One turntable with two arms, or two turntables with one each - which would you prefer?

e@best-groove The TT 801 is one of the TT's I feel extremely confident would benefit from a Densified Wood Plinth, this material lends itself to Bespoke Design as well.

If not commenced with the purchasing of materials for your project, the D'fied Wood is a material worthy of investigating for its properties for this type of application. 

     

@dogberry Both Natural and Manufactured Stone has been regularly seen in use as a Plinth Material for too many years, the Trend I recollect commenced in the 90's with the Garrard 401 being championed in a Company called Slate Audio's Slate Plinth. The Trend grew to other Decks and even Speaker Cabinets.

Not all can successfully Market Slate, hence new Natural Stone was becoming more mainstream, I chose Granite as my material, as I preferred the demonstrations of Granite on a 401, to those I had been to when Slate was demonstrated.

Being brutally honest, I may have even been more attracted to Granite as I preferred the individuals that were advocates of it for the purpose as a Plinth.

Within my HiFi Group, one member has a paraphernalia of ideas, why Slate is inferior to Granite as a Material to be used within HiFi.

I am not without Granite, I utilise it in plenty of places within my System, but mainly now as one of the materials used in an assembly of various Materials that functions as a Structure.

I am also an owner of Manufactured Stone as a Plinth, which has the Brand Name Corian. Again, this is another material I have chosen not to use as a regular choice, it is pretty much reserved for demonstration purposes.

My Friend who has recently converted to Densified Wood - Panzerholz, has a quantity of Corian in Slabs, as the P'holz has been capable of persuading them to rethink their previous thoughts on Plinth Materials, they are remaining curious, and are in the process of utilising the Corian, to try this material out as a comparison.

Lucky for me I will be able to hear this in use, on a TT and Tonearm of the same design I own. This will allow for Two Set Ups to be used of the same equipment mounted on two different Plinth Materials, additionally this will also allow me to have my Cart' used during a demonstration along with the Two standard Ortofon K'bs available.

If all seems worthwhile, I do believe the Kaneta Designs will be produced in both materials, to take the investigations further.

@dogberry In relation to your notification of your next venture to have a Standalone Tonearm Pod Produced, to be used with the SME 10 and SME M2-9 Tonearms.

I have no doubt the Headshell Design used on the M2-9 is a much-improved mechanical interface over any Products it Superseded from SME.

It does not matter one iota, who is pleased, you are the end listener, and you are the one making choices for how monies are used that leave your account.

I am sure you are to share in many hours of fun filled investigation when these arrive at your home. I sincerely hope there will certainly be a room full of music on a regular occasion. 

If it is off interest, the answer does not have to be immediate. I can donate to you, to assist with having an extension of the experience of a Tonearm Pod, a piece of Densified Wood - Permali that is a 75mm (3 inch ) Thick Material, cut to a dimension that would suit having a Standalone Tonearm Pod produced from it.

Let me know, there is no rush.

       

When considering producing a TT that will support a Tonearm/Tonearms of choice.

There is the likelihood that a Custom Design Plinth will be selected for the role.

The additional consideration will be the material selected to be used to produce the Plinth.

There are many options from a Singular Material through to a Composite, and then there is the Quantity of Tiers of materials and the configuration of the Tiers used to produce the structure.

Each Custom-Built Plinth can have an impact on the SQ, for the better or worse, also one Plinth Design has the capability to allow a certain Tonearm Type to perform for the better and another Tonearm Design can be negatively affected. It is basically down to how a Tonearm mechanically couples with energies transferred through the Plinth.

Alternatively, there is the option to use a Standalone Pod/ Pods to mount Tonearm/ Tonearms on.

My experience has been to limit myself to the use of One Tonearm only. This has been the practice for many years with fixed headshell designs.

Today, I use a Tonearm with a detachable headshell, which has made the ease of experiencing Cartridges much simpler to achieve.

Additionally, as I am involved in a social activity with HiFi, the Cart’ mounted on a Detachable Headshell is an easy and secure transport to a home with a similar mount method on a used Tonearm.

