probably got the concept from Japanese, after seeing the links from sampsa55.

For my SP10, I ordered the SDP height to just cover the original spindle because I do not need additional platter mass to help with speed stability (thanks to the wonderful speed stability of the SP10mk3) unlike belt drives.

BTW, I'm not pitching for Acoustical Systems. I'm just a satisfied user and offering this solution to those who are seeking to go beyond the normal mat/clamp fine-tuning and try to address one area that affects both DD and belt drives which is spindle bearing vibrations.
OTOH, I suppose air bearing spindles do not have mechanical contact and friction also. Hmm, maybe the SDP may be seeking to get the benefits of air bearing spindles in this respect?
ddriveman OP
171 posts
 
Hi Halcro,

Do you use the pigskin mat on top of the CU180 or directly onto the bare aluminum TT-101 platter? Thanks for your reply to "inna", could not have said it better. 
ddriveman OP
171 posts
 
Hi Raul,

Good to hear from you again, my friend. My Essential 3160 is performing very well and is still ... "Essential" to my system, LOL! Thank you for it.

Yes, I do have the AT666 mat. But I stopped using it after the rubber lips lost their elasticity and lost vacuum hold (and not long after I bought it). I think you are using the AT 666 without vacuum, correct? And you still like it a lot without vacuum? But do you still keep the OD and ID rubber rings for vacuum in place? If so, then the LP rests on these rubber rings and I wonder if you are liking the AT 666 because of this interaction.

As for the SOTA mats, I also have the Goldmund Relief mat and clamp. Have not actually tried it because it requires the mat to be glued to the platter with its adhesive tape backing. It’s messy to remove the Goldmund mat after you stick it on. The Goldmund mat also a kind of metacrylate that supposedly matches the vinyl resonances. Now that your mention the SOTA, I must try the Goldmund, one of these days.

Have also tried Herbie’s mat and extreme phono mat (on Denon DP6000), Micro CU500 (good but heavy, so only certain TTs), Trio Ceramic (very nice), sorbothane (not so good results on DP6000). Have a new Concert Fidelity thin Carbon mat that I’ve yet to try and others I can’t remember. Yes ... I have too many mats. LOL!!! And don’t get me started on headshells, and headshell wires and don’t forget clamps, footers, platforms .... etc.
ddriveman OP
171 posts
 
Hi Raul,

Thanks for your insight on AT 666. I will have to check on my AT 666 again. I'll send you email and maybe you can help me with pictures.
So, you like the AT 666 because of the vacuum hold then. Ahh! I see.
Hmm, makes me want to go and figure out how to get the vacuum hold to work on my TT-801. The original vacuum rubber mat is not usable at all, badly warped and distorted. Or maybe put the AT 666 on it !
ddriveman OP
171 posts
 
Hi lewm,

I see our point (I think).
The DD motor generates motion via magnetic force and hence there is no mechanical contact (although one can argue that the force generated by magnetic field in a way provides "stiffness" between rotor an stator and may still transmit some vibrations, but certainly much less than physical contact).
But in belt drives, there is physical mechanical contact and you actually need friction between pulley/belt and belt/platter and that is a bigger source/risk of vibrations being transmitted!! Am I correct?
I guess I was still touting the typical thoughts of belt vs DD in my earlier post. The British audio press via Linn Sondek did "pollute" our minds about belt drives and shape so much of the vinyl world that we know today.
And no worries about hassling me, especially if you're polite about it, which you are. It's the great part and fun of audio forums and learning.
ddriveman OP
171 posts
 
@sdory . Thank you for sharing your experience with the GEM Dandy mat. I've not tried it yet but will now be on my "to try" list, especially given your experience on Technics TTs.
More to discover