Albert Porters after market panzerholz plinths

Albert, Thanks for your response on mats. It is surprising that your favorite and second favorite mats are wildly different in material construction AND in weight. The Micro, according to others above, weighs ca 4 lbs and the Boston Audio Mat, which I like a lot on my Lenco, must weigh much LESS than the stock rubber Technics mat, which weighs a bit more than half a pound, if memory serves. I have already expressed my concerns re using the Micro mat on the Mk2, due to the fact that it increases total mass of platter + mat by about 50%, which one would think would not be good for optimal servo performance. But the proof of the pudding is in the listening.

Lewm,

I don't think the MK3 is effected by the weight of either of these mats. All I'm hearing is the difference in construction or whatever else is going on between these two "hard material" designs.

My MK2 was not effected by the Boston mat or Funk Firm. I don't remember trying the Micro Seiki CU-180 with it.

The Micro Seiki mat is so expensive I was late moving into them. The Boston is a superb alternative and far less expensive. I think very fairly priced based on construction and performance (at least in my system).

I guess my question in the midst of this s///t storm is not going to get answered? It's a really simple question, no interpretation or opinions required.

Jonathan,

on 9-5-2010 i did answer your question 2 posts below your question. i'll quote it.

Jonathan,

i'll do my best to answer your question.

Albert does not do the 'nude' SP-10 Mk3 plinth. his Mk3 plinth design keeps the case-work on the Mk3. Steve Dobbins Mk3 plinth, which i own one of, does at least remove the top case-work. however; i do not know myself whether he removes anything else from the Mk3 before installing it in the plinth. my impression from my conversations with him is that the motor is secured directly to the plinth; but exactly what that might mean relative to your question i'm not 100% sure of.

Dear Mapman: +++++ " are you saying basically to trust your own ears? " +++++

not exactly and not so simple. I trust in my very long training process that was/is already tested under any " real " audio environment here at my place and in several ( dozens+ ) other audio systems, including the Albert one, testing any audio item or whole system you can imagine.

My ears are only part of that testing process and certainly a trusty tool. I'm trained on purpose not at random, the process follow a discipline at each process stage.

Till today that process show it his value, confidence and validity when repetition is need it. I can't remember any significant fail on the process in any test with any audio item in any audio system.
Yes, IMHO and due to my in deep training that process is " bullet proof ". Is it the best out there?, certainly not but is the one with almost 100% of success.

Some Agoner's are witness of its effectivity and could give a testimony about.

Have I golden ears? can I hear better that other people?, no it is only that I have a procedure a self training procedure/process where I know exactly what to look for and how find out or not, " simple " as that.

This testing/evaluation process permit me to have audio conclusion in hours when other people needs weeks or months to do it. Btw, in anyway IMHO if you are unaware in the first listening hours of the main virtues and " errors " of the audio item under evaluation then over the time you just can't do it in precise way.

I can't explain step by step all the evaluation/test procedure/process and there are " things " that even I can't explain how I can discern on it other that my day to day training.

Btw, my first step, out of my place, is to heard/hear the system by 15-20 minutes through digital source. One of the main/critical factors in the process is to have/choose the right music tracks on LP's/ CD's and the knowledge level on those recordings.

regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.