As for a Multi Input Phonostage I had the option of this when I had my Valve Phon’ built, the builder had a Phon’ of almost identical design to my one, with a Four Input Option.

I chose not to go for this method, as I am happy to use different owned Phon’s, to add a something different to a presentation. I feel today this has been the better choice for myself.

I have been a user of Bespoke Plinth on various TT, I prefer a design that rigidly couples the Tonearm to the Plinth, on my own designs, no Base Plates are used.

My first Bespoke Plinth has been produced from Slabs of Granite, that the final configuration added up to being a 9 Stone Granite Plinth, which was used to mount a Garrard 401 with a SME IV.

This after many years usage was swapped for a PTP Solid 9 with a Audiomod’s Series Five Micrometer, mounted on a Lamination of Corian, which is a Composite Stone, again quite a heavy assembly.

I have used lighter Plinths, where Lead Metal is used with Plywood/Chipboard on Laminate Plinths.

The most recent plinth material learnt off and one that is to be used, which is another lightweight design, is Densified Wood.

This is a material that has been able to make a very good impression when used with the same TT and Tonearm I am using.

I had first moved over to Light Weight Plinth Designs using a compressed 1-inch Plywood Board as Plinth, with a weight of approx’ 900Kg per m3.

It is reported that the Plywood that has an increased compression has a useful Damping Factor and has good dissipation properties, all scientific explanation can be found at Qualia Labs web page.

The introduction to an alternative 1-Inch Plywood Board Material and one that has made the most positive impression, is from a material that is approx’ 1400Kg per m3. This is probably the densest of the Densified Wood to be found today.

For myself, the experiences of past have evolved to the preferred order, which is to have one Tonearm, with easy to exchange Cartridge Options, hence a removable headshell. The rigidity of the Coupling of the Headshell is of importance, and a loose bog-standard connection can create a SQ issue.

The TT and Tonearm interface is as important a consideration as the other coupling connections being made but is the one that will most likely be the hardest to acquire valuable direction on. Note: many TT > Tonearm Couplings are produced using a Material that can have changing properties throughout the seasons, to the point where an interfaces critical dimension point is compromised. Materials that are stable and influence the maintaining of the Set-Up Geometry are desirable.

Phon’s are easy to exchange and having the option to have increased experiences of a Phon’ is an attractor, one Input suffices for my needs.

I have worked with and sought out demonstrations of others work using different Plinth Materials and configurations for a structure for many years.

Recent learning has shown there is a material available, that is able to make a very positive impression and to myself has become an attractor.

I have experience of seeing others migrate to densified wood plinths; some who have been quite set in their commitment to their earlier plinth designs in use, their curiosity about this material and introducing it to their set up, proved to be a correct choice.

I have been demonstrated a Densified Wood in use as a Plinth on various occasions. On one occasion, with same Model TT’s. One with Densified Wood as a Plinth and the other using a Marine Plywood. The result being the Densified Wood has left a very positive impression, which has been encouraging to the point I have acquired my own material. It has been used as a Sub Plinth to date, which has also proven to create a positive impression.

The owner of the Marine Plywood Plinth referred to now has a Densified Wood Plinth and is without doubt the improvement has been very noticeable.

I have a Plinth produced from this material but am not at present able to use it on my system.

 

I have looked into Kuzma Design TT's, and the discoveries made are in keeping with the Design and Materials for a Bearing Assembly of which I am an advocate.

The Kuzma selection of materials is also similar when compared to selections that other Third-Party Bearing producers are offering as an upgrade for Vintage TT's.

From my experience these types of materials when in use are able to bring a new presentation that is a noticeable improvement.

I have discussed this in previous posts and see no point to elaborate in the Subject.

From my end, if an intention is to make a change to a Set Up, with the intention to achieve an improved performance from a Vinyl Source, keeping the focus closer to home, and looking into how an interfaces can be improved, can prove to be quite valuable.

I have the pleasure of being regularly demonstrated a Standalone Pod Mounted Glanz 12 Inch arm, with a Miyajima Cart', used on a SP10R on regular occasion, it never fails to impress.

Isolation that functions as a support, has little to do with maintaining the critical geometry between Tonearm and Bearing Spindle.

