MAT - platter material, thickness/ resonant frequency - thoughts please

Any platter designed correctly will not resonate regardless of what it is made from.

A well designed mat has the mechanical impedance of vinyl and has relief for both the label and the edge of the record. Any floppy soft mat is bad. But, just as important is the way the record is clamped down. Vacuum clamping IMHO is the best followed by reflex clamping of which the Sota Reflex clamp is an example. SME and Kuzma do it by having a clamp that screws onto a threaded spindle.

A properly designed suspended (isolated) turntable is always best. Examples are SME, the Stabi M and Ref 2, Basis, Sota, Avid and Dohmann. I personally prefer belt drive. It can be just as accurate as DD.  Isolation and proper record clamping are more important from a sonic perspective as long as the drive is executed correctly. 

Whichever way you go I recommend the Origin Live (thin) mat on top.

Im not a fan of record mats...wool,cork,vinyl,rubber they all cause static electricity, or worse they dull the overall sound. If you cant lay the record down right on the platter with a good clamp why bother. Nothing says stability like a slippery wooley mat on a glass platter....geez dont get me started Roy Gandy!

I like tables where you dont use a mat:

www.michell-engineering.co.uk/michell-gyro-se-turntable

Matt M

Rim and belt drives only work with the inertia of very heavy platters, DD‘s tend to be light for obvious reasons. My best results come from a very heavy acrylic platter with a Verus rimdrive. I use a Millenium  carbon fibre mat and clamp with carbon fibre lining on the LP side. The logic of the mat and clamp is to damp resonances of the LP itself, so: yes, mats have a purpose

ringmat, ringmat, ringmat

A platter pad needs to do two things: control resonance in the LP and minimize resonance in the platter.

To do the former the mat has to be the same hardness durometer as the LP so all frequencies are absorbed by the mat. If the mat it too soft or too hard there will be colorations as a result.

IME its a good idea to have the platter treated to be non-resonant. Generally speaking an amorphous material like acrylic or metal will not suffice on its own. Technics recognizes this in their current machines and so their platters have damping materials applied.  

Two excellent turntables!

The Sony will be difficult if my experience at attempting to “improve” a PS-X65 is typical. The original oil-filled mat you reference is pretty much unobtainable at this point. Interesting read on their approach:

https://www.vinylengine.com/library/sony/total-system-technology.shtml

The JVC may prove to be more responsive although it appears the original mat was 1.) sized to fit within a recess in the platter 2.) features a slight dish profile suggestive of using a spindle weight or clamp.

With a properly dialed in system, any changes will result is sonic differences so remain objective.

I own a Selection of Vintage DD TT's, included in this collection have been three TTS 8000's of which two are still retained.

I have a selection of Platter Mats produced from different materials and use these regularly to detect if improvements can be made with a mechanical interface by swapping Platter Mat material.

For me the TTS 8000 has been a great TT, but not as the basic functioning TT supplied by the Manufacturer and then via how many other owners?

It has been great as serving the purpose to be used as a donor model, to be worked with to make changes to the original designs put in place for it and have the designs produced to deliver improvements over the original design and remove some of the concerning mechanical interfaces that have been met when the TT is kept as per the original.

If a TTS 8000 has shown signs of some of the known design concerns, this would in my view not be a TT that would have time spent on it trying  to improve on the interfaces, by making minor changes using standalone third party ancillary devices. I would be more inclined to learn how to have the TT perform in a manner that is with a selection on improved mechanical interfaces.

It would only be then that any choices made for the use of a Third Party Ancillary Device would place the device in an environment that can allow it to show of the qualities that can create an attraction toward it.  

Dear all

Can I just say thanks for the intelligent discussion thus far - it’s what I was hoping for 🙏.

@mattmiller i had always thought bareback with Acrylic platters - both of which you have - however - RDC clear light uses a cork mat and the reson rota often used a Ringmat.

@atmasphere thats very much what I was hoping to explore here - with Acrylic I am thinking one type will interface better than another when compared to a stainless steel platter for instance. As it happens both Jvc and Sony’s platters are damped under the platter

@pindac i am confused with ur post. What mat combo worked for you? Are you saying. Also what are the known design concerns on the Sony? Are you suggesting not to bother? Thanks

@lohanimal Acrylic can be variable in hardness. Oracle makes an acrylic platter pad that is really close to the hardness of vinyl and not surprisingly, works quite well.

hi @atmasphere  - that makes logical sense. A material that has a resonant frequency between the Vinyl and the Acrylic should theoretically channel it away into the Acrylic.

I am puzzled how the heavy metal mats purportedly work. I read the SEAC article posted in another thread.

Note: The TTS 8000 is a TT that I own and enjoy the ownership of, especially for the experiences I have encountered, have shared in communications about theses experiences with other owners, and have entered into the area where carrying out modifications to the TTS 8000 are the next actions to be undertaken and completed.

