Albert Porters after market panzerholz plinths

One of the problems with measuring turntables today is that the tools for doing standard DIN tests are no longer available. Sure you can measure noise with an unmodulated groove on a test record, but then you'd only have a number and no meaningful way to compare. The original Panzerholz plinth was done on a lark and designed intuitively (although after a great deal of research). It worked so well that it was decided to share it with others. You really have to hear it to appreciate it. It is impossible for me to imagine how it could be improved upon. I don't think it could even be made more compact.

Ckniker,
I have experience with the Boston Audio Mat 1 and Mat 2 on the SP10 mk2. Both work great. My preference is the Mat 2 because it's thicker and more substantial. It's size fits the mk2 platter perfectly, almost too perfectly. The mat fills the space completely. One advantage of the Mat 2 in this reguard is that it is twice as thick and so leaves more to grab at the edge when you want to remove it. Sticking the mat down with two sided tape is beneficial to keep it still and solid but go very sparingly or you will have a battle on your hands ever getting the mat off the platter.
Having said all that, I still think my favorite is the CU-180 and I've noticed no speed control issues with the mk2. The Boston mat is much less expensive and more readily available. I'm sure the mat you're using is quite good but if you try the Boston, I doubt you'll go back.

Timeltel, Thanks for the link to soundfoundtain. Good info on material characteristics as applicable to TT. I think this may be key determining factor on the ultimate sound EVEN AFTER you have resolved the vib issues, measured and tested and the whole shebang.

Great looking shots on Albert's plinthes. Thye certainly look top notch and make the Technics look much more substantial. And I am sure same goes for sound quality. Congrats Albert!

For those looking to quantify the resonance characteristics of various plinth materials, a fellow on Vinyl Engine seems to have done just that.

http://qualia.webs.com/dampingfactorvalues.htm

But wait, from his data it seems that MDF and slate measure the same, 0.017! Now I have no personal experience with comparing these two materials but I have read multiple recommendations against MDF for DD plinths (not sure why it is favored for rim-drives such as the Lenco). And I have read very favorable opinions on slate, both for commercial sources such as OMA and the DIY projects such as Lew's.

So how can it be that two materials can measure the same yet offer such varied sonic results? Were they the same overall size and thickness when measured? Were they layered or constructed in the same fashion? Or is the answer a combination of material characteristic and how the plinth is designed and assembled?

The last question seems to suggest its own answer, which brings us back to Albert's plinths.

Tim, I saw that post several months ago. The guy is somewhat of an engineer and seems to know a lot more about materials science than I do, but his conclusions don't remotely compare to my personal experience, certainly as regards MDF vs slate. In fact, it could be said that his results are proven wrong per se by anyone who has listened to plinths made of these two materials using the same turntable chassis. MDF sucks for direct-drive, IME. I owned a Jean Nantais Lenco plinth made of alternating layers of MDF and baltic birch which was excellent but not as neutral as my slate Lenco. His work did make me more curious about Panzerholz, however,which fared very well. The relationship of his test results to goodness of a plinth material could be a case of "True, True, Unrelated". Remember that choice from College Board tests?

I argued the issue with the poster. For example, I pointed out to him that the result one gets using his technique might be dependent on the orientation of the slate (parallel vs perpendicular to the layered structure) with respect to the vector direction of the stimulus and the placement of the measuring gear, but he insisted it would make no difference without offering proof. I notice that slate is kind of ring-y if struck with force perpendicular to the layers (I.e., top surface of any of my plinths) but is dead as dead can be when struck by a force parallel to its layering. Then there is the whole question of whether the results of striking any material are relevant at all to how it may perform in this application.