I am not aware where there are claims that the Spring Suspension has the additional function of managing energies transferred through a Plinth as a result of the TT's operation. 

A Spring Support needs to be adequate as a support to ensure a Platter can maintain a Level Set Up and needs to be effective at reducing the ambient energies that are able to be transferred into the system during operation.

In general, the energies needing to be dealt with are not known, as the methods required to accurately measure the presence, is not in use with the average TT user.

The familiarization with different materials and assemblies for a Plinth Construction is the only method I have adopted and used to make my own assessment.     

Most materials chosen as a Plinth Material have poor Damping Properties and inefficient dissipation.

It is not possible to ensure an individual that if they adopted a Plinth Material that does have desirable damping properties and efficient dissipation, that they will perceive it as an improved experience. 

It is an individual's preference for a certain type of SQ that will dictate this.

I am now feeling confident that after having experienced a reasonable quantity of Plinth Construction, that the use of Densified Wood Material as a Plinth is the best method for myself.  

 

 

It has been difficult to suggest a Densified Wood to be considered for use in the USA as there are not too many Brands able to be found.

Thanks to the TV Series 'Forged in Fire', I have seen a material used that captured my curiosity and have now discovered the correct name for the material that somebody who is developing a curiosity for a Densified Wood might like to look at.

My searching for Diamond Wood, has commonly not found the wood type I was looking for.

A different approach has found Dymond Wood.

This is more like it, a Birch Wood Veneer Board, that begins as a 2 Inch assembly of Layer and is compressed to a 1 Inch finished product with a plastic resin type of adhesive.

The description is very in keeping with the Wood Type I am an advocate of. 

The properties that make it more akin is the Weight I have a Dymond Wood at approx' 1300Kg per Cubic Metre, which is undoubtedly a Densified Wood.

The Compressive Strength and stability when submerged in water is very attractive, this material is extremely stable and will not expand or yield in any usage for HiFi.

You could make a plinth large enough to use a M4 Sherman as a Tonearm and it will be the ideal Plinth Material.

Hopefully the info' will be of use to a forum member for their own trials to commence.     

@au_lait I am quite familiar with Panzerholz and Permali, I have some very nice P'mali Boards and am fortunate to have purchased a supply oof P'holz with a friend who has CNC Produced a P'holz Plinth for both of our SP10 Mk II's.

I have listened to the SP10 Mk II in a P'holz Plinth for a few years now, at another friends, and this past weekend on Saturday, was demonstrated one of the CNC Cut Plinths produced for the SP10 MK II, for the first time in my friend's system since it was exchanged from a Marine Plywood Plinth. 

The P'holz Plinth has been mounted on to a P'holz Sub Plinth to create a Two Teir Support Structure.

My comments on the last occasion I visited, when a Marine Plywood Plinth was in use; was based around detecting a detractor, of which the fundamental cause was suggested to be from the Cabinet Speakers. I was awarding the Speakers Cabinet as causing coloration.

This Time around, I was very quick to make it known the same Speakers were quite transparent and getting a fix on their placement was now much more difficult, the coloration that was suggested as being present in the speaker's had seemingly disappeared.

A set of Electrostatics were also put to use, and the Cabinets and ESL's were seemingly with parity when it came down to Transparency.

One other point of interest is that on a very well-known Album, I was confident that the replay on this occasion, was delivering information, I had not detected before when replayed on a selection of systems. 

The change of Plinth Material in this case has had a notable effect at managing a distortion that can be passed through a Styli, and manifest downstream at the Speaker. 

I can't help but think the Sub Plinth has been instrumental in assisting with the additional detail being detected in a replay. As a P'holz Sub Plinth has proved quite a valuable addition to other equipment used at demonstrations prior to Saturday's Visit.  

I know the cost of receiving Panzerholz outside of Continental Europe can be quite prohibitive.

Permali is a Densified Wood that is a little easier to find, maybe the licensing for the product is eased.

In general, I encourage a search for Densified Wood as most Countries produce their own Brands, that all share very similar properties, it seems the weight for Overseas Shipping seems to be restrictive, hence the home-produced material. 