There is a small group of individuals who have embraced the TTS 8000 and chose to find ways to minimise the impact of the mechanical interface issues that can develop.    

An internet search will show that over the recent years, the Sony TTS 8000 has been under discussion where there are reports from owners of mechanical interfaces been discovered that have been viewed as being a concern and efforts undertaken with the intent on producing an improvement.

The methods adopted by some at present, are not going to suit all TTS 8000 owners who regard their TT as their LP Replay device of choice. Some of the procedures being considered and carried out can be quite difficult for an individual to consider, the information takes time to digest, to the point where it can be seen for the value that others have seen in it.  

Some of the earliest reports of the treatments used to remediate the Spindle Bearing interface, have been quite basic, and can usually be discovered where the adding of a high viscosity lubricant (Grease) at the Spindle Interfaces within the Bearing Housing, has proved to reduce the condition where excess Spindle movement has been detected and a measure put in place to reduce the movement.

The Grease has been the choice as a less viscosity lubricant leaks from the base of the Bearing Housing and ends up on the PCB.

Some of the later methods, along with the most recent methods have been to produce a remediation work carried out at these interfaces, to a level that is requiring the exchange of parts, with the intention to improve on the dimension tolerances present at the interface.

There is also information and works undertaken in relation to the most recent reports on works undertaken within the spindle housing where other parts of the design have undergone a rethink and other remediation work has been undertaken.

The reports of the outcome on the most recent methods for a remediation work undertaken has been limited, but that is also a factor that the information is new and not all TTS's designated to receive the remediation have been subjected to the work at present.

Additionally there are at present only a handful of individuals that have committed to carrying out the most recent remediation work that has been made known, also only a few of the individuals undertaking the work are in possession of Two TTS 8000's that will enable a comparative demonstration and offer a subjective description of any perceived differences being discovered between a Standard OEM and Modified TTS.  

Do I know if a Dry Bearing Housing on a OEM TTS with a Spindle that shows excessive movement is better that a OEM TTS with a Spindle Housing packed with a High Viscosity Lubricant (Grease) and has as a result produced a Spindle with a noticeably reduced movement. I do not have an answer for this, as it is not a method I have chosen to adopt at present.

In relation to the TTS's I own,                                                                                      Do I know if a Dry Bearing Housing on a OEM TTS with a spindle that has noticeably excessive movement and a Platter that wobbles when finger pressure is applied at platter rim, is better than a TTS that has a Bearing Housing with Spindle Bushes machined to produce improved dimension tolerances at the interface, also with a New Part produced for the Spindle Thrust Pad Interface that is intended to create extremely low friction, also a Bearing Housing Base that is Oil Tight does not leak out any type of lubrication selected, also with a Platter that has undergone a remediation to improve the seating on the spindle and not wobble (pretty much like the non wobble ones found on most TT Brands).

I do not have an answer for this either, but am an owner of a TT that has the parts ready to be used to on the Bearing Housing remediation.

The Platter Wobble is the outstanding remediation to be overcome. 

The remediation work to be used on my TTS are already in use on another TTS and the reports from the owner about the remediation are very positive and encouraging.

When the same TTS owner reports on their assessment of a comparison demonstration to the OEM TTS they own, the differences they are describing of the noticeable improvements and the speedy removal of the OEM TT from use, is for myself the type of report that speaks in droves, and is quite encouraging to the    idea of making changes, the methods to be adopted are further underpinned as the way forward I will be pursuing. 

To answer the OP's inquiry, if a Spindle is detected with noticeable sideways movement from applying a small amount of finger pressure, then the replay will be compromised in comparison to nearly all other Brands of TT's, as eccentric rotation and speed fluctuations are present. I am not aware of any bearing design that has an intent for this to occur.

If a TTS is discovered to have the wobble on the platter, I would feel this is a little less concerning, as the Tonearm and Stylus Force will possibly not impact on it, but the eccentric spindle rotation 'might' impact on the Platter and encourage a micro wobble, for this reason I am looking into a remediation. 

I am saying there are a few things known about the TTS 8000, that it might be worthwhile learning if they are present on a owned TTS, prior to carrying out any other investigations and outlay with the intent to improve on the TT's performance.

One of my TTS 8000's is not with me it is to undergo remediation work, and the other is partially set up to be used as a Standard OEM Model.

I have not used my full range of Platter Mats on the TTS 8000, but in a recent conversation have learned that another TTS 8000 owner has preferred a Foam Mat I rate over their Tenuto, I have formed this viewpoint on my SP10 MkII.

I have also recently introduced the AT 677 and preferred the AT 677 over the Tenuto and after loaning the AT 677 to another Tenuto user, they have now acquired their own  AT 677.