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 4 responses by halcro

Interesting topic ddriveman....
It's so true that different platter mats all sound differently on every turntable regardless of the drive system employed, so finding the one that sounds 'the best' is a labour of love....
But one worth doing 😎🎼
Having gone through the same exercise and tested literally dozens of mats and combinations of mats (don't forget combinations 👅) I agree that the CU180 copper mat sounded wonderful on my Victor TT-101 DD deck so I can believe that the TTM Mat sounds better and that the AS SDP sounds better still....👀
The problem for me with the SDP (as you rightly say), is the fact I would have to make three new higher tonearm pods for my setup
http://i.imgur.com/JEroaY8.jpg
which would be a costly exercise as they are cast bronze 😱
In the end, even though the CU180 sounded so well on my deck, the weight of it worried me as the Victor has an electronic brake system which stops the platter 'dead'.....but it can't be adjusted for the heavy weight of the CU180.
Surprisingly....I found that using the Victor pigskin mat directly on the aluminium platter
http://i.imgur.com/OvDW2EZ.jpg
achieved a sound almost identical to the CU180 😘
I may try the TTM Mat on my Raven AC-2
http://i.imgur.com/WXRFfcK.jpg
as Acoustical Systems makes extension pieces for the Raven arm mounts to accomodate for the extended height of the TTM Mat 😀

But as you brought up platter mats.....you must also know that different headshells and their materials similarly make as much (if not more) difference to the sound.....👀
And the choices here are daunting.....
But perhaps that is a subject for another Thread....❓
Wow....sampsa55 thank you for those Links.
That trip through Japan with the sites, the systems, the horns and the exquisite food has given me such pleasure and a real 'high',,,👼🏼
I hardly know where to go from that.....
It shows that the discriminating Japanese audiophile has a sensibility and conviction to his audio pursuit that transcends the western concept of 'new product is better product' syndrome. 
Horns and more horns....idlers (almost exclusively)....vintage arms (almost exclusively)....SPU cartridges and valves...and more valves.
I know some 'modern' western audiophiles who will snigger at such systems and dismiss them as 'nostalgia' and 'irrelevant' but for me, they represent a visionary truth which has been (only for the moment I hope) ignored by the masses because of its exclusiveness and unattainability,
Thank you once again for this timely reminder...😎

Since you are reporting a profound improvement, the original design is definitely not good. This is not fine tuning, basically it's an effort to quite radically change the design. Would be better to start with the drawing board instead of patching.

I think you are over-reacting Inna....
This IS fine-tuning just as much as tube-rolling, different spikes and footers, isolation platforms, different weights, headshells, power cables, speaker and interconnects and indeed cartridges themselves.
Each improvement we make does not negate the sum total of the collective 'machine' we have developed.
Our hobby (by its nature) is a constant quest for ever-diminishing micro improvements towards perfection...which of course can never be attained.
This quest results in the proliferation of audio Forums that you populate and contribute to....👀