The Dymond Wood is found in a Board and is found in many colours, this might appeal to a would-be Plinth Builder.  

    

The Link will help with introducing information, that will supply a broader knowledge of D’fied Woods and show that densifying wood has been an evolving practice for nearly 100 years.

Page 37, shows the Brands that are produced across the Glode, in my humble view, it is these Types of production, when produced to this standard and using the Adhesive Selected, that are the most beneficial to be used for a HiFi Set Up.

Kaiser Speakers use P’holz for their Cabinets and refer to it as Tank Wood, there is a Article on this Company, that has a very good description of the valued properties available from P'holz.

Other Speaker Brands and Kits are also utilising P'holz and Permali as well.

https://www.diva-portal.org/smash/get/diva2:1347640/FULLTEXT01.pdf

It would be great to hear the thoughts of users of Densified Wood or Panzerholz, especially to be informed where they feel the merits of adopting the material has been detected.

I will start by inferring there is strong suggestion being determined that an improvement is produced, resulting from how transferred energies are managed, where a notable difference for the better, is undoubtedly detected.

In all experiences I have had of Panzerholz in use, there is a noticeable reduction of a distortion/coloration being presented through the speaker. 

 

@terry9 A very welcome report, the benefits of use are once more shared.

I once offered a DIY Tonearm Builder a Blank of Permali to be used as a wand material, which was declined. You have seemingly worked out how to use it for this role to its best, with the attention to detail for the laminations. 

There are only two other Densified Wood types, I am aware of that would offer more layers of laminations to P'holz B25, one is another Delignit Material and the other is referred to as Picowood. If I read the Spec' correct, I think the compression reduces the thickness of the uncompressed stack by 60%, so more layers are able to be used per given thickness of the end produced board. 

No harm in having a little surplus, when it comes to Vintage TT's.

It's a bit like land, 'they are not making in it anymore'.

Getting the time is crucial to getting the experimentation ventures put in place. 

After encouragement to a semi-retired friend over a period of time, they have at present machined a Panzerholz Plinth, and have now used the P'holz to produce a design for a Kaneta Plinth Design, to be used with a surplus owned SP10 MkII.

The end design has been produced and allows for Three Tonearms to be used, of which one can also be a up to 12" inch.

The initial demonstrations/comparisons will be using 9" inch arms, of which one is to be a fixed Head shell Arm, i.e, the SME IV or Audiomods Series Five. There is also an Origin Live 'Illustrious' that might be made available. The fixed Head shell arm will be used in comparison, to the Kaneta Builders own Tonearm Design with a rare method used to produce a detachable Head shell. The third Tonearm Design is the Tonearm both me and the Kaneta Builder own and use, that in this build guise, has a conventional removable Head shell design, and not the most recent Head shell connection produced.

Awaiting their opportunity to be used with the arms, there are two Ortofon Kontrapunk B's in original build guise, that both share similar hours of usage and Two unique types of Bespoke Built Ortofon Kontrapunkt B's, with not too far apart hours of usage. 

The original build K'b, has proven itself within the group of individuals I regular spend time with, to be a Cart' that can be extremely impressive through to underwhelming depending on the arm chosen. 

One of the rebuilt K'bs to be used, has been used in a variety of demonstrations has been proven to make a very good account of itself.

The earliest talk on the structure of the investigations to be undertaken, will be to learn where the Tonearms are seemingly most noticeable at being effacious in their ability to not impart a sense of mechanical impediment when in use.

For myself, the sense that a Tonearms mechanical function is not having an effect on the replay being presented is a real attractor and a desirable trait.

I personally removed the SME IV and Audiomods out of regular use, for the reason, there was a sense of there being an impediment to the mechanical function being detected. It will be good to revisit this old experience/influence and see, 'what is', in the comparisons taking place. 

The method chosen for the demonstration/comparisons will have the beneficial advantage of having little time delay between the demonstration and assessments.

The Tonearm interface with the 'Standard Built K'bs' and the 'Derivative K'b Versions', will certainly be very carefully assessed to see where the attractive and less attractive presentation is to be found.

This will keep a Group of assessors busy for a reasonable period and might also entice other Tonearms to be offered for the assessments to extend.

There has been Talk of Trying out different continuous length wand wires, for a later down the line comparison session when much more is understood.

One Turntable with Three Arms for this type of venture seems quite fitting, Three identical Cart's would be the icing on the Cake, but 'hey ho'.

    

I have a very nice Slab of 30mm Thick Slate, that I purchased which would produce Two Plinths.

Since my moving away from Massey Plinths, I have not been motivated to use it, or concern myself with learning how it works in comparison to Granite or Corian.

A Granite Plinth has not been experienced for quite some time, and this was with a Garrard 401. The PTP Solid Nine is readily available mounted on Corian.

I only use the PTP now to introduce others to the Idler Drive system and do the odd comparison to show how the TT drives can produce different sonic signatures.

I see the PTP as a very successful method to be used on an Idler Drive system, and in fairness, it is possibly the best use of the amalgamation of a modern design meeting design from an olden era.

I am at present excited about an upcoming experience I will be introduced to.

I see the PTP Design and the Kaneta Design as both coming from a similar line of thought, which is to have the engine decoupled from it usual mounting and attached to a material that is much more suitable for the purpose.

I have been instrumental in presenting this design to individuals who are with the Skill Set in both machining and electronics to produce this design for the SP10 MkII.        

The Kaneta Design produced from Densified Wood will be in place for myself to receive a demonstration very soon.

Additionally, it is to be produced to have a New Design Platter.

The Kaneta Design is flexible with Platters, which enables this version to be used with a variety of Platters, i.e, Original, Original Modified, New Design (Acetal with Increased Inertia and a Gunmetal Platter. 

The Design is to enable up to Three Tonearms mounted of which one can be a 12" Inch design.

This one has been a long time in the waiting to experience, it is a whole new territory of investigation, and I am chuffed at the thought of it now coming to fruit.

There is also a great opportunity be made available, to compare Tonearms against each other, as within my Group, there are a selection of sought after Branded Tonearms and Bespoke Produce Designed Arms.

Even better is that there are MC Cart's of the same Brand/Models with similar hours that can be donated to get the most from the new experiences to be encountered.   

Modern Densified Woods by their very design are produced to be a material which is low in conductivity and selected for its properties where it is resilient to change when submerged in water, the Spec's show minimum uptake following 24 Hours Submergence.

Drawing on my whole experience of P'holz from the long-time owners, who steered myself toward the material, through to the most recent owners I am in contact with. Where across the Group, thicknesses up to 32mm are in use.

The purchase guidance given has been to buy Cross Grain Construction in B25 with a minimum thickness of 25mm.

There is absolutely nothing made known to me to over many years of knowing P'holz users to suggest a Cross Grain Lamination Structure in B25 of a minimum of 25mm Thickness is showing a tendency to warp.

I have my own supply of P'holz for nearly 18 months now.

A P'holz Plinth Produced, that is not in my possession at present, it is out on loan to an owner of the same model TT, the Plinth is produced for.

Additionally, I have a batch of boards that are cut to a dimension of 400mm x 500mm, I have just put a steel rule across these, and can report there is nothing seen to be considered as a concern. 

I am even familiar with a Standard Type Head shell design made from Cross Grain B25 P'holz that is now about six months old. I was handling a couple of the produced Items from a batch only a few weeks past. The Material to receive the Cart' is approx' 4-5mm in thickness, there certainly has not been any obvious signs of showing a deformation. 

I have no concerns for the above production specification for a P'holz material. 

There is another specification for P'holz, where it can be obtained with a Longitudinal Grain Structure. A board of this at a particular thickness might have a tendency to warp, but I am not familiar with boards created using this Grain Orientation on P'holz.

Firstly, I will make it known, I have a familiarity with the Garrard 401, used in Granite Plinth for a Long-Tem usage. Admittedly this TT has not been owned for approx’ 6 years, time flies.

Recently within my Group two consecutive session were arranged to be demonstrated Idler drives used on the same system. My PTP with a Corian Plinth was the first to make a show, which was mounted on a Sub Plinth using my P’holz Boards. The footer was a AT 616 under the Sub Plinth and the TT. The group had their revisit to an Idler Drive experience, and for the first time experienced one used in comparison to a SP10R.,

The second arrangement was to be given a demonstration of a Garrard 401. This was mounted onto a Compressed Bamboo Plinth, which for me was of interest as I know it is well liked Sub Plinth Material.

The Garrard was given a little better lore than the PTP, as it was mounted onto Two Sub Plinths made from P’holz with AT 616 Feet as the base footer and Sub Plinth Separator. The TT was seated onto Gaia Footers.

The TT had an Origin Live Illustrious with a Sumiko Pearwood Cart’. For the record, I have been introduced to the Tonearm and Cart’ on previous occasions and have been very impressed.

On this occasion in this environment and system, and drawing on recollections, resulting from the very positive impression made, I was to state, this use of the Garrard 401, to be the best performance I have heard from a one, and I have heard numerous over many years during the first decade of the new millennium.

I can’t tell you the Spec for the Bamboo Board used a Plinth, the Spec for the P’holz used is known.

I have investigated compressed Bamboo, and in general the Board is found if ’correctly compressed’ to be a weight of approx’ 700Kg per m3.

A newer to the Market Dense Bamboo - ’Tiger Bamboo’ is to be found at a weight of approx’ 1000Kg per m3.

None of these are plasticised through using Resins as a Densified Wood is.

In general Densified Woods are found at approx’ 1200Kg - 1500Kg per m3, of which P’holz falls in at around 1400Kg.

I have been a follower of the individual who may have put the information forward, that identified Densified Wood as an attractive material for Plinth Building Purposes. The Web Pages containing many useful comparisons to other materials and the criteria used for measuring a materials damping factor is to be seen at qualia.web.com

I have in the past discovered alternative materials of interest and sent in material samples to be tested by the producer of this Web Site.

From my understanding it is Densified Wood that is the most efficient at managing Transferred Energies, in a manner that will reduce the level of superfluous mechanical energies migrating to the point it reaches the Styli and impacts on the Signal Path.

 

 

 

 

"I'm curious to hear how people would decide for themselves the answer to this question. Or maybe you've already made this decision - what do you like about your decision or what would you differently next time? "

Cheers.

" Besides we're off track on the OPs 

original question... "

There are those who not only like to have an option on how many Tonearms are mounted to work with one Turntable, but this can also be achieved through a design that is not offered by a TT's Manufacturer. It is achieved through an individual deciding on a Material to support the Turntable and Tonearm/Tonearms.

Hence P'holz has come into the discussion, as there has been earlier discussion on Bespoke Plinths being produced, to support the usage of Multiple Arms.   

maybe @dullgrin would like to make a further follow up contribution to confirm if the information offered since his last contribution, is satisfactory to help with the initial inquiry made.  

" Nor do I fret about whether or not Panzerholz or some other material might sound better. "

The journey for myself through HiFi Encounters and building a HiFi System, is based on growing in experiences through being demonstrated different options that can be incorporated into an owned system.

I don't see myself as a lone entity in this understanding of a Journey with HiFi as the interest.

There is for me, a pursuit of knowledge, especially about how one is stimulated by the use of certain components or an assembly of certain components.

As one's experiences grow, they are quick to identify where a stimulus is present that is an attractor or a repellent.

As one's experiences grow, the likelihood is that there is a much more selective mind set in place, and a willingness to change prevails, the stimulus encountered can prove to be very persuasive. To the point an outright rejection of an idea or immersion into an idea takes precedent.  

I am not one who is to Stagnate and be found Resting on One's Laurels, and especially not one who will Show Contempt Prior to Investigation.

There are tremendous discoveries to be made, when a mind is open to what others are doing, where differences are obvious to one's own choices.

It is with the open approach and willingness to learn that new discoveries have been very persuasive, bringing change, hence I was introduced to Plinths produced that were very different to my 'one time favoured' Mass Material Plinth Design. With the result being the Mass Material Design are no longer favoured and wanted to be used as the regular method.

 

 

@dullgrin Thank You for a very fair assessment and your encouragement.

@dogberry It is not madness to have a plan in mind for Four Tonearms, it is a little unusual to have four in use consecutively, but definitely not unusual to own Four Tonearms and a selection of usable Cart's to match that number or more even. 

I have owned and used approx' Nine Tonearms to get to the place I am today with a Tonearm.

Today with only one Tonearm in use, I still have a selection of Seven retained, along with LOMC, HOMC and MM Cart's, all with a usable number of hours left on a Stylus. I don't know how ageism may be affecting some through the time in storage.  

As for the offer for the Permali, the offer is for a piece of the size that would be able to be turned into a Tonearm Pod, that by design, when finished will be able to be stored in a cupboard when not in use, or only be as intrusive as a Black Brass, if kept in use. 

A Slab to not be accepted by SWMBO will be very expensive to send onto you.

I was given my own room without any dispute for the HiFi, it was like an approval to go off the scale with madness. To get the idea, the Power Amps are seated on a 250Kg slab of Granite. In the Room I would refer to that one as adventurous.

There are more quirks to be found. 

Corian is potentially the earliest form of a Composite Stone to be produced an available mainstream material, it has a Patent, and it is this Patent that is the fundamental guidance referenced to produce alternative Composite Stone products that followed.

It is hard to see how a 66% inclusion of Bauxite Stone with the rest as an Adhesive Resin, used in the mixture for Corian, disqualifies it from being termed as a Manufactured/Engineered Stone. 

@duramax747 You have a very long experience with Densified Wood and have potentially seen it evolve to the production methods used today.

When I first started to learn about Densified Wood and the applications it is selected for, one memorable info' is that the development has now about a100 years of history. 

I have no doubt, there is a noticeable value to be had from producing a Rack, I have seen owners with a 'stash', start using their Plinth Blanks as Sub Plinths after my introducing them to the positive effects of it combined with a P'holz Plinth.

As stated on previous occasions, it has really been an attractive addition with suspension footers under a few other TT's and Digital Source.  

There are Companies asking for up to a £1000 for a P'holz Sub Plinth, even more if a swirly rebate is milled into it. I am confident my Water-Stained Blanks are as good; the surface markings have a real impact on SQ 😎.

You are fortunate to have a ready access to the materials, in the UK, P'holz has almost stopped being imported, at present a source of importer of a full board is not known. I may have been the last person to import a full board.  

Have you any knowledge of Dynawood, as this is looking to be quite common in the US. 

 

One turntable with two arms, or two turntables with one each - which would you prefer?

An Inquiry of this type is able to suggest that a New Plith is a requirement.

One turntable with two arms: This as a method has seen many Bespoke Built Designs to suit an individual's specific needs or wanted aesthetic. 

or two turntables with one each: This can have various permutations, where one of them is for the use of Two TT's of the same design used with different Plinth Materials and the same Tonearm and Cart' used for both.

Either of the above, to suit one's specific needs, can require a Bespoke Plinth.

Plinth Materials are always going to surface when an Inquiry lends itself to potentially having to have Bespoke Equipment at hand to realise the method proposed.

@syntax Your statement is correct, My Granite Plinth which weighed in at 9 Stone, was produced as a design using professional services from a Stone Mason Company. There was no Middleman's mark-up, for the era it was produced, it was quite expensive, from recollection approaching £500, I'm sure another £500 was able to be added if Purchased through a Dealership.  

When P'holz was in regular supply, it was approx' £150-200 for a Plinth Blank from an individual supplying Blanks, and even cheaper if sourced as an off cut through another source.

I would have selected P'holz over the Granite, if I knew what I do now, through the experiences of both in use. 

Today I have selected P'holz for Plinth Purposes, over other owned Board Materials and other Structures available to me as a Plinth Material.

As said Sub Plinths in this material can be found selling at £1000, so sourcing and working with a Board of Densified Wood, if very cost effective. 

  

 

I have a 75mm Thick 'Permali' Densified Wood Board.

I am familiar with Panzerholz produced with 25mm and 32mm Thickness Boards.

The individual from Qualia Lab's who has caarried out the Testing on a large selection of materials chosen as a Structure to be used within HiFi, has made it known on regular exchanges that a 10mm Thickness Panzerholz or Permali are able to deliver the ideal Damping and Dissipation properties for HiFi related purposes, especially in relation to what more commonly selected material are able to offer.

A very good friend used a 25mm P'holz Plinth for many years, and then had been able to source a Thicker 32mm Board.

This allowed for the 25mm Plinth to be compared to a 32mm P'holz Plinth, their assessment was the Bass and Air from a presentation was an improvement when using the 32mm material, the 32mm remains in use today, and I hear this whenever I visit.

Another individual used a 25mm P'holz Plinth naked and another which had a Material called Newplast added, each were able to use the same TT > Tonearm > Cart'.

After a long period of trials, the Newplast was removed, as it was said to have created an overdamped sound which was not as attractive as the Naked Material only.

I have moved away from Mass Material Plinths, as the Perception of being overdamped was noticeable, and not dissimilar to the presence detected when certain designs of a Cabinet Speaker are used. Either of these being detected is an unattractive presence I am not comfortable with, when it is detected during a replay.  

There is only one method to discover if a Densified Wood is suitable to an individual as a Plinth or Sub Plinth, and that is to experience it in use.

               

As Stated within this Thread, I have no desire to return to a Mass Plinth Material as my regular used Plinth for the TT of choice.

It has been made known within this thread from the time (which is 20+ Years ago) that I chose Granite as a Plinth Material; I had been demonstrated around this time both Granite and Slate as a Plinth Material with a same TT model mounted.

Granite was preferred over Slate and that was the route I went down, I even made it known that the personalities demonstrating Granite, might also have been a factor in my decision being made. (It is all too distant and not able to be accurately recollected, the only realness is, I chose a Granite Plinth for a Garrard 401, and shortly after had a SME IV purchased to use with it, and possibly a High Output MC ??).

As stated within this Thread, I have a very heavy Slab of Slate, enough for Plinths for Two TT's or a Multi Arm Design, I have no desire to have a Mass Plinth in use for my chosen TT any longer, so this as an option is buried.

As stated within the Thread I own a Mass Plinth, being Corian, but the TT it is used with is superseded and is used for demonstration purposes only of an Idler Drive TT.

Along with the above I have also heard a few produced Polybentonite Resin structures formed to function as a Plinth Design on a few different TT's, this is a Mass Plinth and measures favourably to Panzerholz for Damping but dissipates quite differently. The Polybentonite Resin Plinths are similar to recollections of other Mass Materials used for a Plinth. To my sensitivities I detect a colouration present not dissimilar to a Cabinet Speaker Colouration, for myself this has become quite unattractive when detected, to the point of feeling something present is overbearing.

Panzerholz as a Plinth material is not an idea that comes from myself, I was introduced to it, and was impressed, on follow up encounters that impression grew, as my recognising the attractive properties on offer during a replay were being proportionally attributed to the P'holz. An extended period of experiencing it and having seen others 'deny it' and then 'adopt it' has affirmed to myself, there is a New Plinth Material I am needing to introduce.

For me it is the airiness and unconstrained flow, the ease the presentation takes on, and the clarity that is very attractive perceptions to be encountered. 

As stated within this Thread, I have a Plinth produced from P'holz, that is out on loan to those who owning a TT that suits the design and can mount their TT on to it.

If their Tonearm of choice is not able to be mounted the offer is available to assist with enabling the individual expressing an interest to hear their TT in a P'holz plinth.

There is not a penny for myself to make from such an offer, it is just an extension of the social activities I engage in with HiFi and other enthusiasts, either known or not known to myself. This is something I would not consider for any other Plinth Material, but for some reason the P'holz material is seemingly worthy.

The only reason I can see, why Plinth Materials are presented as a subject within this Thread, is because a design for Two Tonearms might require a New Plinth to be produced, so an individual contemplating this is to be aware of the options on materials. Indirectly a user of a Typical TT > Tonearm set up, might become curious as to how different materials as a support for a TT > Tonearm might impact on their set up. Plenty of us are from that background, so no need to discourage it.